Re: The 469 auto
 

Because you cannot have more than one robot in the opposing alliances goal zone, and if you have one there, and one in the tunnel, if they shoved you out they would get a penalty because you are not allowed to cause another alliance to get a penalized right?

Re: The 469 auto
 

Not allowing them to get a penalty doesn't result in getting a penalty yourself, just the other alliance not getting a penalty.

Re: The 469 auto
 

If 469 pushes you into your defensive zone, with another one of your allied partners and it wouldn't be penalized. You could then play defense on both goals, especially if they latch on and can't unlatch them self then you'll have to stay in that zone.

Re: The 469 auto
 

Very interesting, but thats stretching the rules quite a bit.
If you were to do this more than once the refferees would probably do something about it.

Re: The 469 auto
 

Several loop bot and 469 countermeasures schemes in this thread.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=84280


See post #10

Re: The 469 auto
 

If someone pushes you into your defensive zone (and one of your alliance partners is already there), no, you don't get penalized immediately, but you do have to get away as soon as they stop bugging you. You can't use the fact that they pushed you there to stay there indefinitely, and trying to defend the second goal is downright absurd.

Re: The 469 auto
 

In all of this talk, I haven't seen one person say this so I will. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. It's pretty obvious that 469 will not be top seed since they do not have a dominant solo bot, so why can YOU be top seed and pick them before anyone else gets a chance to? That's how you beat a 469 strategy. The only thing that stands in your way are other teams that can dominate on their own.

Re: The 469 auto
 

What I'm saying is if both bots (defensive, and midfield) are tunnel robots and they get stuck in the defensive zone by 469 they have no choice but to stay there. I mean this could be an extremely rare circumstance, but could happen. The only thing they could do is play defense.

Re: The 469 auto
 

Emphisis mine.

They must try and get out (IE they cannot just go and guard their goals because 469 is "in the way")

Re: The 469 auto
 

The GDC has ruled against penalty protections for penalties that involve more than 1 robot. In Q&A there was a question about if a robot is E-Stopped in the defensive zone for being incapacitated does that permit another robot to join them because of the E-Stopping protection from penalties. The GDC ruled no. This exact situation occurred in the finals match 1 at FLR, the blue alliance got a red card for it. The ability of the remaining team to clear either the bump or the tunnel is questionable, but there was NO effort shown to clear it, which I would accept as a red card

It's basically the same thing with the forced penalty rule. ONE robot was forced to double up in the defensive zone, not both of them. Therefore, not both robots are penalty-protected, and we have the call. The initial penalty could be waived, but if you don't at least show an attempt to clear the bump then you get a red card

Re: The 469 auto
 

Huh. I had no idea that was what the red card was for...

Re: The 469 auto
 

That's a distinctly different situation, where a second robot consciously decides to enter the zone after the first is e-stopped. If 469 pushes someone through a tunnel, that's completely different.

Re: The 469 auto
 

What it comes down to is the discretion of the referee, whose ruling will be final. Expecting 100% consistency from the referees at different events (or even different fields at the same event) is probably a mistake.

Re: The 469 auto
 

Actually, it was the 2nd that enters the zone then e-stops. but that's not my point. The rules say that you need to show EFFORT to leave, or get a red card. If you can't go under the tunnel because 469 is blocking it, make an attempt to clear the bump. If you flip trying to get over the bump, your partner in the zone better try to show that effort because not even an E-Stop protects you from that. 2 robots flipped in the far zone after attempts to leave most likely would not incur any penalties since the original one was forced by 469

Re: The 469 auto
 

I'm pretty sure when the first robot flipped, it sure demonstrated an attempt to leave.

You're saying this like it's a likely nightmare scenario teams have to deal with. To be honest, there is almost no way this will happen, and on the off chance your tunnel bot just so happens to get forced through the tunnel by 469, I think simply trying to push against 469 would be okay.