Eh just thought I could get the problem atleast known
Itās insane how DRow pointing to another post of him saying something ironic gets more likes than an average post.
DRow you da best
Most events will be online, so there is no EP to test this- for example, MJSās 43 second skills run would be impossible if all their towers were regulation (on most of the goals the balls slide straight out, they donāt flex at all in the video). However, with the new skills events updates allowing towers to be adjusted to 6.63", this run would be counted and added towards global rankings- I just think that itās a little broken.
trust me when i say MJS will be just as fast at a real comp lol
Pretty sure EPs will have requirements for remote skills only run and means for verifying it. Will cross that bridge when we get to it.
if their goals are within tolerance, they are considered regulation. When participating in a virtual skills tournament on your own field, itās just common sense to widen your goals to the maximum legal tolerance. Completely legal, and itās a strategy available to all participants so itās fair imo.
Determination of conforming fields for skills only runs for remote only events lies squarely on Head Referee and EP ā¦ How that will be determined is to be described by event hostsā¦ So please do not look for āloop holesā to game advantage - it serves no one.
I wouldnāt say itās a loop hole. As the rules stand, a field with all the goals spread to maximum tolerance to aid in robot speed is perfectly legal. If the gdc wants to fix this they can either lower the maximum tolerance, or they can have some rule like āthe purpose of the tolerance is not for teams to gain an advantage by abusing themā.
if itās in spec itās in spec
if a ref or ep letās me adjust goals to their max height within the tolerances described by the manual, you bet imma do it
itās common for students to be able to move and adjust field elements during setup, like last year with cubes during skills. if itās within the tolerances vex gave us itās fine
EP and Head referee will determine what is acceptable for their events and communicate clearly to teams that wish to register to their events.
If you can not meet EPās expectation for level playing field for online skills - what is the point?
id say itās pretty level, seeing that literally every team has the same tolerances from the same game manual
while not every ep is the same, unless they explicitly say to not mess with the goal heights (whether for fear of damage or the game elements during the matches or some other reason), as long as youāre within tolerances ur good
donāt think EPās can/will micromanage the tolerances on the goals of everyoneās field. if itās in spec its legal. And it doesnāt create an unlevel playing field because everyone can take advantage of the tolerances. As an ep, if youāre concerned with it creating unfairness (to teams not aware of the minor exploit) you can just tell everyone they are allowed to space their goals to the max tolerance, whether they do so or not is their choice.
Iām sure GDC has though of this, theyāve already updates the tolerances once, and has decided that it isnāt a problem. Or maybe they plan on tightening the tolerances, idk.
personally, Iām not a fan of the tolerances being so exploitable, I think they should be += 0.1". it does go against the way the gdc intended the balls to have to be descored, but as long as the rules allow it, it will be exploited.
No, that is not correct - EPs when we set up an event all our fields are set up the same way for all teams - in the scenario you propose, teams set up fields to benefit their best outcomes. That is not what you expect at worlds or regional championship or any local events. So please do not design base on edge situations, but what you would expect for a fair challenge at Worlds.
Yes, or I will not host events.
To be clear, we will be flexible, but that does not mean we will cater to teams that tune specific situationsā¦
Sportsmanship is expected for all teams.
I agree with this. definitely donāt design any part of your robot around this potential exploit in the tolerances, or you might have a sad time once you have to compete on a field set up with perfect dimensions. I also donāt think the tolerances were intended to be abused in this way, and they probably should be tightened. That said, I donāt think there is anything morally wrong with abusing the tolerances in this way. You arenāt violating any rules, and you arenāt gaining any advantage that isnāt available to everyone else.
couldnt have said it better myself
and end of the day - that is what we expect - design for unexpected and unperfect - and EPs will expect that team set up will not be perfect - but if you have every goal at the best threshold for success - you can expect extra scrutiny ā¦
I am optimistic every team will do their best to set up fields to the best of their abilities.
EPs and Referees may ask for measurements of each goals - much like the scrutiny of robot sizing. That is ok.
Not looking for āgotchaā moments, but looking for teams to demonstrate their best performance of their robots for skills only events.
Sorry to be āgrumpyā but I am here to host events to showcase teams being their very best.