Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Defensive Robots/Strategies? (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153352)

garyjune 09-01-2017 22:43

Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Considering the shuttling and the importance of cycle times in this year's game, how effective would defensive strategies/robots be?
Would it be a better idea to defend against gear or ball scoring robots?
What design elements/components would increase a robot's defensive capability?
Would a hybrid gear + defensive robot be viable?
What would defense this game look like?

NerdyCharmax 09-01-2017 22:53

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
I think that to be an effective defense bot all that you really have to do is go to the opposing alliance's launch pad and clog up some of the narrower passages between the drive station and the airship. Then there is also of course the ability to severely lengthen your opponent's cycle time just by being in the way and forcing them to adjust their path in the neutral zone. Make sure that you check up on the rules before pursuing any aggressive defensive strategies.

MARS_James 09-01-2017 23:06

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Considering the shuttling and the importance of cycle times in this year's game, how effective would defensive strategies/robots be?

Very, even more so than last year

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Would it be a better idea to defend against gear or ball scoring robots?

Why not both? But if I am being honest Gear robots are easier to defend against since ball scoring robots will be able to put themselves against a wall or in a safe zone and just shoot over you or between hits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
What design elements/components would increase a robot's defensive capability?

Powerful drivetrain, 6 cim, preferably two speeds to chase down and pin. Low ground clearance so as not to accidentally acquire game pieces. Max height for your size box. Low center of gravity. High traction wheels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Would a hybrid gear + defensive robot be viable?

I think designing a robot to do both is a good idea, but during an actual match post Auto, it is better to focus on one task or the other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
What would defense this game look like?

So post Autonomous head to the area between your airship and their feeder station push/pin a robot heading to retrieve a gear till you either are nearing their safe zone or you need to break the pin. Wait for them to retrieve the gear.

They will either A)need to go around the air ship to not deal with you or B)try to get by you

If A: Go diagonally towards their desired path they will either: 1) Redirect and play chicken, 2) Run into you and now you have a pushing match heading towards your safe zone so they are risking a penalty 3) You pin them for a legal pin

If B: Don't let them by turning it into a pushing match or pinning them legally

Either they get by you or you spend the entire match shutting them down if it is the latter congratulations, you did your job and will be on someones pick list for effective defense if not.

Once they get into the area to score the gear that is not a safe zone, be as disruptive as possible and you will either slow them down or make them drop the gear.

Either they score the gear or they don't. If the latter once again congratulations, you did your job and will be on someones pick list for defense if not repeat the steps listed above.


If someone is making you waste this much time the whole match than there is no way you are cycling fast enough to engage the rotors by themselves.

Lil' Lavery 09-01-2017 23:59

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
The mandatory feature required of all teams attempting to play shutdown defense near the opponent's airship will be a way to solve the visibility challenges presented by the airships.

Brian Maher 10-01-2017 00:05

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MARS_James (Post 1628359)
I think designing a robot to do both is a good idea, but during an actual match post Auto, it is better to focus on one task or the other.

I don't agree with the boldfaced text. Granted, neither of us will know with certainty until the game is played, but consider this scenario:

Say Robots A, B, and C are on an alliance. Robots A and B can score a total of five gears. Robot C can place up to three gears and play defense. If A and B place their five gears (plus the free gear), the alliance engages two rotors (80 points). If A, B, and C place their maximum eight gears, the alliance engages three rotors (120 points). However, if A and B place their five gears and C places one gear then plays defense, the alliance still engages three rotors (still 120 points) plus they gain whatever havoc C wreaks on their opponents.

TDav540 10-01-2017 00:07

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Maher (Post 1628381)
I don't agree with this. Granted, neither of us will know with certainty until the game is played, but consider this scenario:

Say Robots A, B, and C are on an alliance. Robots A and B can score a total of five gears. Robot C can place up to three gears and play defense. If A and B place their five gears (plus the free gear), the alliance engages two rotors (80 points). If A, B, and C place their maximum eight gears, the alliance engages three rotors (120 points). However, if A and B place their five gears and C places one gear then plays defense, the alliance still engages three rotors (still 120 points) plus they gain whatever havoc C wreaks on their opponents.

+1 to Brian here. It's very alliance and match dependent.

MARS_James 10-01-2017 01:30

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Maher (Post 1628381)
I don't agree with the boldfaced text. Granted, neither of us will know with certainty until the game is played, but consider this scenario:

Say Robots A, B, and C are on an alliance. Robots A and B can score a total of five gears. Robot C can place up to three gears and play defense. If A and B place their five gears (plus the free gear), the alliance engages two rotors (80 points). If A, B, and C place their maximum eight gears, the alliance engages three rotors (120 points). However, if A and B place their five gears and C places one gear then plays defense, the alliance still engages three rotors (still 120 points) plus they gain whatever havoc C wreaks on their opponents.

Sorry i failed to elaborate on this my point was more so, if your tasked with playing defense, getting a gear is not an effective strategy. If your tasked with getting gears, playing defense is not an effective strategy, however if your task is put up x gears what you do after/inbetween is up to you but get those x gears.

SMR Vault 19-01-2017 22:16

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Considering the shuttling and the importance of cycle times in this year's game, how effective would defensive strategies/robots be?
Would it be a better idea to defend against gear or ball scoring robots?
What design elements/components would increase a robot's defensive capability?
Would a hybrid gear + defensive robot be viable?
What would defense this game look like?

There are 2 core defensive strategies (from a general design standpoint) to consider based on the 2 volume constraints:

1) Vertical Defense- Use your robot to block potential fuel shots by choosing to build using the volume option with a focus on height (30 in. by 32 in. by 36 in. tall (~76 cm by 81 cm by 91 cm tall)).
This option is difficult to pursue for 2 reasons:
  • Most balls shot in the high efficiency goal most likely follow a steep trajectory that your 36 in. height limit may not be able to block.
  • If your robot is able to block shots, getting your robot in position to block will be quite difficult, and will require manueverability that our robots may not be capable of. Well trained drivers are advised for this strategy in particular.

2) Horizontal Defense- Use your robot to effectively pin opponents by selecting the volume option with a focus on width (36 in. by 40 in. by 24 in. tall (~91 cm by 101 cm by 60 cm tall)).
  • The greater width of this design allows for greater blockage in tight spaces. Here are the rules for pinning:
G11.There’s a 5-count on pins. ROBOTS may not pin an opponent’s ROBOT for more than five (5)
seconds. A ROBOT will be considered pinned until the ROBOTS have separated by at least six
(6) feet. The pinning ROBOT(s) must then wait for at least three (3) seconds before attempting to
pin the same ROBOT again. Pinning is transitory through other objects. If the pinned ROBOT
chases the pinning ROBOT upon retreat, the pinning ROBOT will not be penalized, and the pin
will be considered complete.
  • This strategy takes a more contact-centered approach to interfering with shots; since shooting into the high efficiency goal will be such a challenge for teams this year, any light interference to a robot setting up for a shot may be enough to cause the opponent to miss. If you take this route, be mindful of the rules regarding contact:
G08. Don’t tear others down to lift yourself up. Strategies aimed at the destruction or inhibition of
ROBOTS via attachment, damage, tipping, entanglements, or deliberately putting a GEAR on an
opponent’s ROBOT are not allowed.
G09. Stay out of other ROBOTS. Initiating deliberate or damaging contact with an opponent ROBOT
on or inside the vertical extension of its FRAME PERIMETER is not allowed.
In terms of contact, both vertical and horizontal builds should be equally effective, but the width of the horizontal should be more effective for pinning.

In regards to height, the distance from the ground to the top of the high efficiency is roughly 27 in. The maximum height for a vertical bot is 36 in. and for a horizontal bot is 24 in. The horizontal bot should semi-effectively block shots into the low efficiency goal, so this is something to consider when picking a strategy.

In summary, your most viable option is probably to pursue interfering with ball-shooting robots. They are easier to throw off, as many teams seem to be implementing safeguards against gears falling off.

SMR Vault 23-01-2017 22:31

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
We reviewed some core defensive strategies in our video update of weeks 1 & 2, so we recommend your team checks this out to see how other teams are implementing some of these strategies!

https://youtu.be/PJhMr0CW83s

Edxu 23-01-2017 22:48

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
The field this year has some semblance to Ultimate Ascent's field, with large field objects creating chokepoints. The chokepoints this year are the two corridors where robots can exit their key.

Optimally played defense will make it extremely difficult for boiler-scoring robots to leave the key after their cycle, as IMO, playing defense on intaking robots is more important than defense on scoring robots, as accuracy matters less than volume of fuel fired.

A blue robot shifting between these two positions can significantly disrupt an opponent's cycle time, and even has the potential to entirely lock them out of acquiring new gears or fuel to cycle.

http://imgur.com/a/NA1uK

kenfox 25-01-2017 00:23

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Considering the shuttling and the importance of cycle times in this year's game, how effective would defensive strategies/robots be?

Defensive play seems to fit best with a shooting strategy. The first 2 rotors are must-haves, but a shooter can win with 41 pts in fuel if they prevent opponents from getting 4 rotors.

I hope we see a shooter than can put up 40 pts in auton. They'll seed high and should be able to pick a good auton gearbot and another gearbot. That's enough points coming out of auton to win with a pure defense teleop strategy.

In a gearbot vs gearbot race, the first alliance to 4 rotors will have to decide to go full defense or shoot. If they get to 4 rotors with a 4 gear lead, it probably makes sense to go full defense. Or put up a point of fuel just to cover the case of a rotor tie before switching to full defense. An auton fuel dump into the low boiler by a gearbot will be valuable for the same reason.

If an alliance feels they can win in the climb, it may pay to be very defensive as well because climbs can dominate low point games. Strong defense and good clock management will be very hard to play against though it requires more coordination than alliances can normally execute.

It will be fun to watch these matches and see where the meta goes!

Best advice this year (as it is most years) is don't skimp on your drivetrain. Speed and reliability are critical to both offense and defense.

Raysaran 25-01-2017 06:38

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Considering the shuttling and the importance of cycle times in this year's game, how effective would defensive strategies/robots be?
Would it be a better idea to defend against gear or ball scoring robots?
What design elements/components would increase a robot's defensive capability?
Would a hybrid gear + defensive robot be viable?
What would defense this game look like?

Playing defense on the return feeder station is probably the best way to go, you get a huge vision advantage and it's a lot harder to see your robot behind their airship.

Parker Brotman 01-02-2017 20:54

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Raysaran (Post 1636021)
Playing defense on the return feeder station is probably the best way to go, you get a huge vision advantage and it's a lot harder to see your robot behind their airship.

An extremely important thing to note about this is that as per G13, "A ROBOT with any part inside its opponent’s RETRIEVAL ZONE may not contact an opposing ROBOT, regardless of who initiates the contact. Violation: TECH FOUL." You can defend against robots that are near the retrieval zone, but be extremely careful about it because tech fouls aren't fun.

Parker Brotman 01-02-2017 21:22

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Considering the shuttling and the importance of cycle times in this year's game, how effective would defensive strategies/robots be?

I agree with everyone else that defense will be a big factor this year. A mostly open field which also has a few chokepoints lends well to defense, as well as the fact that there's only one fully protected zone per alliance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Would it be a better idea to defend against gear or ball scoring robots?

Either could be good depending on the circumstances of any given match, but generally I'd think defending against gear-delivering robots would be a more effective strategy due to the nature of how gears and fuel are each scored. Fuel is scored in a fluid manner, meaning a team basically sits in front of the boiler and the score steadily ticks upward. Gears on the other hand are scored in an incremental manner, meaning you only get points when your gear total passes what I think of as a "checkpoint." The gap between the final two checkpoints (rotors) is equal to the sum of all previously delivered gears, so if you can keep the opposing alliance down to 11 delivered gears, it's just as good as limiting them to 6 delivered gears, and you're making their last 5 gears completely worthless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
What design elements/components would increase a robot's defensive capability?

Good drivers and a strong drive train.

The more experience your drivers have, the better they will be at all aspects of the game, especially defense. There's something to be said for keeping your design simple and finishing early so that you're drivers (and programmers) get more time with the robot. And the thing about practicing defense is you don't even need a full robot to begin practicing; all you need is a functioning drive train.

Unless you can pull off a more complex drivetrain such as swerve or octocanum, I'd stick with tank drive (as in 6 traction wheels, not treads). This is a very contentious topic, but most people, myself included, would highly advise against using a mecanum drive or an H drive, as the (slightly) increased mobility is outweighed by the fact that they will get pushed around easily by other robots. And if you have well-trained drivers, you should be totally fine with the mobility of a tank drive.

As for the transmission, I like shifting gearboxes. You can have a very low speed which is great for pushing other robots, and you can have a high speed which is good for traversing the field quickly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyjune (Post 1628343)
Would a hybrid gear + defensive robot be viable?

If your talking about robot design, absolutely. All it takes to build a good defensive bot is a strong drivetrain.

If you're talking about strategy, it could work. If you're confident your alliance can get 3 rotors activated but highly doubtful your alliance could get up to 4, one good use of your time instead of cycling useless gears would be to play defense.

A hybrid fuel + defensive strategy for your robot might be even better though. To pickup a gear requires that you fetch it from a specific location on the field, whereas fuel can be found everywhere. This means that you can both intake fuel and play defense at the same time.

Alex Cormier 01-02-2017 22:42

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
I am very excited to see how D will play out this year. Can't wait. ;)

scott.smith 01-02-2017 23:29

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Cormier (Post 1639317)
I am very excited to see how D will play out this year. Can't wait. ;)

After your resounding success with defense last year, will you be going all out defense this year? If so, care to share ideas about defense?

JesseK 02-02-2017 12:21

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Remember that this field is mirrored rather than rotationally-symmetric. This means that the pinch points your defensive bot exploits also force your partners to go even further to place their gears. Sure, we could start getting into "but we'd go here, and you'd go there, but what if this and that.....". Yet there still remains a fundamental issue with playing zone defense that has no easy answer.

Just be sure your bot can deal with 120-150lbs of another robot crashing into you because you decided to get in their way while their robot was in 'ludicrous mode' ;).

bmammen 02-02-2017 15:00

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SMR Vault (Post 1633763)
There are 2 core defensive strategies (from a general design standpoint) to consider based on the 2 volume constraints:
G11.There’s a 5-count on pins. ROBOTS may not pin an opponent’s ROBOT for more than five (5)
seconds. A ROBOT will be considered pinned until the ROBOTS have separated by at least six
(6) feet. The pinning ROBOT(s) must then wait for at least three (3) seconds before attempting to
pin the same ROBOT again. Pinning is transitory through other objects. If the pinned ROBOT
chases the pinning ROBOT upon retreat, the pinning ROBOT will not be penalized, and the pin
will be considered complete.

A question around pinning vs contact. G11 defines pinning this way:

"There is no FIRST® Robotics Competition specific definition of pin, so a general definition applies; “to prevent or stop something from moving.” As a result, contact is not required for pinning to occur. For example, a ROBOT parked right behind an opponent that is between dividers could be considered pinning because the dividers and the parked ROBOT prevent the opponent from moving."

So would contacting a robot for a period of longer that a 5 count be allowed assuming both robots were moving? Such as in the case of continued bumping or pushing?

Cothron Theiss 02-02-2017 15:13

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bmammen (Post 1639566)
[size="3"]So would contacting a robot for a period of longer that a 5 count be allowed assuming both robots were moving? Such as in the case of continued bumping or pushing?

First off, this is a hypothetical situation, therefore is dependent on the situation and the referees during the match.

But imagine this scenario: Robot A is moving towards some point on the field to score points. Robot B wants to play defense on them, and so Robot B drives headlong into Robot A to prevent them from scoring. Both robots are in an open area, pushing head to head and neither are moving for over 5 seconds. This is typically not considered a pin. While neither robot is moving, Robot A could, at any time, throw it in reverse and try an alternate route. Robot B is preventing Robot A from getting to their destination via the most direct path. They are not preventing them from moving at all.

Now imagine this: Robot A has just scored, has one end against a wall or some other obstacle, and wants to drive back tot he other end of the field to reload whatever scoring piece. Robot B wants to play defense. Robot B does this by driving headlong into Robot A, driving it into the wall. Neither robot is moving for over 5 seconds. This would typically be considered a pin. Robot B is preventing Robot A from moving whatsoever and would be in violation of G11.

While that doesn't directly answer your question, you should be able to draw the correct conclusion form that.

Alex Cormier 02-02-2017 19:14

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by scott.smith (Post 1639333)
After your resounding success with defense last year, will you be going all out defense this year? If so, care to share ideas about defense?

We'll see... we are in the process of making a teaser video of this years progress so far. Stay tuned. ;)

qscgy 02-02-2017 19:50

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Our team saw the defensive strategy in this game as being similar to Aerial Assist. Both had fairly open fields, and pinning for longer than usual was allowed. What worked very well for us was going across the field at full speed on a 6-CIM drive and hitting opposing robots, then shoving them. It is unclear as to whether this is allowed this year, but a hit to a corner would definitely throw off a team's aim. A hit while placing a gear on the peg could also interfere, as could blocking chokepoints. What I'm trying to say is that we think that harassing opposing robots is better than constantly trying to defend. One idea we also had, which is of questionable legality, is to ram the opposing alliance's airship while a pilot is lifting a gear. If this is allowed, and depending on the construction of the airships, this could cause a pilot to drop a gear.

New Lightning 02-02-2017 20:12

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by qscgy (Post 1639670)
One idea we also had, which is of questionable legality, is to ram the opposing alliance's airship while a pilot is lifting a gear. If this is allowed, and depending on the construction of the airships, this could cause a pilot to drop a gear.

Disregarding the legality aspect of this strategy, I just don't think that this would be reasonable given the fact that FIRST wouldn't put a major permanent structure on the field without it being extremely secure and well built. It would have to be built specifically to withstand the impact of a robot. It would seem to me that if a robot would be able to shake the entirety of the airship with sufficient force to distract a human player that the airship is not robustly built enough.

I think that this really isn't the best possible defensive strategy. Your better bet would be to go after the robot while its trying to place the gear. Even if their gear just drops into a slot that the drivers pick up from, which is by far the simplest option that there is, then you can still hamper the teams ability to proper place the gear on the peg.

iyportne 02-02-2017 20:51

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
This kind of thread is among my favorite. So much good information, point and counter-point, and I most often defer to the teams with the most experience in planning and executing this aspect of the game.

This year however has two very striking differences, and only one mentioned here so far. The fact that this years field is mirrored, meaning that instead of counter current flow, most team's modeled and practiced cycle times will likely mostly occupy the same space, leading to offense basically having a built in defense - or the stronger bully wins. This also means that defensive skirmishes have to be well designed and executed or you are interfering with the cycle time of both you and your opposing alliance. Couple that with more than one skirmish and you could shut down the whole field, especially in elims with 4 total gear runners.

The second difference is the possibility for hundreds of game pieces littering the field. Not all robot-robot interaction is going to be the classical, and by now predictable, bumper-to-bumper, my drive train is better than your drive train pushing around...there's going to be balls (and maybe gears) stuck between bots in what may be a completely untested fashion. Remember the old trick, now outlawed, of putting solid noodles on bottom and hollow on top in order to jack up an opponents bot to get the upper hand. I predict many robots will be getting jacked up on fuel, and I'm not talking about Red Bull.

This years game is sure to be a crowd pleaser, and I further predict as the competition weeks progress, when offensive strategies progress so too will defensive strategies and we may not see the steep curve in high scores that we did last, especially considering the diminishing returns of gear running.

ns3517 02-02-2017 23:03

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
What about a team who builds a very small drivetrain then just defends shots.
Ex. A team chooses the 36x40x24 volume and builds a 29x18x24 chassis. They can now extend approx 15 inch from their frame. They could extend a 15 inch shield or sorts to hover over top the opponent shooter. Like team 1405's robot in stronghold.

BotDesigner 02-02-2017 23:51

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ns3517 (Post 1639739)
What about a team who builds a very small drivetrain then just defends shots.
Ex. A team chooses the 36x40x24 volume and builds a 29x18x24 chassis. They can now extend approx 15 inch from their frame. They could extend a 15 inch shield or sorts to hover over top the opponent shooter. Like team 1405's robot in stronghold.

My team (who also cheesecake a blocker of our own last year) considered this idea early on in the season. We didn't go with it since we thought that we would be far better off with a larger drivebase which would help us in pushing matches. IMO the most effective defense this year will be ramming, pushing, pinning, and misaligning opponents with your drivetrain, thanks to the lack of safe zones (and the huge point value discrepancy between gears and fuel). I believe that teams who want to play defense should invest far more into their drivetrain than a blocker.

aldaeron 03-02-2017 09:40

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ns3517 (Post 1639739)
What about a team who builds a very small drivetrain then just defends shots.
Ex. A team chooses the 36x40x24 volume and builds a 29x18x24 chassis. They can now extend approx 15 inch from their frame. They could extend a 15 inch shield or sorts to hover over top the opponent shooter. Like team 1405's robot in stronghold.

So long as the robot being blocked has an exterior surface at the maximum height (24") this would not work because you cannot rotate your blocker up above 24" to get it above their shooter.

SpaceBiz 03-02-2017 09:49

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
One thing that might happen is robots is fuel getting stuck in gear mechanisms, specifically passive ones, incapacitating them for that match. In theory, intentionally doing so is almost definitely illegal via G08.

"Don’t tear others down to lift yourself up. Strategies aimed at the destruction or inhibition of ROBOTS via attachment, damage, tipping, entanglements, or deliberately putting a GEAR on an opponent’s ROBOT are not allowed."

Violation: FOUL and YELLOW CARD. If harm or incapacitation occurs as a result of the strategy, RED CARD.

There are some hypothetical scenarios where this could be a problem however. If robot A pushes robot B into a hopper, causing one of the 50 balls to get stuck in, and incapacitate one of the mechanisms on robot B, what happens? How do you judge intent of an otherwise acceptable defensive action? The strategies "aimed at" wording makes it seem like intent would need to be present to draw a foul, but wouldn't it therefore be a result of strategy and always draw a red card? Obviously it is the head refs discretion, but is there any direction you think these rulings would normally go?

JesseK 03-02-2017 10:26

Re: Defensive Robots/Strategies?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SpaceBiz (Post 1639811)
One thing that might happen is robots is fuel getting stuck in gear mechanisms, specifically passive ones, incapacitating them for that match. In theory, intentionally doing so is almost definitely illegal via G08.

"Don’t tear others down to lift yourself up. Strategies aimed at the destruction or inhibition of ROBOTS via attachment, damage, tipping, entanglements, or deliberately putting a GEAR on an opponent’s ROBOT are not allowed."

Violation: FOUL and YELLOW CARD. If harm or incapacitation occurs as a result of the strategy, RED CARD.

There are some hypothetical scenarios where this could be a problem however. If robot A pushes robot B into a hopper, causing one of the 50 balls to get stuck in, and incapacitate one of the mechanisms on robot B, what happens? How do you judge intent of an otherwise acceptable defensive action? The strategies "aimed at" wording makes it seem like intent would need to be present to draw a foul, but wouldn't it therefore be a result of strategy and always draw a red card? Obviously it is the head refs discretion, but is there any direction you think these rulings would normally go?

Balls getting stuck will absolutely be a problem for most teams, especially the errant ball that pops up when plowing into them near the feeder station. It was among the reasons I forced our feeder team to pivot last night and re-evaluate most decisions and assumptions about the feeder last night. In the end our tests showed that our mechanism could be crazy-simple and still deal with this exact problem.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14.

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