Re: end game defense
 

As much as I think this strategy is kind of pointless, I do not think that in any way shape or form this should warrant a yellow card.

The GDC designed the game and stated that if you are in their home zone for the different time increments a penalty would be assesed. Why are we assuming that not only do you get a penalty, but you also receive a yellow card. Yes you are intentionally violating a rule, but thats the beauty of risk and reward here. Most criminals know fully well what will happen when they break a rule, and I guess some of them will account for what the risk to reward is. That may not be the best example, but it has merit.

If they GDC wanted this to not be a strategy then a yellow card would be awarded...if you think this is the only way to keep your opponents from gaining those 60 points, then by all means go for it. But why not just design a bot that can lift, or be lifted as well if not better than your opponents.

We need to stop searching for loopholes. THis is a viable strategy, but the much better strategy is instead of searching for possibly ways around the rules, to get down to business and design a bot thats better, faster, stronger....if you do that, then your opponents may be forced to consider this kind of strategy against you.

Re: end game defense
 

Actually, I'm not. Here's what I'm assuming:
1: Other than being in the opponents home zone, no rules are being broken. (No tipping other robots intentionally, in other words.--automatic DQ for you, IIRC, for tipping)
2: If you don't defend, your opponents will make it off the floor 12" within 5 seconds (which is feasable for a ramp or a high-powered lift).
3: You leave at 5 seconds or less, which gives you 30 penalty points. You are not able to fly across the field and hit a robot-sized target in 5 seconds or less. (You need to go faster than 10 f/s, which is about the upper limit of controllability.) If you leave sooner, one or two of the other alliance will score.
4: Your alliance is able to lift as many robots as necessary. This is a critical assumption. I'll explain why below.

Here is what will happen wiht the above assumptions:
Redabot A will play defense on Blueabots A, B, and C during the end game. Assuming that Redabot A is in the blue home zone, Redabot will incur up to 30 points. Redabot B, meanwhile, lifts Redabot C above 12". Redabot A plays defense until Blueabots B and C can't get up on Blueabot A (the hoister), then runs for the end zone to score. However, if Redabot A leaves Blueabots B and C alone, they will score (by whatever means, I don't really care what.) So, Redabot A incurrs full penalty points (30). IF they make it back, then it's 60 points for Redalliance, (minus 20 penalty points at best) but Bluealliance has scored between 30 and 60 points. So at best, it's 40-30, Red, in bonus, at worst it's 60-10, Blue (again in bonus) beacuse Redabot A didn't arrive in time. If Redabot A does not return, it's 30-30 at best and 60-0, Blue, at worst.

Now, let's say that Redalliance can't lift any robots at all. So Redabot A plays the same defense. At best: 0-0, assuming that all defense takes place outside the home zone. At worst: 60 to -30, Blue.

So, if you can't lift at least one robot on your whole alliance above 12", you're toast. If you leave early, you may be toast. If somehow you can legally defend in their end zone and win in bonus, I'll be surprised.

NOTICE: I am not saying anything about defending outside the home zone, because that is not included in the original question.

Re: end game defense
 

Scenario 1, nobody on the Red alliance can lift, Blueabot A can lift 2 @ 12":
What if Redabot A defends Blueabot A (the hoister) for the full end game? Then the Blue Alliance gets 0 bonus points instead of 60. The Red Alliance incurs 30 points of penalties. Bonus/penatly points are then -30 Red, 0 blue, a net result of 30 points in favor of Blue. If the Red alliance doesn't play defense, the the bonus/penalty points are then 0 Red, 60 blue, a net result of 60 points in favor of Blue.
The same can be applied to a scenario where the Red Alliance can only lift one bot, or lift 1 bot 4" and 1 bot 12".
The only time where you can keep up (in terms of bonus points) is when your alliance can lift an equal amount of potential points (in this case, 2 bots at 12").

But now you must factor in what other factors may take place (such as playing defense outside of the home zone, further manipulating the rack, and possibly yellow/red cards).

I still think people are focusing on <G25> way too much though. <G03> is where most yellow cards in this scenario are going to originate, with possible additional backlashes from <S01> (safety disables) and <G35> (intentional damage). As I said earlier, <G25> is really preventing you from accidental interference when going for ringers in their home zone, not actual intentional defense on other robots.

Re: end game defense
 

You're right about that, but you need a row of 5 to win in Scenario 1 assuming defense is played in the home zone and 6 for no defense. As in, you (alliance need to be able to put up lots of ringers in big rows. And, defense outside the homezone was not included in the original.

How I personally would play the end game defense: stay outside their zone and hamper any robot coming in. Might not be as effective, but I've got a shorter time to get back and fewer penalties. (better chance of bonus for my side)

Actually, we discussed this as a team last week. It didn't go far, other than that it depends on the match. I'd give you the results if you'd give me the lineup. (2@12 or not, what number of ringers can go up per alliance, etc.)

Re: end game defense
 

These are some huge assumptions, especially the one about having to stay for the entire endgame. Prediction: few alliances will have the coordination to climb a narrow ramp in even ten seconds, let alone under five as you suggest, especially in qualifying. In fact, I bet I could defeat most double loading robots incurring only one 10-point penalty, maybe even none. But I'm not giving away all my secrets. As for your further assumption that it's impossible to drive across the field and hit something in five seconds or less, I've seen it done. In fact, I recall personally doing it in two or three seconds in 2004 with a five foot tall robot that could travel at 16f/s, knocking a doubler ball off a movable goal and saving the match. Actually, I think there's a video of it on SOAP somewhere if anyone cares to look... Believe me, there's a whole new world above 10f/s. So are you actually suggesting that there aren't any scenarios you are able to conceive of in which the strategy we are talking about would be useful?

Allow me: my alliance consists of three dishwashers, in which case nobody's climbing, lifting, or pirouetting over anything. In this case if the opposing alliance can lift anything at all, it's worth a try, isn't it?

Re: end game defense
 

I think you're making some big assuptions too. How many teams are going to have ramps? Probably quite a few. Get lined up (2 seconds if you've got a bit of maneuverability), drive up (2-3 seconds, including stopping and locking in if you do that). Yes, you can do it in 5 seconds. I'm also not saying it's impossible to hit something from across the field with a robot in five seconds or less, I'm saying that it's impossible (or close to it) to hit a specific size of something in that time. Those doubler balls were big targets compared to a robot-sized ramp.

I am saying that I can't think of any scenarios where this might be useful. I am NOT saying that none exist. Care to enlighten me?

(And your "dishwashers"--can they put on a row of five without being spoiled by the other alliance? or six? If not, you lose on ringers placed by the other alliance, assuming that they recover while you are going elsewhere.)

Re: end game defense
 

The GDC has answered your question... sort of. It would be helpful if the GDC answered questions directly, rather than reiterating something which the question submitter clearly understood.

What I don't understand is why you would get a yellow card. There is a clearly defined penalty for intentional tipping; does that mean you won't get a yellow card for that? :rolleyes:

Re: end game defense
 

Given that they don't even mention yellow cards in their response, I believe their response indicates that a yellow card is (pardon the pun) not in the cards.

Re: end game defense
 

The GDC said you will be penalized "according to <G25>"

Since Yellow cards were specifically asked about and not mentioned at all in the responce, I would believe that means no yellow card.

Seems like intentional violation of <G25> is a legitemate strategy.

Re: end game defense
 

supposing that your robot is deploying its ramp(s) a bot from the opposing alliance in your home zone gets hit by the deploying, would you get disqualified even though they are not allowed to be there?

Re: end game defense
 

The GDC never addressed <G03>, yellow cards may still be a possibility, and <G03> should probably be asked on the Q&A

Re: end game defense
 

The GDC could end this by means of making the penatly stiffer than the benefit (thereby eliminating the reason for doing this). Even a yellow card may not be enough reason to deter this in the finals (since you have 3 bots, you could take 3 yellow cards). I would think putting an end to this would take something like the GDC stating "playing defense in the opponents end zone during the end game will result in a 100 pt penalty".

My concern is that if the GDC does not address this, there is potential for confusion throughout, with refs interpreting the rules differently (as is happening on this board) in each regional, and perhaps differently on the different fields at nationals.

In the end, I don't want to imagine what my grandma would say if I told her I broke the rules on purpose, but it was part of the strategy to win (but that's between her and I). It's my belief that the rule is in place in order to eliminate defense in the end zone during the end game, but until there is a penalty stiff enough, people will do it.

Re: end game defense
 

Taken from this answer in the official FIRST Q&A system:
So REDABOT heads for the Blue Home Zone, expecting to pick up 30 points of penalties while preventing the Red Alliance from scoring a potential 60 bonus points, for a net 30 point result in their favor. But in the process, BLUEABOT-1 has just put a target locator on REDABOT. BLUEABOT-2 unfolds their ramps, and the two alliance mates start lining up in position. REDABOT gets in the Blue Home Zone and tries to block, as the penalty points start to accumulate. BLUEABOT-1 and BLUEABOT-3 push against REDABOT, and REDABOT is pushed unevenly against the ramp/wedge. Losing traction, REDABOT is pushed farther up the ramp/wedge, which effectively lifts one side of the robot, and REDABOT falls over. The referee determines that this is "normal game play" as the Blue Robots were trying to gain their position on the ramp and REDABOT was intentionally blocking the way. REDABOT spends the rest of the End Game lying on it's side on the floor, collecting 30 points of penalties, while the Blue Alliance gets all 60 bonus points.

The fact that ramps may effectively become wedges and the robots can be overturned during normal game play without penalty seems to make a big distinction in the complexion of the End Game. The substantial probability of an overturned robot and a big penalty seems like a pretty big dis-incentive. I would think that the potential 90-point differential is a pretty big reason not to muck around too long in the opponent's Home Zone during the End Game.

-dave

Re: end game defense
 

Cleric: 'Once at the number three, being the third period be reached, then, drivest thou thy Holy Robot Lifter of Antioch around thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall topple it.'

This is what I was hoping to hear from the GDC No gunning for them, but they can't shut you down from fear of tipping.

Re: end game defense
 

I think Update 15 answers the question about incurring the 30 points in penalties for being in your opponents home zone during the last 15 seconds to stop them from scoring. What do you think?

Rule <T06> allows for the Head Referee to assign a YELLOW CARD to a team for
exhibiting egregious behavior. Examples of egregious behavior include, but certainly are
not limited to, the following:
a) Behaving in an unsportsmanlike manner repeatedly or after receiving a warning
b) Damaging the field repeatedly
c) Ramming robots repeatedly and/or excessively
d) Using foul language and/or gestures while on the field
e) Tipping robots repeatedly and/or excessively
f) Forcing your opponent to commit a rules violation
g) Gaining an advantage by breaking a rule repeatedly and/or excessively