2016 IRI Rule Change Suggestions

Competition Off-Season Events
#21

Replace the drawbridge and sally port with clear polycarbonate.

I know this will cost money, but it’s worth it. If a team I’m with ends up competing, I would honestly donate to a Fix The IRI Drawbridge Fund to help make this happen. The drawbridge is just such a crummy field object and it really ruins the flow of the game when it is out there. It would just make a subset of IRI matches worse to watch and play in.

I would get rid of the penalties for driving through a defense when there’s a ball stuck in it. If this means teams bulldoze an extra ball or two over a defense than they otherwise would have, whatever, it’s worth it. Not a huge deal.

I would not remove protected zones or anything like that. That’s completely unfair to the hundreds of teams that designed outer works shots. I don’t know why everyone is so bothered that they can’t hit shooting teams this year - it didn’t seem to bother anyone in 2012 or 2013…

To draw penalties in the secret passage, the robot drawing the penalty has to be also within the secret passage. I’m not sure if this is how the rules are currently written or not, but it’s being called as “offensive robot in secret passage + any contact at all = penalty”.

#22

I think the IRI is for the best of the best. I may be wrong but I think making the game easier to play defense seems like no improvement. Any mid level team with a decent drive system should be capable of this. If anything their should be a premium on skilled tasks, shooting long shots ,climbing and autonomous. I rather see more offense by adding more balls and get rid of ball hoarding.

#23

FMS automatically generates the audience selection and there’s no way around it. The easiest way to get rid of it would be to randomly select between the two.

If they really wanted to, they could develop a whole new system, ignoring the print-outs and field reset lights, but, as someone who is planning an off-season of their own, I don’t think it’s worth the effort.

I like this idea. We might take it for Mayhem in Merrimack! :smiley:

#24

Does the FMS know the difference between defenses placed on the field? If I put a rough terrain in place of a rock wall, would it scream at me?

#25

I’m not entirely sure how much of an ‘arms race’ this would cause, but I think it would be cool to see the wording of G13 to be changed to the following:

Bolded sections are changes that I am proposing. The intent of this change would be to encourage teams who have been sitting on 2 ball autonomous modes all season to run them with less fear of drawing fouls, but I can see this possibly becoming an arms race of sorts for folks to spend time working on 2 ball autos. It also intends to make a situation where two robots attempting to collect the same boulder to be a no-call situation. Thoughts?

-Nick

#26

These changes are aimed to speed up the potential pace of the game to a level beyond WCMP’s and DCMP’s. Let’s assume all IRI teams are at least capable of crossing at least 8 of the 9 defenses. Let’s also assume teams are very capable of boulder scoring, either high or low.

Allow selection of both defenses from the same category. If done, also remove the ‘tunnel’ that the HP’s have to throw a ball into in order to get a ball on the field. (Seriously, no where in literature or history did a catapult have to re-cross yonder mountain to get another rock…)

Allow the low bar to be placed anywhere. We need to keep those autonomous programmers on their toes (muahahaha).

I agree - get rid of the audience selection. Or implement a more scientific method for determining which one is chosen - something like decibel-seconds, for example.

Set tower strength to 8. Add ‘fiery’ boulder that, when scored high or low, gives the opponents a tech foul. There are only 2 fiery boulders on the field, and they both start behind the glass (1 per side). I can give a part number for the ball - it’s bright orange, is the same size (verified w/ measurements) and is only slightly stiffer than the usual game piece. Sure, it needs 2 extra people to specifically watch the balls - but it’s IRI, I’m sure there are people who would love field-side seats.

#27

Nope. FMS only know what’s entered by the defense coordinator and the current audience selection. That’s how it sets the outer works lights for the field resetters. It can not differentiate between the different defenses physically placed on the field.

However, if FMS is posting data (I haven’t heard if this will be enabled for offseason builds, although it usually isn’t), then the published defenses used in a match will be wrong.

#28

-Playoffs tower strength is set to the average number of boulders scored across all alliances in the IRI qualification rounds, minimum 10. I don’t think any of us can predict how loony the play will be there, so let’s just admit we don’t know.
-No penalty for crossing the midline during autonomous, if the bumpers don’t cross the far black line. (This should facilitate boulder-grabbing strategies without removing the overall protection intended.)
-Teams can get credit for more than one crossing in autonomous.
-Leave the drawbridge and sallyport alone. It’s IRI, it’s supposed to be hard. Bring a pole if you’re that worried.
-Remove or greatly increase the height limit on poles, subject to some safety vetting (say, a get-through-the-doorway test and a pelted-with-boulders test). It’s IRI, it’s supposed to have something ridiculous on the field (and this might beat Suzy-Q).

#29

You know I heard the TSA has a really expensive iPad app to pick left or right… Might help. :slight_smile:

#30

Interesting.

Though perhaps they could also ban all poles, suspend a camera above the field, then send the feed to 6 separate monitors at the 6 driver’s stations?

#31

Add 2 more “refs” to focus on the outerworks, and reverse the hinge side of the sally port. These two new refs would not need to call any fouls and would only need to know the wave off and what counts as a crossing.

As for actual adjustments to the game, I’ll leave that up to everyone else :slight_smile:

#32

Leave all of the defenses in the same place for each round of matches so we can play more matches and make field reset easier. Don’t change them until every team has played their first match, then until every team has played their second match, etc…

#33

The protected zone around the outer works was not a loophole in the rules, but an obvious and almost certainly intentional aspect of the game. Yet, relatively few teams took advantage of it. I don’t think teams should be penalized for having made good design choices to take advantage of the obvious protected zone.

#34

Add extra points for multi climbs/a triple climb bonus. Maybe make the rough terrain blocks a bit taller so that there’s a reason to select it. Possibly add weight/take off the constant force springs on the portcullis?

#35

Replace the 5th defense with another Low Bar to encourage more two ball autonomous routines.

Or allow teams to replace whatever defense gets put in position 5 with the Low Bar but don’t only give it points for the first crossing as the “penalty” for putting it in.

#36

Return any ball that flies out of the field to the SPY. They can do what we they want with the ball, except score it.

#37

If the goal is to increase scores, have 3 balls start touching the castle wall, but not in the secret passage, on each side placed by the alliance in that tower.

1 Like
#38

Does that include nailing a defending robot? :smiley:

#39

I’d also donate to this fund. The drawbridge seems to be much harder than the sally port for many teams (since you can’t just spin around/wiggle to break contact), but it’s not getting much use because of how much of a hinderence it is to drivers. It’s almost like there’s only 8 defenses instead of 9 because of how little it’s used. There’s something to be said for tradeoffs, but I think it would still a challenging defense to cross even if the door was clear. The #damaged/#opportunities success rate in the quals at the DCMPs was low, which is partly due to the abysmally low denominator, but also because it’s difficult.

#40

For those keeping score at home (because I love numbers) the Drawbridge was the least selected defense in Qualifications, being chosen 27.67% of the time. However the Portcullis (28.71%) and Rough Terrain (29.29%) weren’t chosen with much more frequency.

In Playoffs, the Drawbridge was actually chosen with MORE frequency (28.30%) than either the Portcullis (28.17%) or Rough Terrain (20.87%)

Your mileage may vary based on region, week of competition, district vs regional vs DCMP, etc.