I was reading the rules and came upon 3.3.12. It states, “Once a robot begins its scoring run, the referee will roll a standard 6-sided dice to determine in which corner the evacuation point will be located.” So, my question is if there is a six sided dice and four corners, how does the rolls work out?
I have to assume MOD 3 as the evac corner cannot be at the entrance. Starting from the entrance, go clockwise 0, 1, 2. I am sure TC will clarify.
@SPatRCJ2018 I had exactly the same question in mind, I’m glad you asked it.
@elizabeth.mabrey in some arenas (like it occurred at the German championship) the entrance is not located in one of the corners, but in the center of a wall, which results in four corners being possible locations for evacuation points.
This is an example from last year:
Thank you @Marc and @elizabeth.mabrey
In that case, I would imagine that they will just take dice %4.
Thank you Marc for showing an example with four corners.
When determining the position of the evacuation tile by a dice, we decide randomly regardless of the number of corners where evacuation tiles can be installed.
For example, in the case of four places, I may decide (1, 5) (2) (3, 6) (4) in order from the top right of Marc’s photo.
Depending on the OC of the competition which the spot of dice will be assigned to which corner.
Thank you Naomi . So, it can be completely arbitrary then, except it is pre-determined by the OC upfront. Does it change every competition day? However, I feel it is important that will be revealed to the participants at the beginning of the competition in order to minimize ambiguity when it comes to arbitration. Please confirm.
I don’t understand your intention well.
I don’t think it is necessary to clarify it before the competition starts.
Students should be programming so that they can find the evacuation point in any corner.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I absolutely agree the automation that students program should be able to handle “any” random corner; no one should hardcode it.
What I have stated is to ensure rules are clear to the referees so that they won’t have to face confrontation from teams to argue for unfair placement. It is all about clear arbitration.
Take your example : (1–>5) (2 ) (3–> 6) (4) . As long as this setup is clear to all referees as well as the teams, teams cannot argue that the referee just being arbitrary.
Thanky reply, I understood your concern.
I can’t monitor all the competitions, but I believe that the referee will be fair for all participants.
I think everyone involved should follow the RoboCup spirit.
I cannot agree more. Being an organizer is a 'tough" job, and thanks to everyone who volunteered in this effort.
I was trying to point out the importance of clarification. I am sure all referees are trying their best to be fair. My point is about “clarity”. When I organized an event for my students at my center, I find I have to provide clear expectations in the rules and process of arbitration in order to minimize confusion and confrontation.