Value of defense
 

In Aerial Assist, there was only one game piece, so four robots were left with nothing to do but bash into other robots (I hated Aerial Assist). Four defensive robots and two on offense. This game appears to be the antithesis of Aerial Assist.

With all the potential for scoring, and the availability of scoring opportunities, combined with the protection rules for robots during scoring, I don't see any value to playing defense. If your goal is to maximize Qual points (during qualification matches), your alliance needs to breach the four defenses and take the tower. Any time spent playing defense detracts from the time available to damage defenses and weaken the tower. Even a pizza box can be an effective scorer this year. I believe you can score more points during the match than you can possibly prevent.

Re: Value of defense
 

Totally agree! But we both know we are about to hear the contrary ::ouch::
Wait for it......wait for it........... Here they come........

Re: Value of defense
 

This sounds like a discussion we had last night. Similar conclusion.

Re: Value of defense
 

Defense will be critically valuable when offense can not keep up with the opponent, as has been the trend in most goal-oriented games.

Re: Value of defense
 

Defense is valuable when:

1) Annoy a shooting robot / steal their missed shots
2) Keep other Alliance from parking in SP to steal your boulders.

Re: Value of defense
 

What rules are you talking about? There is nothing like the key (in RR) this year. If you are talking about backing up into the outer works that seems to grey area that I am sure the QA will clarify.

If everyone is truly building short robots as a recent poll suggest then I think a 4ft 6" blocker angled 15 inches into your short robot could be very effective at blocking shots.

Not to mention that the goal is a lot different compared to say AA where you could shoot at a wide variety of angles (at the correct height) and still make the shot.

I however do agree that defense even as I mentioned doesn't seem viable until eliminations and even then only against short shooters that can be blocked easily AND a capable enough offense (from the other 2 bots) that can still score 8+ times.

Am I missing something?

Re: Value of defense
 

There are no safe zones for scoring boulders, including on the batter. There are no rules which inhibit defense against scoring boulders, except those surrounding the outer works (i.e. ball flow).

Hope those batter shields are tough :ahh:.

Re: Value of defense
 

There is a safe zone stretching all the way across the field. The outer works.
I have it on good authority that the outer works protection rule was intended as a dual role. Protection for both breaching and shooting. I do not expect an update changing it.

Based on shooting from the key in 2012, I don't expect shooting from the outer works to be overly difficult, however, it is a high risk for the reward (missed shot is a huge penalty in time), so many teams may decide to forgo long shooting. With only one defensive bot allowed, there will always be at least one low goal vulnerable.

Re: Value of defense
 

Exactly, I don't understand how there is such a big debate about this part of the game. They clearly specified they way you can shoot and used the wording "And no other carpet" rather than "only completely in the enemies courtyard" I expect many team that do well at these competitions to use that safe zone.

However (and this isn't directed at the quote above) the value of defense should not be over looked, which it is year after year by many people. While you may not Need a defender at all times or in all matches. Certainly as the weeks progress and teams start stealing balls from the secret passage way. or teams that have to rush low goals to breach and capture Defense will be critical to stopping them not only from getting to the goal but also keeping them from getting back out or opening the Group C Outerworks for teammates. Defense is not just complete prevention of scoring but when you can add 5-10 seconds to a few of the other alliance cycles that's as good as getting as getting points for your alliance. (at least when you alliance is capable of already doing both the outerworks and tower without you)
PS: don't forget about the value in playing defense while you teammates break defenses that you can't and then switching the defense and an offense bot to get the varieties of outerworks broken up in the most efficient way.

Re: Value of defense
 

As I read the rules, we have come to the same conclusions, as far as the value of our robot doing defense. This is not zero-sum - there are two zero-sum points on the match win, and up to more points for doing offense. Going for those QP has to be a top mission.

However, there are always teams out there who manage to put up a pretty good defense even when it doesn't seem to make sense. In Recycle Rush, some teams threw more noodles into their own yard and the opponents landfill than their opponents field, but threw early and often, even when it messed up coop points. Don't count on enlightened self interest, because many teams do not follow it. Be agile enough to outmaneuver anyone who can hit you hard, and tough enough to take the beating from anyone who can keep up with you.

Re: Value of defense
 

I agree. My team has also come to a consensus that it's a much better idea to play offense rather than attempt to slow down enemy robots. There's more value in scoring than defending.

Re: Value of defense
 

It is weird that you can't hard commit to defense in this game and score at the same time. I would have liked to see breaching not just be such a one sided thing. I'm no expert nor should I be telling the GDC its bidnizz but an obvious addition to the game is when a robot runs over one of its own damaged defenses it could repair it. This would mean robots actually have more then one zone to play defense from. Anyway that is just wishful thinking. Defense this year puts you in a position where you can't really boost points you just need to hard stop the other side from scoring. Stalling a team just isn't enough with the hit point system, and the boulders constantly being forced onto the field. Scoring is a self perpetuating cycle that without defense can easily snowball out of control.

Re: Value of defense
 

Hmm, we got distracted by the opponent castle wall as both an alignment device and semi-safe zone. We also got distracted by 'trapping' a bot in the courtyard, preventing it from getting to the outer works after it delivered a boulder.

Ok, I think I can see how the higher levels of play will form around this game now.

Re: Value of defense
 

The defensive rules remind me of 2010 when only one bot was allowed in the scoring zone. It was very difficult to stop the other bots from scoring if they were good at handing the ball and shooting quickly. That'll be the case this year as well.

Re: Value of defense
 

After walking around AutoDesk's CAD'ed field last night I came to a striking conclusion about the outer works. I bet the zone for effective offense is at least 6-12" away from the outer works. The defending drivers cannot see the rear bumper of an offensive robot , and therefore are really unable to estimate whether the bumper is over the outer works or not. This is huge. I bet it will cause a LOT of penalties in early weeks.

Re: Value of defense
 

I don't agree with those that say defense is not a viable strategy in this year game. Will you be able to totally prevent scoring, obviously not. But a look back to 2014 and where defense could be readily effective in delaying the offensive robot from scoring. Secondly whether or not there will be two robots in the courtyard zone at the same time both ready to shoot and in need of defending seems like a less than often occurrence. And even then simply delaying the shots long enough to where the other alliance can't score 8 boulders and preventing them from weakening the tower, there by preventing a capture, seems to be a very viable strategy.

Re: Value of defense
 

So, are you going to defend the castle or the outer works? Maybe both? (requires two defensive bots) If your opponent is using all three bots to weaken tower / damage defenses, which alliance is more likely to get the extra QP?

Re: Value of defense
 

Not as many as you think, remember the defender bot has its drive team looking right at it, and can see pretty easily if they are in the protected zone or not, just like the refs can, especially since most teams are hinting at staying small this year.

Re: Value of defense
 

If you play defense then you focus on defending inside the courtyard. Because, like I said, I have doubts that there will be two teams at the say time ready to shoot, so you focus on the team ready to shoot. And after the give up and go to the low goal, or they get around you and shoot, then you go after the other team that has now entered the zone and defend against them.

Re: Value of defense
 

with three robots trying to score, the odds are pretty good that there will be two bots trying to score at the same time. And remember. the low goal is just as valuable as the high goal for obtaining the extra QP, and if you are busy defending instead of scoring, the the extra three points for the high goal don't matter much anyway.

Re: Value of defense
 

Defense is not necessarily the best strategy because its usefulness will vary from match to match. Any robot this year is capable to play defense, so if defense is your primary strategy, you are not very likely to get picked by a top team in a first round competition. Also, as you move further along in the season, other teams will want your robot to be used to gain more points. Defense is tricky this year because it is a goal over 6 feet and a robot that is 54". This means that the offense will have to shoot over you to score and you can't extend upwards to block the shot, giving you a comparative disadvantage. Lastly, defense this year will be based primarily on blocking and moving against other robots so you will need a robust bot to prevent any damages. This increases weight and limits your ability to do other tasks well.

Re: Value of defense
 

There's not a lot of space in the neutral zone. A single robot can effectively lock up an opposing team that is trying to breach defenses or make it to your courtyard if they play it correctly. If you can trade one of your less offensively equipped robots for one of theirs, why not?

Very rarely, if ever, is there a situation where the decision to play or not play defense is so black and white. The closest thing to that ever happening is when FIRST stuck a wall in the middle of the field separating the alliances and literally said you cannot cross it.

Re: Value of defense
 

But see I have doubts that your going to have two robots in scoring position at the same time, let alone three. And if there are three trying to score on your tower, then your other two alliance partners have a clear run at the outer works and tower of your opponent. And then when it comes time for your to capture your opponents tower then you make your move through your secret passage, cross the easiest defense for you and capture that tower.

Re: Value of defense
 

Whether or not defense is important this year comes down to which alliance would win:

1. An alliance with three shooters
2. An alliance with two shooters and a defender

Since between three robots, a breach is very likely to occur in most matches (although speed is a different matter), if a defender can at least slow down the shooting cycle of all three bots, those three bots will probably be outscored by two undefended shooters.

I think that defense is especially important this year because it's so difficult for drivers to line up their shots, given the limited visibility, while defenders have a clear view of what they are defending.

I'm sure that there will be a different value to defense at different levels of competition. A defender at an early regional or district event might prevent 100% of tower-scored points, while a defender at a late regional or champs may not be able to keep up with the offensive pressure of multiple scorers.

Either way, we'll find out in six weeks!

Re: Value of defense
 

Right, but the thought is, at least for the teams next to the castle, parallax will give the offensive robot another 6" or so to play with. Very similar to 2011, but at least in 2011 there was another line of tape to use as an indication of location.

Re: Value of defense
 

I think a key thing everyone here is missing is that the defender may not be focusing so much on blocking shots or messing up a robot trying to shot but preventing boulder pickup from the secret passage.

The team update made it very clear the rule is designed such that trying to get a boulder from the secret passage is going to be dangerous if there's an opposing robot over there. If there's not then if you have two boulder scoring robots you can pretty well guarantee a selection of boulders to choose from without leaving the enemy courtyard.

Re: Value of defense
 

These are the reasons defense is played. When there is an offensive mismatch. This particularly comes into play when one robot is significantly stronger than any contender on the opposite alliance. Yes, you definitely want to get that RP in -- win or lose...but why have 1 when you can have 3?

If two of your robots are better at doing what two robots on the other side of the field are doing, you want to try to neutralize that 3rd robot's attack the best you possibly can.

Re: Value of defense
 

The big safe zone that is the outerworks leads me to believe that defense will only be very effective with low/high goal shooters that have to shoot from up close, tall blockers, and potentially ball starvation. I don't think stopping breaches will be very effective simply because a team can just drive on the edge of their opponents outerworks(with bumper inside the volume of the outerworks) to get to whatever defense they want to clear next. In that situation, the defender has no real option but to get out of the way or take a foul. Shooters that line up with the edge of the outerworks too are also protected and can only really be blocked by a tall robot if they themselves are short. I could be wrong but that's how I foresee defense this game.

Re: Value of defense
 

I could see defense being valid for several situations... Consider: If you have three high-scoring shooters on your team, it is very likely that they will not have enough boulders to keep themselves busy - at least not without trying to grab one from the opponent's secret passage.

So:
* The third bot might as well consider playing defense (unless it can damage more defenses). The first two can likely handle all teh scoring.

* A bot for the team without the shooters might consider tripping up the shooters - or at least make it difficult for them to grab boulders from the secret passage without incurring a tech.

Re: Value of defense
 

There are 2 foot high polycarb barriers, aka shields, extending to the edge of the outer works between each defense. It appears to me that a robot must move completely off the outer works in order to change position on the outer works.

A robot should be able to effectively defend shooting, especially short shooters, if the mid-field defenses are difficult to cross.

Whether that's cost effective I think will mainly depend on boulder availability and cycle times--stopping the 8th shot is worth a lot more than stopping the 9th.

Re: Value of defense
 

From my team's Game Analysis, 2 great robots should EASILY be able to cross all defenses and eliminate the Tower's Defenses. So what scoring is left for the 3rd robot to do.

Obviously, be a 4'6" shot-blocking wall, of course. Block all the silly 1'2" shooting robots. (just make sure that they don't get too close to the Outer Works and draw penalties.) As long as they can cross either Category B or D obstacles, they can join us to Capture the Tower during the last 30 seconds.

You go ahead with your 3 offensive robots, I'll send my moving wall over to play with you (4 robots in 1 courtyard!!!), and we'll do more with 2 robots than you accomplish with 3.

Re: Value of defense
 

This is the way I see it too, if you don't play a defense bot, then you are allowing every robot to be a 469 breakaway bot, once there are 6 balls behind the tower, they make a shot, and you hand them another ball to shoot, there is no risk to to being in the secret passage.

This is game is all about game piece control, 6 balls behind red, 6 balls behind blue, 6 robots, no balls on the field.

If no alliances play defense, then do you have this years noodle agreement? Both alliances defeat the tower and capture it unobstructed just to give each other the (RP) qualification points. . .

Re: Value of defense
 

I would say no, because winning the match is worth the same as the agreement, and if you play defense and win a match, and your alliance partners get one of the bonus 1 rp goals, then you have already made an improvement on your 2 rp deal.

Re: Value of defense
 

The revisions on the rules so far make this years defense positioning heavy and not just (please pardon the term) destructive. A lot of instances are cropping up where you just need to get to a point to be safe so defense is stopping a robot before they reach that point.

Re: Value of defense
 

Eh, Aerial Assist was okay, not the best but far from the worst. I fully agree with you that defense, at least being a dedicated defender, is going to be useless, usually. If you're against an alliance that relies extremely heavily on tower points, however, it's a viable option. Much like Aerial Assist, the ideal job for any robot will not be pure defense, it will be to periodically complete a scoring objective, and defend while not completing one of these objectives. In 2014, you would prioritize your "job" on the alliance (inbound, pass, truss, shoot) and defend while not completing that job. This season, the same concept applies.

Re: Value of defense
 

Ahahaha yes, the true value of defense this year. Since short bots seem to be arriving in the masses, a tall bot has the potential to be an extremely powerful defender as well as being a power scoring bot. The options for a tall bot with defensive capabilities could be endless...although this does depend on whether the small bot trend will pan out, or simply be relegated to rookies and Ri3D teams.

Re: Value of defense
 

Easily hey? I wouldn't guess this happens until regional semi-finals in most regionals.

Re: Value of defense
 

Why two?

We tend to be very strong in the PNW and should be respectable at Champs, but are not set up to ever truly be a "top" team. Looking at all of our analysis of our abilities and the game, I see no reason why ONE very strong robot couldn't damage all the defenses in a match. I suspect there will be a few that can do just that. There will be more that can handle all the defenses, but not necessarily in the allotted time..... Being able to to damage all five should not be uncommon, though I don't see it happening that frequently in week 1 and 2 qualifying events....

Still, back to the topic at hand... If all three robots cross a defense during autonomous, a strong breaching specialist should be able to finish the breach on its own. A strong shooter should be able to deal with all the boulders in its opponent's courtyard - and be looking for something to do. The third robot will need to focus on some combination of delivering boulders (scoring them?) and playing defense.

I'm not yet convinced that a lot of defense will be the ideal way to go... The shooter will need a steady supply of boulders in order to maximize its potential... Will the third bot be able to add more points to the scoring potential than it can prevent the other side from attaining? We may have to see this play out a bit before we know...

Re: Value of defense
 

It would be a very strong robot indeed that could do a 15 second game cycle scoring boulders through the worst four of seven defenses in arbitrary locations on the field looking out through their own outer defenses, even against minimal active defense. Will there be any? Probably; this is certainly within the Cheezy Poofs, Simbotics, or RoboWranglers' capabilities, and perhaps a dozen others. Will there be many? Probably not. Our primary goal is to be able to score either QP solo (edit: except, of course, for alliance partners getting onto the batter), while helping towards the other, and being able to rack up boulders once the OP is breached. We also expect to have a high percentage high goal shot; we have used cameras to do the equivalent of this twice already. These attributes will probably be enough to be an alliance captain or easy first round pick at a regional.

Re: Value of defense
 

I agree with this, but I think there will be non-elite teams who will be able to cross all the necessary defenses by ignoring all balls. Especially early in the season, I expect there should be many surprise teams that seed very high while 'better' robots spend their time chasing balls around the field. If I was a non-elite team competing at an early or weaker event, I would strongly consider this strategy.

In response to the main topic, of course there will be defense...

Re: Value of defense
 

How many seconds of teleop will the average defender bot take to get to their court yard and in position to play defense on anyone? 20 - 30 seconds based on the skill of drivers on teams who would pick a defensive bot?

How many cycles could a shooter bot accomplish in 20 seconds? 1-2 cycles under the low goal based on the skill of the scoring team.

How many seconds f teleop will the average defender bot take to get to the neutral zone in front of the opponents secret passage? 5-15 seconds?

How many cycles could a shooter bot accomplish in 20 seconds with a defensive bot in the neutral zone? 0-1 under the low goal based on the lack of skill on the defending team?

Defensive bots will be very useful in the neutral zone if all they do is go back and forth on the center line. They will cut the number of cycles of most teams in half i bet.

Re: Value of defense
 

What won in 2013 I believe it was 3 shooting robots....

Re: Value of defense
 

Thank you GDC. For me this is the first game that one or two robots will not be able to win a match by them selves. Mentor Mac

Re: Value of defense
 

3 shooters, but remember that 1477 went to shut down 469 whenever they got into position for full-court... This same concept applies this year. This game can be played in so many ways that it is impossible to say "2 offense- 1 defense is always superior to 3 offense" or vice versa. It is entirely dependent on who you are against. There's no reason to have a defender if you're against an alliance you can't defend against. I've gone through a few examples of viable alliance setups below, and included my thoughts on effective counterplay against these alliances:

1) The breach boogaloo: 3 dedicated breachers with low goal capabilities. This is by far the safest alliance; there is little to no legal defensive maneuvers to take against this alliance. However, without any high goal abilities, their points potential is very low, and the focus on breaching leaves lots of balls open for your use. Ignore defensive strategies, just outscore them.

2) The capture cluster: 3 dedicated shooters that can cross B/D defenses. Counterplay with this alliance may seem easy at first, but it is actually pretty complicated. If they are performing at a high level, this alliance could easily take care of the group C defense while cycling. With the terrain to serve as an equalizer, there will likely be multiple shooters taking shots in the courtyard at any given time, leaving the defense bot to try to block two or more robots, which is pretty difficult to do. However, without any breach potential, this alliance could absolutely be outscored. Defense in the courtyard is not ideal because of the number of shots that need to be blocked. Instead, defend choke points on the field, near the secret passages and wherever a robot is trying to collect.

3) Specialists: B/D defense/inbounder, Breach specialist, Shooting specialist. By far the easiest alliance to counter, but also has crazy high points potential at higher levels of play. Inbounder and breacher immediately take care of C defense while shooter scores a couple from the center line. Then, inbounder takes position inbounding balls through the low bar or B/D defense for the shooter. Meanwhile, the breach specialist finishes the breach and dumps a few in the low goal. There's really nothing to be done against the breacher, so the easiest way to shut down this alliance is with a blocker in the courtyard. With only one shooter to defend against, it's easy to beat this alliance, especially at low to medium levels of play.

4) Double Hybrids: 2 hybrid breach/shooters and a B/D/lowbar inbounder. This alliance is extremely strong. Two shooters in the courtyard makes defense difficult, and an inbounder keeping the courtyard full means their job is made that much easier. 3 bots that can all contribute to a breach will make it easy, especially when one's sole purpose involves crossing defenses to get balls staged for shooters. The best way to stop this alliance is to have multiple robots contribute in some way to defense. Whenever it's possible, shooters should do their best to prevent the inbounder from getting balls, and breachers and inbounders should try to stop shots in the courtyard. There's few ways to outscore this alliance, so attacking from all fronts will help reduce their potential most effectively.

5) The very happy shooter: 2 inbound/breachers and a shooter. This shooter will be very happy with two robots feeding it, and the two breachers can handle the collaborative C defense without interrupting the shooter. With a consistent, fast shooter, this alliance could be insanely strong. However, a decent courtyard defender could easily shut down that shooter, with no robot constantly nearby to help it. This is the only alliance that I can way, with 100% certainty, you will always need a blocker. Stopping that shooter leaves this alliance with extremely limited points, so shutting it down is extremely important.

Re: Value of defense
 

Will it be so easy to shut down an elite shooter? In other words, can an elite defender easily shut down an elite shooter? I think an elite shooter should have a decent advantage.

Logic: The shooter can shoot from near max height at an upward angle from the outer works. The defender will have to give a little buffer between them and the offensive robot so as to avoid penalties. If the defender isn't tall enough to block the ball, and isn't allowed to hit the shooter, what can they do? An elite shooter should be able to hit >80% of their shots.

If an elite defender can shut down an elite shooter, defense is very valuable. In the higher levels of play, 2 breacher/shooters will easily be able to breach and defeat the tower. The elite breacher/shooters will have little need for a support bot so it might be advantageous to have that third robot play defense in most cases.

Of it's all just speculation at this point. But that's what Chief Delphi is for!

Re: Value of defense
 

I don't see blocking shots as being what good defense will really be about. The main focus of a defensive bot should be, just as it was in 2012, '13, and '14, to slow down the process of collecting the ball and moving into shooting position. If the shooter isn't in perfect rhythm with its feeders, the balls will spend some time on the ground before the shooter can pick them up. That's where the defender comes into play—its job is to steal the balls and send them back the other way or at least ferry them to the secret passage and play sentinel over them until a teammate can come collect them. Then, once the shooter does get a ball, the defender should hound it all the way until it retreats to the outer works or squeezes onto the batter. A good driver (and that's what this strategy crucially relies on) could conceivably cut the output of all but the best shooters by 50% or more.

Re: Value of defense
 

As someone who comes from the region that 1114, 2056, 1241, 610, and many more call home:

I'm really used to planning for being up against the strongest possible teams. The number one thing those teams do is dissect the game and do what is necessary to seed number one independent of the skills of their alliance partners. In FIRST Stronghold, that means ensuring that they get the two extra points available in each qualification match.

To do that, they must DAMAGE 4 of 5 DEFENSEs by CROSSING them each twice, AND score 8 BOULDERS into the enemy TOWER. Conveniently, those two objectives mesh nicely. So long as you CROSS a DEFENSE each time you bring a BOULDER into the enemy COURTYARD and score them, you'll achieve both (assuming your alliance partners are at least functional enough to drive up onto the base of the TOWER to CAPTURE it).

For this game, I don't see any reason a single elite bot shouldn't be able to single-handedly achieve that objective, and I expect the top teams will probably do just that.

As in every previous year I can remember, I expect the top teams will CROSS two DEFENSEs in auto and score 2 BOULDERS. That means they only need to score 6 more in teleop. Totally doable.

Re: Value of defense
 

I agree that it's doable for an 1114 or 2056, but it might not be the most efficient way after a few weeks or in eliminations when they can count on their partners for something. At that point, specialization could make everyone's job easier. That's the time when an opportunistic defender can do some damage.

Re: Value of defense
 

Don't get me wrong, I agree it is rarely the optimum usage of an alliance to do everything yourself and carry your alliance partners, and those top teams recognize that too.

I'm merely stating that the perennial powerhouses will be ABLE to carry their alliance to those 2 ranking points without help, in the event of barely functional alliance partners. As always in FRC, the best defense is an untouchable offence. The 2013 Championship Alliance mentioned earlier in this thread and other powerhouse offensive teams routinely embarrass all but the best defense by simply being faster, more agile, and better practiced. The best drivers practice executing their offensive strategy under defensive pressure, and since most defense is an afterthought, the drivers are usually less practiced, and the offence simply drives circles around them.

I'm expecting that at CMP the GDC will be taking their option to adjust the number of BOULDERs required to weaken the TOWER, as many teams present will be able to score 8 BOULDERs alone.

Re: Value of defense
 

I think it's interesting that you bring this up, because I had a feeling the game would progress exactly the opposite of how you described. At low-to-medium levels of play, I expect to see no robot that can solo a breach and a capture in the same match. At higher levels, even, I predict that no more than 3 teams will do this in the first 4 weeks of competition. As a result, I think it will be much more likely to see alliances that have one robot breach and one robot capture at early events, and at lower levels of play. However, as the game gets more advanced, and fields get deeper, I expect to see alliances with three robots all capable of contributing high goal shots and defense crosses. Utilizing all three of these robots most efficiently could entail many things, based on their relative strengths and weaknesses. However, in the case of an alliance with three hybrid scorers, I expect them to all contribute to both objectives.

Re: Value of defense
 

Yes, this will be a key defensive point--it could well draw off an offensive shooter from the other side to defend the feeding station.

There's also defensive solutions to key outworks.

Defense will work much like it did in 2012 and 2013 (and basketball). You will not be preventing scores but rather slowing down the rate of scoring, and trying to disrupt certain strategies e.g., 2013 FCS.

Re: Value of defense
 

I can see a single top robot completing this task alone (or with minimal help) in qualifications.

Re: Value of defense
 

Generalizing the value of defense is risky, when in all honesty its case by case. If you run a match where none of the robots can be defended against then defense has no value.

Re: Value of defense
 

However, in the 2013 Curie final, 4814 was a defensive specialist leading two shooters in 1918 and 67, and nearly won the division.

Re: Value of defense
 

You are correct if alliances do not plan for this. Offensive bots need to rotate through the field so they are not getting in each other's way in the court yard. Have one in court yard while other is in secret passage area, rotate. You'll be in greater risk of penalty.

Re: Value of defense
 

While defense is risky, I would expect that when elims come around, teams will have enough scouting information to have a strategy where they may want to slow down the opposition if they are able to get a decent lead during the Autonomous period.

Since the mysterious force known as Murphy's Law happens, we want our drivers to know how to play defense in case something goes wrong. Scoring is what we are building the robot to do and our strategy to plan for but stuff happens!


I'm really looking forward to seeing the game strategies evolve this season.

Re: Value of defense
 

To be fair, they do need to get their partners to at least cross a defense and help them capture, but I agree with most of this. I just think that the majority of "strong" offensive teams early in the season will really be good-ish drivers with functional robots, and they won't be good enough to outplay some smart defending. There will always be teams that really are that good, though.

I also predict that the tower will get strengthened for CMP, although that provision has been in the rules for a number of years now and has never been used.

At low/medium levels of play, there will be all sorts of bumbling around and that may involve a division of breaching and scoring robots, but those matches won't be very high-scoring or interesting to watch. The unlikelihood of getting three or even two of the robots you described together on an alliance will inhibit the hybrid alliance strategy. I think that the qualification matches of a team that ends up seeding very high in the first couple weeks will feature that team scoring points wherever they can and their partners struggling to get through the class A and C defenses or defending the whole match. Very rarely will an alliance breach and weaken in one match, but many of the times that it does happen, I think one robot will be responsible for a majority of the breaching and a majority of the scoring. The other partners still will probably be focused on those one or two defenses that the shooter doesn't want to worry about.

What I consider specialization, which I don't expect until the second half of the season, it one robot staying in the opponents' courtyard and collecting balls that were deposited by another robot feeding and breaching at the same time. I know it's a goal for a lot of teams to be this feeder robot, and I think that's a great strategy to go for because it can allow you to be quite productive, but I think the population of these robots that work effectively will be quite small in the first few weeks and so they won't take over the game dynamic from the start. Once those robots become common and effective, some will get efficient enough to convince a shooter that they can handle breaching and feeding, and that's when scores will begin to take off.

When you mention having three capable robots together, though, I think that that setup will lend itself to the strongest shooter taking over and getting part-time help from one partner who also plays intermittent defense, while the third is the dedicated breacher/feeder. We saw something similar a lot in 2012, where one robot would stay on offense shooting, one would shoot some but collect balls from the defensive side of the field, and the other would stay on defense, potentially lob stolen balls over the bump, and initiate the balance sequence. I don't expect many alliances of three robots playing relatively equivalent roles.

Of course, I could be underestimating the level of play overall, in which case the "lone wolf" alliances won't come to exist as often.

Re: Value of defense
 

this is true in many ways but in some cases it may not matter. the rules are there to keep us safe and the game fun. defense is impotent but if you focus on defense what happens when you get a team of only defense. or all you know how to do is defense. but your right it is hard to know where your bumper is and it will be interesting to see how many technical arise in this game alone. can we get a counter from first on how many happen?

Re: Value of defense
 

A breacher bot could find itself with a period of time toward the end of a match when it's already breached all of the defenses, and it's trading 2 point cycles with the opposing alliance's 5 or 10 point cycles. If that situation is anticipated, the breacher might be better off spending some amount of time during the middle of the match playing defense before the end game rules kick in. As long as the breacher leaves enough offense time to breach and capture for their own alliance, playing a bit of defense could be the right move in some cases.

Re: Value of defense
 

That will still leave seven defenses to cross. Each robot can only get credit for crossing one defense during auto.

The rules already stated this, but it was clarified in Team Update 01: