![]() |
Re: end game defense
Based on the answer to the initial question in the Q&A I believe the rule will stay the way it is. If a team plays defense in the home zone for the whole end game they will receive 30 point in penalties, no yellow cards, and no DQ's. Team update #15, seems to suggest the possibility of a yellow card in this scenario, however, based on the clarity of the initial answer in the Q&A I don't see this happening. I think this is a viable strategy that teams will use sparingly. If a team is behind in a match, there is little to no reason to do this. If you are ahead in the match then it seems as though there would be a better way of trying to get 30 points.
I do not think there is anything wrong with this strategy. It is a clear rule with measured consequences. I don't see any problem with taking advantage of that. |
Re: end game defense
Quote:
It's not GP, but neither is disrupting another team from getting 60 points by camping in their home zone and receiving the 30 point penalty. I think any team that does this should be yellow carded. *dons flame suit* PS This opinion is my own, so don't take it out on my team. |
Re: end game defense
Quote:
Should the refs decide that a team is purposefully blocking the lifting, in the home zone during endgame, they will yellow card that team. Should the refs believe that your team is purposfully tipping other teams, you will be yellow carded JMHO |
Re: end game defense
Robot tipping :) is not even remotely in our strategy.
The 30 point penalty is to discourage the opponent from being in the home zone during the last 15 seconds. This is to allow safe elevation to 4" or 12". Where do you draw the line? If your alliance partner is going for your ramp or lift and another bot hits them, causing them to skew and fall off the ramp. Is that GP? Of course not. Your alliance partners are going to make every effort to get the 60 points if it's available. Please stay out for the home zone if you don't belong there. Thanks :) |
Re: end game defense
My thoughts on this are, if FIRST has already established a penalty for breaking a rule (in this case a loss of up to 30 points) then they have taken into account that blocking would be a potential strategy. I don't see how you could assess one penalty but then add another one due repetition or intention (which can't always be proved) unless it specifically says so in the rules.
If it says "the penalty for being in the home zone is 10 points per 5 seconds", then that is the penalty, it doesn't say "the penalty for being in the home zone is 10 points per 5 seconds and potentially a yellow card". My team actually discussed end game blocking when we were designing which lead us to our two ramp design, so if one gets blocked, both robots can still get up on the other. :) |
Re: end game defense
Quote:
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: g) Gaining an advantage by breaking a rule repeatedly and/or excessively |
Re: end game defense
Quote:
also although i think that blocking in the endzone is not a good idea, i also do not think it is GP. its part of the game. if an alliance knowingly plans this, then they know the consequences, and should deal with them. |
Re: end game defense
Quote:
Quite simply, once that first warning sounds, get out of there or it's penalty/potential tip/possible yellow card time. It isn't worth sticking around (which is how it was apparently designed to be.) |
Re: end game defense
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 21:02. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi