Chief Delphi
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=141523)

TimTheGreat 12-01-2016 00:21
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purpose (Post 1521738)
It'd work for about 30 seconds maybe. According to G21 (A ROBOT contacting carpet in the opponent’s SECRET PASSAGE may not contact opposing ROBOTS), you're allowed to be in their secret passage, but you're not allowed to touch opposing robots in their secret passage. Once the other alliance noticed what you're doing, all they have to do is send one robot to touch you and you'd be at fault and get a tech foul.
Not quite. G11 states that the opposing alliance cannot force a robot to break a rule. So if they touch you it's not a foul on you. In fact, it's a foul on the OTHER team.

Jared 12-01-2016 00:22
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
This thread may be relevant.http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=141277

Also, G11 may apply if they put in two balls at once and force you to control them

AndyBare 12-01-2016 00:23
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cad321 (Post 1521755)
The biggest issue I see now (assuming you follow along with the suggestions/updates throughout the thread) is that you would still be susceptible to defense. What stops another team from coming and bumping you while you're shooting?
You could make feet that extend from beneath your robot and make you somewhat immobile.

AndyBare 12-01-2016 00:24
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared (Post 1521760)
This thread may be relevant.http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=141277

Also, G11 may apply if they put in two balls at once and force you to control them
The G11 might apply to them, correct? Are we on the same page here?

Rangel(kf7fdb) 12-01-2016 00:30
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
If a human player can be fouled with G11 for depositing balls too fast because an opposing robot is forcing the human player to deposit, I'm sure this is a huge oversight by the GDC and will be in a team update or Q&A. Really the robot doesn't even need to score to be effective. By carrying one ball and blocking all but one HP slot, the robot can prevent the human player from putting balls back into play.

JesseK 12-01-2016 00:30
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Seems plausible to reduce cycle times, yet an offensive robot coming back to the secret passage to get a ball would put this strategy in a world of hurt. The other alliance bot would push your bot back onto the courtyard carpet, and if you resist or push back you may wind up with a pretty bad foul regardless of whether the other bot initiated the first contact. The offensive bot is simply coming to get boulders, so it's tough to say they intended to force you into a penalty.

AndyBare 12-01-2016 00:30
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Oh shoot.
Counterweight thing wouldn't work, cause you'd be touching their SP carpet...

Purpose 12-01-2016 00:32
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheGreat (Post 1521756)
Not quite. G11 states that the opposing alliance cannot force a robot to break a rule. So if they touch you it's not a foul on you. In fact, it's a foul on the OTHER team.
You know, I forgot about that rule. I think you may be right, it definitely could be applied in this case, but the way I'm reading it, it seems to be a fail safe so teams don't design a robot or an entire game plan revolving around giving other robots fouls. In this case, an opposing robot is in your secret passageway, in the way of the boulder dispenser. You could possibly argue that you needed the dispenser, and it's your alliance's dispenser and they shouldn't be in the way. I don't know, it seems like it's in the air.

AndyBare 12-01-2016 00:38
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purpose (Post 1521769)
You know, I forgot about that rule. I think you may be right, it definitely could be applied in this case, but the way I'm reading it, it seems to be a fail safe so teams don't design a robot or an entire game plan revolving around giving other robots fouls. In this case, an opposing robot is in your secret passageway, in the way of the boulder dispenser. You could possibly argue that you needed the dispenser, and it's your alliance's dispenser and they shouldn't be in the way. I don't know, it seems like it's in the air.
G21 is a super iffy rule right now by itself. Waiting for QA to clear up some question about "contact"

BotDesigner 12-01-2016 00:39
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheGreat (Post 1521756)
Not quite. G11 states that the opposing alliance cannot force a robot to break a rule. So if they touch you it's not a foul on you. In fact, it's a foul on the OTHER team.
But would it be a foul on them by sitting in your secret passage hoping you would touch them forcing a foul on you by you forcing a foul on them. Logically it doesn't make sense because the fouls would go on forever. Foul on you for forcing them to foul you by them forcing you to foul them...

Greg Needel 12-01-2016 01:16
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheGreat (Post 1521756)
Not quite. G11 states that the opposing alliance cannot force a robot to break a rule. So if they touch you it's not a foul on you. In fact, it's a foul on the OTHER team.
I guess I don't see this. Since they can clearly have a defender in their own courtyard, as long as no pin comes into play, if they touch you than wouldn't it just be defense and not trying to force a foul.

If I was a ref and I saw a team blocking access to the HP slots that a team was trying to get to there is no way that this would be called as intentionally trying to draw a foul. Additionally I think that an interpretation of G25 might come into play after it was done a few times, as it is intentionally impeding the flow of the match (although none of the definitions clearly define it as such in the current manual)

Knufire 12-01-2016 01:34
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
If this was going to work this year, it would have worked in 2012. Which it didn't.

James Juncker 12-01-2016 06:56
What if you had one team mate block the far human player ground input and had the other robot with its wheels outside the SP allowing it to shoot. This way with an extension of 15 inches you would be able to get all of the other alliances boulders as well and have the ability to Launch the boulders as you aren't in contact with any carpet. With this you also make it almost impossible for the other team to push you out of the corner

AndyBare 12-01-2016 07:42
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Juncker (Post 1521813)
What if you had one team mate block the far human player ground input and had the other robot with its wheels outside the SP allowing it to shoot. This way with an extension of 15 inches you would be able to get all of the other alliances boulders as well and have the ability to Launch the boulders as you aren't in contact with any carpet. With this you also make it almost impossible for the other team to push you out of the corner
Then you'd be fouled for a G25
  • Sub-section B
 coordinating a blockade of the FIELD with ALLIANCE members
An example of a blockade would be two (2) or more ROBOTS on the same ALLIANCE working together to “box” an opponent ROBOT into a corner of the FIELD using the GUARDRAIL and the CASTLE WALL.

bduddy 12-01-2016 12:53
Re: Immobile 200+ pts solo robot concept
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyBare (Post 1521820)
Then you'd be fouled for a G25
  • Sub-section B
 coordinating a blockade of the FIELD with ALLIANCE members
An example of a blockade would be two (2) or more ROBOTS on the same ALLIANCE working together to “box” an opponent ROBOT into a corner of the FIELD using the GUARDRAIL and the CASTLE WALL.
How is this a blockade of the field? It doesn't inhibit the movement of the other alliance at all.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:23.
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi