Important Q/A forum responses

Let’s duplicate/point out the important FIRST Q/A forum here so we have a centralized location for the possibly strategy/material/process changing responses. Only post responses to questions that have to do with things that are not covered or are unclear in the manual or that contradict the manual.

I thought it should be pointed out that the GDC has started to answer some questions. Here are some of the interesting ones I found at first glance:
Coaches may NOT have laptops on the field

The wrap-around exists!

Herding of more than one piece is illegal

Legs may only be pushed in order to control them

Scoring of other alliance’s ringers results in a penalty, but ringer counts, as long as it’s the only one in the leg.

Post other interesting links you find, or comment about the ones posted.

How 'bout defining AM two speeds as COTS mechanisms, which means they must be purchased after kickoff . Those AM people will be making lots of money.

As an aside to AM employees: Interested in selling some stock? :rolleyes:

EDIT: Perhaps this came across the wrong way, and is actually quite irrelevant after what Andy said about this rule change.

We are not happy about this ruling. That is an understatement. I don’t forsee anyone winning or “making lots of money” in this situation. I see alot of needless paperwork and shipping for teams to become legal.

I still want to see an official FIRST update on this.

Andy B.

This is not the link you were talking about? It is a link to a question about herding tubes.

I was curious what ruling you were referring to.

Sorry. I was referring to the thread found here:


Oh, yeah - I saw that in the Q&A and thought that might be what you were talking about. I just misread the claim “Legs may only be pushed in order to control them” to read that the only way in which you can contact the legs is when you are pushing them to control and score.

I assume this means that a team cannot intentionally sway the spiders to keep an opponent from scoring? I was looking forward to that type of defense, and teams overcoming that.

Did you read the answer here? It says the legs “may be pushed”.

If you read on though…

Re: Spider attachment clarification

The Spider Legs are considered part of the field structure, and are covered under Rule <G33>. The Spider Legs may be pushed to one side, from the front, or from the bottom, to stabilize them during the process of hanging a game piece. However, they may not be grasped, held, or severely restrained without violating this rule.

I believe they will not allow you to just go forwards and backwards into the rack for the duration of the match, but this would be a useful question to submit.

And <G33> says

They’ve already said we can push as long as we don’t break. The Q&A was only referring to how much constraint could be put on the spider to be considered grasping. And I can hardly believe that “disruption” would mean putting the spider into motion, else no one would ever be able to nudge it, even accidentally.

Yeah, I agree. The Q&A question was specifically asked in regards to contact while attempting to score, so it seems the GDC answered that question specifically with “…during the process of hanging a game piece” instead of a general ruling about spider contact.

a questiong about the herding clarification… if your home zone is littered with pool tubes, can you move them out of the way to make room for your robot to deploy ramps and such, or is this still considered herding?

While this will not effect our team personally, I can definately see that extra money will need to be spent on everyone’s account, and excess paperwork will need to be done. It reminds me of our team having to disassemble the spare KOP gearbox at the door of the Pitt regional in order to get in, only to re-assemble it on the other side. We didn’t use it on the robot.

Why did you have to disassemble anything to get into the event? I can’t imagine how this is in anyone’s best interest, nor do I recall a rule that would prevent you from bringing assembled mechanisms in as spares.

last year seems applicable. Most of the components of the KOP gearbox were available as COTS, but the gearbox itself would count as a fabricated item, and would be subject to the 25 pound limit. Taking it apart would let you slip a lot of the weight through as unrestricted COTS components.

Andy, are you implying that teams should plan to return any COTS MECHANISMS purchased from AndyMark prior to kickoff so that you can refund their $ and then turn around a reship them back to the team and recharge them? I only see this serves to waste your time, team funds for double shipping, and additional paperwork on both ends. While I think I understand the intent of the rule, this solution, while seemingly legal, seems totally ridiculous for all involved.

Yes it is an annoying rule, but it has a purpose. It provides another layer of rules to ensure teams are not designing or building before season starts, the build season is 6 weeks long. This time is for designing, ordering, building, and testing. You can’t say Dave didn’t warn us (and here), my team almost got into this situation but I decided to take Dave’s advice on this one :ahh:.

I feel confident in in saying that Andy, I, and many others wholeheartedly agree that it is, indeed, a completely ridiculous thing. You must admit that, as the rules are currently written, the only other options available to these teams are to either buy more transmissions or chunk their current transmissions in the trash and kiss their money goodbye. I’m pretty sure neither of those options is preferable to a lot of paperwork getting the transmissions legal. Obviously what would be best for these teams would be for the GDC to reconsider this rule.

EDIT: Jonathan. Saying Dave warned us is like saying the tooth fairy warned us. Everyone here takes anything he says preseason with a grain of salt, for good reason. Unless he was deputized as an official spokesperson for the GDC and I didn’t notice, then saying that he warned us is a pretty poor defense. Aside from which, making a preseason, non-authoritive announcement of a possible rule change on CD? Exactly how may teams is that supposed to reach? If FIRST was serious about telling teams they could, and should, have sent an Email Blast.

Good point there, but I have learned with Dave that you can tell he is being deceiving an sincere. In those two posts when i first read them I didn’t see the deceiving trickery in his post, I saw a general warning to teams about purchasing parts early. I do agree that if they should have sent out and email blast about it, and i also agree that Dave is not a spokesperson for the GDC and likes to play games with us sometimes.