The last LRT I was in, only 5 balls maximum was allowed to be scored in goals. When a team tried to score 6 it was not counted. Can you confirm that 6+ ball scoring will be allowed in the upcoming weeks. This is important for me to develop my strategy for our next competition. RECF should have a maximum of 15 balls coded into the LRT software.
The middle goal is capable of having 15 scored balls.
The edge goal is capable of having 12 scored balls.
The corner goal is capable of having 9 scored balls.
This is not an EP problem. This is a problem with RECFâs faulty LRT code. They have capped the amount of balls in the code to 5. A RECF representative told us on the zoom meet. There was nothing they could do about this.
yeah there are a lot of ways that goals could theoretically have a large amount of balls scored in them, either the definition of scored needs to be changed to prevent >3 ball goals or the software needs to be changed to allow all scored balls to be counted.
If they cap it in the manual to 3 balls I will not be happy. Multiple ball scoring is a new skill check for teams to become world class. Worlds without multiple ball scoring I feel will just be a coin toss among the decent snail bots.
true, although I think itâs a major flaw in the game design if the only way to win a high level match is to exploit an unintended feature of the goals.
I do agree that it probably makes the game better, but hopefully change up is a lesson for the gdc on why not to make the game so easy that the only way to differentiate the scores in higher level matches is to exploit the scoring definition in order to break the game.
I guess it would be nice to have - In order to ball get scored - ball should pass through the hoop - from top of the hoop and meet other criteria to avoid the ambiguities.
This rule is a modification of the definition of Scored. In a Live Remote Tournament, a Ball may be considered Scored in a Goal if it is still touching a Robot of either Alliance color. Note: The intent of this rule is for Head Referees to give Teams the âbenefit of the doubtâ if they inadvertently contact a Ball when attempting to Double / Quadruple a Goal.
The Ball is fully or partially within the outer edge of the Goal.
The Ball is fully below the upper edge of the Goal.
The Ball is not contacting the foam tiles outside of the Goal"
The fact that scoring balls is legal this way has been clarified in a Q and A. The fact that these balls are scored is not the problem, itâs the fact that the LRT software just doesnât allow us to score more that 5 balls/goal
If you had a conversation with someone from RECF about this during the event (as you said earlier in this thread), then Iâm sure they will have passed it to the right people and it will be fixed in due time.
I think a maximum of 3 balls would help the original point of the game. Change Up wasnât made to stuff 3 specific goals each match. By rball scoring at 3, teams would now have an incentive to score other goals and create different scoring circumstances, unlike the current online strategy.
The original point of this game was to be back and forth and to have quick changes of possession of each goal. Because of LRT, Change Up has become less of a back and forth game. If LRT had a 3 ball cap, there would be a lot of goals locked in tied possession and just generally trying to score as many alliance color balls as possible. I think this would reduce the incentive to score other goals among higher level teams that can easily clear the field since if all the balls are scored, most likely there will not be any rows due to tied possession. Even though 4+ balls isnât intended in the game design, it introduces some more complexity to benefit high level teams since more and more teams can clear the field.
agreed. it would have been better if change up didnât need this mechanic to allow for differentiating scores at high levels, but the fact that it does means that goal over-filling should stay.
@holbrook I will be surprised if this gets fixed in 2 weeks before my competition. This is an urgent issue that is affecting more teams than just my own, yet RECF have not addressed it or made answers available to my coach or other event partners.
Idk if that would completely solve the problem. Most teams can already clear the field and having possession for both alliances would just increase the points per team on each alliance. Since the game is so easy, I think there needs to be a determining skill factor, whether it was intentional or not.
I think at the very least it couldnât possibly hurt. Tied goals with no ownership are a problem. âDouble ownershipâ might not be an ideal solution, but it can only help.
what is so hard about EPâs listening to the rules? Neither the game manual nor the Q&A provide an upper limit on the number of balls per goal.