Kidnapping Opponent's Robot
 

Is it just me, or do other folks feel it is not in the spirit of FIRST to allow robots to be dragged, pulled or otherwise kidnapped. I called FIRST to try to convince them that the matches will be too much like Battlebots if this is allowed. They said they MAY change the rule because a few teams have also complained. An updated is coming out tonight.

I know I can come up with a robot design that will let me grab an opponents robot pull them into the endzone and watch my partner just grab one more goal to almost insure us a win. But I think I would make a lot of enemies in the FIRST community.

Just my opinion. I'm sure others disagree -so let's hear it.

Raul

Raul the Magnificent is right, AGAIN!
 

I totally agree with Raul on this one.

I can see allowing PUSHING of robots but pulling or hoisting or forklifting or etc. should be beyond the pale.

I really hope that FIRST changes its mind on this one.


Joe J.

I'm in on this one too ....
 

I say get the flame thrower out and toast this rule .......

Potentially damaging other robot... not good...
 

I think any extra brain power teams have to put into thinking about dealing with other robot potentially damaging their robot when lifting is just a waste... It don't really add any education value to this project, and it's starting to get to the bad side of human nature.

The pushing and the heavy goals in the game already call for a robust robot design already, so why have another thing to add more head to head competition between robots?

Pushing robots away imply defense and de-scoring, which is fine in a competition. But pulling or hoisting or fork lifting seems to imply that stronger robots can bully yours around, and can take advantage of a weaker robot, just because they aren't designed to be a bully robot... So defense¡K Or demonstration of power wins more... You can do the math ;)

And, especially with this year's shipping rule, you cannot take home your robot after the regionals to do repairs... You really want to prevent as much damages as possible.

And, I don't think rookie teams or 2nd year teams will be prepared for this kind of physics interaction between robots this year, especially with last year's competition.

What do you think?

Pick up or dragging another's robot is just like pinning. I think the pinng rule should apply. The end result would be like a cat and mouse game, somewhat entertaining.

FIRST should change the rule NOW
 

If FIRST is going to change the pull/kidnapping rule, they should do it NOW so that is is fair to everyone designing the robots.

Flame on. Incidental contacts such as pushing are OK. Pulling and kidnapping really make the game a robot battle. Every robots will be speding all two minutes pulling and pushing each other.

we complain, FIRST listens
 

Here's the update:

>Q: Can one robot lift another robot up using a fort lift type device?
If so for how long? Does the pinning rule apply to that?

>A: Yes, and yes the pinning rule does apply. Please read the Entanglement Clarification post and the rules on pinning.


It looks like they're getting more strict on the kidnapping rule. This ruling relates directly to lifting, but I'd argue that it can be extended to grabbing as well.

Mike

I'm In
 

I agree with all of you! The rule should be changed or made stricter. No matter what, you can be sure that 217 will not be designed to lift or pull another robot.

Disclaimer:

If you are pulling on a goal and we are pulling on a goal, then we apologize for pulling you our way.

-Paul

no good
 

Everyone was so excited when they found out that it was going to be on 2 vs 2... but I disagree. Kamens reasoning is obviously for publicity, but robotics is shown best when it BENIFITS rather than harms- and that is what is seen when you see robots FIGHTING- which leads to Battlebots! You might as well have a chainsaw and spikes on your robot!!

Just my two cents

-AA

Before I get flamed let me apologise (sp?) - We complain when they create a game with zero contact (that would be last years game) and we complain when they allow contact, even though FIRST clearly states to build your robots robust as there may be incidental contact - and now we complain when they go even further towards the robot gladiator thinking and allow pulling. Is it me or do just like to complain? Or, is it FIRST that simply over reacts from year to year and justifies it by changing this rule to drive us nuts? I have no idea what they were thinking! How is a referee ever gonna be able to establish what the allowable standard will be regarding this rule and be able to share it among all of the referees at 17 regionals so to establish a consistant approach ? Hey FIRST, if you are listening - I'm not whining - I'm just telling you that you are not going to be able to have consistancy if this rule is allowed to stand. Get real, and revise this to pushing only, as it will reduce the number of really ticked off unprofessional reactions when accidentally or purpose destruction occurs. Otherwise, be prepared to see really ugly people and that would be even worse that simply allowing total destruction (Battlebots mentality). I also am sure it could reduce the entanglement issues that will be increased if you don't change the rule. Keep the faith gang - I believe FIRST will clarify this rule and eliminate "pulling". Thats just my 2 cents worth.

WHAT??? CHANGE KIDNAPPING RULE!?!??!? NOOOOOO!
 

We've put all 12 motors on our drive train!!! Our main strategy is to drag 2 robots and 3 goals with us!

I say kidnap-happy everyone! "Build sturdy bots." Though I wonder how a robot will kidnap us if they cant keep up with us.

-anton

Pushing "Good" - Pulling "Bad"
 

Anton - Great design using all 12 motors on your drive train - changing the rule to only pushing shouldn't bother you at all - Now your robot would be the supreme pusher bot !!!

btw, i was kidding with the 12 motor idea on drive train idea. though we do have a design to make it happen :).

-anton

12 motors... Anton, your making me drool...

I believe that the kidnapping (if it happens) wont be as violent as everyone says it will be. If you grab a robot and lift it off of the ground so it cannot drive away that is impressive, so why not allow it? It adds a whole different dimension. Like stealing a harvester before it starts to harvest or a goal controller before it get's a goal. (oops did i say that)

opps - did we do that ?
 

Kacz,
No doubt or arguement that the rule would allow a new dimension - I just don't think that the dimension would be of positive value to the FIRST robotics experience. I don't think that a team would intentionally try and damage the opponents robots before they could successfully complete the tasks designed for now would they! But, is the new dimension going to be worth it to the team that gets its controller speared or wiring accidently ripped off of it? Since the time and effort to repair these will essentially be reduced, replacing mangled parts becomes a lot more trouble. I know, now comes the speech about designing the robot to be robust, making sure that bad things can't happen - easier said than done, unless the robots are reduced to wedge bots, and upside down saucers (I think these are how certain robot are made to survive another robot game I've seen on TV).
For all the excitement it will add - I think the downside far outweighs it!

Re: WHAT??? CHANGE KIDNAPPING RULE!?!??!? NOOOOOO!
 

If you use all 12 motors for the drive train you don't have any left to lift the goals so you get good traction. We are only using 10 motors for our drive train.

Excellent point!

I still dont agree and most likely will never because of what has happened to previous years robots. Even last years robot (granted it was our fault). If you dont know last year our team created an arm that extended 14feet high and we fell over and smashed our ALumn gear box into aprox 5 pieces. Yet we did rebuild it with help from Chief Delphi (thank you). We also fell over at the same height and bent the arm by falling on the side rail causing some major bending but because of the way we made it the arm survived and is still working today. So if we can do it everyone can! But please lets not fight over this!

sorry - no fight intended
 

Sorry if you took my response as trying to start an arguement - I just wanted to make a point that I thought was overlooked. As in many messages on this board - ALL opinions are welcome.
And I do remember the situation that you mentioned as I was in New Hampshire. Good Luck this year - make the robot "robust" enough to keep it from destroying itself it it falls on itself. Also, watch out for flying soccer balls!

Thank you very much and good luck to you too!!!:cool: :cool:

Remember the Tipping Rule?
 

Remember the tipping rule? For those that do not remember (how could you forget) or for those who were not yet in FIRST, I will explain.

In 1997 one team was smart enough to figure out that there was no rule against tipping. The rest of us either did not realize this or were too innocent to think it was alright to do it to a fellow competitior. Anyway, this team caused a great stir with their "innovation". It gave them a great advantage to be able to eliminate contenders and just go about their business of scoring unabated.

The next year, everyone asked FIRST if this was to be allowed. Many complained and FIRST then realized that many robots would add such a tipping device. The competition would turn into a massacre where many robot would get tipped and lots of bad feelings created. So , they made it illeagal to have any device that had the specific purpose of tipping a robot.

Now with this new game, the scoring rules reward you when you can get a robot where it does not want to be. It is no longer just a defensive move to prevent scoring, it is also a potential offensive move that gets you more points.

I understand that in the qualifying rounds you want to allow your opponent to get points. But in the elimination rounds, winning is all that counts. Thus grabbing and holding an opponent robot in your home zone not only reduces their score, it also increases yours. You all realize this already.

If FIRST thinks that this is OK, then why do they not allow pinning? They realize that two robots stuck in a corner is no fun for anyone. Is it any more fun to be stuck in the middle of the field? If two robots get tangled together accidently, then no big deal. But to do it purposely?

Allowing pulling, dragging or lifting robots off the ground to kidnap them to your home zone will lead to a lot of bad feelings (perception of non- gracious professional behavior). Is that what we want? I hope not.

Anyone that tries to pull us is going to get an unpleasant surprise... Ive already started thinking up defensive moves for if someone tries this... our drivers will be preppared!

Unpleasent surprises ?
 

John.
If the surprise is that teams create is a stronger puller than the opponent and thats the strategy for defending themselves - I have no problem with that. But, your response brings up a good point that will also need clarification (although I already think I know the answer).
If team "A" robot tries to pull team "B" robot and team "B" robot has decided the way to avoid from being pulled is to deploy a mechanism or tactic that will purposely cause harm the pulling robot, is that considered defending themselves and ALLOWABLE? I hope not -

Maybe we should all just design our robots in such a way grabbing hold of them is very difficult?

Instead of changing this rule make those teams that decide to 'kidnap' sorry for it.

Greg

meaubry,
No I'm not talking about a defensive mechanism... I don't think that would be legal... but our drivers will be preppared to respond to someone trying to grab us... yes, some of these strategies involve contact, (within the rules) and yes, some of these strategies might accidently damage the transgressor robot... we wouldn't purposely damage another robot, but if they are coming after us, i certainly wouldn't lose sleep over it if we broke something...

This entire rule about snagging/pulling frankly scares me...
When I'm coaching if I see another robot try to grab my baby that i just spent 6 weeks of my life on... i wont hesitate to tell my drivers to protect themselves... does anyone disagree with this philosophy?

Re: Re: WHAT??? CHANGE KIDNAPPING RULE!?!??!? NOOOOOO!
 

*eyes 60 amp breaker*
*eyes motor stall current data*
*eyes 60 amp breaker*

*shrug*

John - I agree entirely, as I see it defending yourselves can be accomplished 2 ways. 1) fight back or 2) take evasive action - this will be tough to do if you are locked into a corner.
Greg - designing the robots to eliminate handle holds is always the goal - but not always 100% possible. Even when you think you did a great job, someone can accidently find that one $@#$@#$@#$@#$@# in you armor. Like I said before - this is a bad rule and should be changed for the sake of gracious professionalism and FIRST.
My last comment on this thread is this - we also are taking extreme measures in design, and materials on this years robot solely to address this one issue. It really takes away from solving the problem of "How to play this game" - and thats too bad, because we also have to address this issue with the students and even discussing strategy leads to a disproportionate aggressive stance - I like offense - scoring is always more fun to watch than a 2 minute tug of war. Good luck to all - and keep your grab handles covered!

Re: Re: Re: WHAT??? CHANGE KIDNAPPING RULE!?!??!? NOOOOOO!
 

Add:

*throws 60 amp breaker out the window*

;)

If someone decides to kidnap our robot they will have not only a surprise but some minor fractures in the frame due to excessive force on a small point. But this device is not like a "Battle Bot" type device but rather an innovation using a drive train. Did I say to much? Or did I confuse you?

Both ;)

I AM SORRY TO SAY THIS>>>

BUT KIDNAPPING WONT WORK


IN order for a robot to get points for the endzone, it has to be touching...If us life em up of wedge em up, then wont be touching..And u have to back off a push after 10 seconds...

SO IN MY MIND>.....kidnapping is pointless.....

ONLY 10 points for your bot...and the teams are even..1 free bot each team.

Meant to say if you lift them up

You've got something special coming your way...
 

As bad as I think the possibility of "kidnapping" is, may it be by lifting or by pulling, i think that if any one manages to overpower our goat like grip on the carpet and get the points, then i'll give you a cookie. Feel free to call me on that :)

But! If you hurt my gompei, you may not want to -eat- that cookie! ;)

Seriously though, to stick with the spirit of the competition, i am much more partial to strong defensive manuevers and clever offenses than brute breaking of things.

This ruling should definitely be rethought

I don't know about this.

I'm not so sure about that. At kickoff they said if a robot breaks the plane it's considered in the endzone (or am I making things up again?).

Matt

No a goal has to break the plane and a robot has to be touching the floor.

IMHO I don't think there will be much bot-knapping. If you build a robot that is strong enough to lift a 130 lb bot, it probably won't be able to do anything else like ball lifting or goal manipulation. If you try to drag a bot, against it's will, I think you will be biting off more than you can chew and will probably break your bot.
I don't think you will see to many light-weight bots. I think there will be a lot of teams with 130 lbs robots.

Just my $.03 (inflation) worth

Wayne Doenges

<We are only using 10 motors for our drive train> team #45

Just curious, how many motors other teams using...?
Ten just seems a little too scary...

We are using 8
 

The Thunderchickens (new nickname for 217, formerly known as Royal Fusion) will be using 8.

Don't take everything you read here too seriously. If it sounds a little crazy, it might just be a little crazy. We probably won't be using 10 motors for our drive.

Are we having fun yet?

Motor Madness
 

Why would you be limiting yourself to only 10 motors for the drive train at this stage?

Camel-like smells
 

Oh yes indeed, crazy.... (like a fox with "goat-like grip" on carpets!)

Also....there is little truth to the rumor that our team will have 6 motors on our drive system.

-Quentin


PS: I understand that some goats have a velcro-like surface to the bottom of their feet which sounds like it violates one of the competition rules. I would suggest reading the rules very carefully before implementing "Goat-like grip", "Giraffe-like color" or "Camel-like smells".
:D

Goats might have this but did you ever see a "Intimidator" with rubber velcro-like surace.

Six motors great drive train = goals and robots.

I still think this is going to be like 1999 competition one puck many robots. the most powerful robot moves on.

Pancake Robot
 

I can see it now a robot forklifts another robot in the air and this can be done to like maybe a foot. If the robot who is captured moves its gone so it has to go along for the ride. Then at the last second the robot drops the robot into the zone for the potential TWENTY POINTS. HMM... maybe first should be thinking about this rule...

rational thought
 

It's nice to say that kidnapping and damaging another team's robot is bad and that no person in their right mind would ever do that, but remember. When a team gets into the finals and their in the heat of competition, this rational thought may go out the window.

I remember in the one of the matches of the 2000 game, this one robot had attached itself to the bar over the ramp and one of the other robots came up the ramp (to gain points) and pushed this other robot off the bar and ramp. I believe that damage was done. So keep in mind, towards the end, the gloves usually come off.

-smokescreen (who doesn't worry about other teams damaging the robot. Only the electricians.)

Re: rational thought
 

That sounds like what happened to our robot. I won't say who did it, but we definitely did not appreciate it.

Dem squad motors?
 

to the 10/ 8 motors for the drive system:

How many motors did Demolition Squad use on the 2000 rob0t? and what gearing if any1 knows... cause I remember VERY accurately that everyone was SURE to get out of their way! they were MAD strong!! (when I say MAD, i mean MADDDD)

This year's comp is going to b interesting to watch

-RoboGirl

I seem to remember that team also damaged it's robot so badly it caught fire right before the next match and was forced to forfeit and settle for the silver....

so even when you lose rational thought, think about the consequences...

Flame Throwers!
 

I say let Get out the flame throwers :)

Re: Dem squad motors?
 

It used the two Drill Motors and two FPs with custom gearboxes on both. Not sure on the gear ratio (top speed of maybe 11 fps.)
It had *very* impressive power and a *very* clever design--my favorite that year.

Dan

It is in my opinion, that the more metal carnage the better:) Dean even made the extra effort to say that a robust machine will make a diffrence in this years game.

Let the push and pulling begin, and i wish ya'll luck if you want to move us:D

this will make people think
 

hey,
I like this because this rule will make you think... I you don't allow people to pick other robots, the whole point is to make us think of ways that we can stop the other robot from picking us up.. thia will help us student think. not just throw a robot together and say go... we will hav eto think offencivly and deffencily.. this just up the level of compotition. I say leave it as is and deal woth it... If they allow us to modify the rules then we will keep modifying the rule an dby teh end there will be no fun in it.. so forget about changing the rules and make your robot adapt....
bobby.... :rolleyes: