|
Originally Posted by Frank
Team Update 2015-01-06
General Updates
This note is from Frank Merrick, Director of FRC Hello teams! For this part of today’s update I wanted to include a note directly from me, rather than generically from the Game Design Committee. I lead the GDC, so all information released by the GDC ultimately has my OK, but I thought it might help to let you know I’m writing this particular note myself.
There has been significant discussion and some anxiety on the Chief Delphi forums over what some are calling ‘The Noodle Agreement’, in which the two alliances in a Recycle Rush match could agree to collude, legally under the current rules, to simply drop their own litter on their side of the field, then not touch it, effectively giving both alliances easy bonuses to their score. The GDC talked about this specific possibility before the game was released. We actually talked about two different ways alliances could collude regarding noodles.
We had briefly considered, then quickly rejected, having the opposing alliance receive a bonus for ALL litter not in scoring position in the possession of an alliance. In other words, an alliance would have received a bonus for litter still sitting in the other alliance’s bin. This was rejected right away, as we realized passive collusion would be easy – both alliances simply needed to agree to not touch the litter in their own bins, and it would be immediately obvious if one alliances was not holding up their side of the bargain. This led to the current rules, in which any litter remaining in the bin has no effect on the score.
The second form of collusion we had discussed was what is being talked about on the forums – both alliances dumping all their own litter on their side of the field and leaving it. This form of collusion is more difficult to pull off, as both alliances need to take some physical action to bring it about, and there would be some natural concern over whether or not the other alliance was going to follow through with their commitment. A game of chicken could ensue. Also, it seems that getting all six teams on both alliances to agree to take a physical action like this, that many would perceive as being contrary to the spirit of the game – if not the rules – would be trickier than taking no physical action, as in the option above, and simply letting the points accumulate passively.
This year we worked hard to keep the rules simple, and to keep both penalties and rules to a minimum number. I’ll give you a specific example of an approach we occasionally used. You will note there are no rules in the manual giving penalties for teams building stacks of totes more than six high. Very high stacks are still somewhat of a concern, however, as they are harder for field reset to deal with and potentially could lead to game pieces exiting the field if the stacks are tipped over. Rather than telling teams they can’t build over six totes high, and assigning a penalty to that, we simply said, per Section 3.1.2.3, that if any portion of the tote extends over the backstops on the scoring platforms, they won’t be counted as scored. In this way, teams have no incentive to build high, as it’s a waste of resources they otherwise could have turned into points. Will we still occasionally see high stacks? I think so. Some teams will have not picked up on this element in the manual, as it’s not a ‘G’ numbered rule and has no penalty assigned to it. For those teams, we think they’ll quickly get up to speed at events. The cost, though, of more aggressively working to prevent these outlying actions within the rules is a more complex manual, more nuisance penalties, and something else the refs have to watch for. We essentially were willing to keep the manual simpler in exchange for likely more often seeing stacks higher than we would like to.
We took a similar approach with the second form of collusion with the litter. We don’t know how often this would happen at actual events, and actively preventing it likely means more complicated rules. However, looking at the forums, the possibility of this noodle agreement happening at events looks as if it’s creating some concern in the community, and distracting from other strategic elements of the game. This still may not be likely to happen often at events under the current rules, but if it does, I think they will be less enjoyable.
So, in this case, we will be making some changes to the rules to discourage this activity. They won’t be perfect, but they should be an improvement. Game Design, like robot design, means working through many trade-offs. The changes are not ready for today’s update, but will follow shortly.
Frank National Instruments has alerted us that they have received reports of the power terminals on some roboRIO’s not being completely screwed in. Teams are encouraged to check the power connector’s connection to the roboRIO. The Kickoff Kit Checklist for the Separate Items has been updated with a new “Where to get more” for the Recycling Containers and Pool Noodles.
|
Winning a competition is great, but seeing kids who never thought they had a chance before suddenly discover a brand new future would be the most amazing experience. - MissInformation [more] 
Threaded Mode