then again, that does not help teams come up with designs that do not fail in VRC legal competitions, so not good. Better for teams to investigate sooner why their designs do not work than have artificial conditions to believe their solution is invincible and then have crushing defeat.
the problem with false sense of security is that teams come to real world situations and then blame Referees or EP for their robots failing.
How is this electronic solution that is non competition legal a solution?
Moreover, if EPs do system wide ESD mitigation - anti-static tiles, or staticide applications, or maintaining proper humidity during winter months (thankfully steam pipes here have leak that keep building damp during winter months )…
Look I get it - you want your robot to work every millisecond - but world is imperfect - best teams figure it out understanding that the world is imperfect (like weather forecasts).
Best advice I have for any team is to get it right over and over under real world conditions - the more you do so - the more likely you will get it more right than wrong. I say this with 3D printer I assembled from components that repeats tasks over and over - sometimes it brings me on a wild ride - leadings to a huge pile of filament … I learn how to deal with it and make it more right than wrong in terms of print outcomes.
You should too.