Re: Team Update #6
 

Alex only expanded on what I was talking about. My question on a RED CARD was whether there must be a Red2 that is contacted, or did the contact with Red1 cause the RED CARD?

Either way, this can lead to some distressing strategies.

Re: Team Update #6
 

Well there goes our "Ahead of Schedule" status. Back to the drawing board with our mini-bot. Too bad because it works perfectly and I just ordered $30 more of limit switches that might as well be thrown out because it seems we're going to be forced into using the stupid heavy NXT brick.

:mad: <- Not happy FIRST, not happy at all.

Re: Team Update #6
 

OR, during the elimination rounds, you pin Blue to the wall for thirty seconds, thus incurring sixty penalties, while you wait for red2 to contact Blue and get blue a red card, thus causing the blue alliance's disqualification and red to win the match by default.

Re: Team Update #6
 

Hmm, given the concern being raised about having to get a NXT brick to get the robot down, I hope the GDC will allow a small kite string like tether for your minibot. Pulling the robot down would be easy enough, and a string doesn't add any advantage in the race portion.

Right now the rule is you can't violate the 12"x12"x12" volume so a string would be in violation, but if they could make an exception for non-powered tethers it would make it relatively simple to get the robots back down.

Re: Team Update #6
 

I'm willing to bet there's some kind of electrical solution that reverses the direction of the motors with the depressing of a limit switch that doesn't "unreverse" them once it's lost contact.

But I didn't really think the GDC wanted people implementing flip flops on their robots...

Re: Team Update #6
 

Double Pole Double Throw light switch?

Re: Team Update #6
 

There are household 4-way light switches which can do this. Because they are commonly mounted in a wall outlet box, and are available at home supply centers, they fit this requirement


I wonder what they would say if you said "I disassembled my 1 motor controller and used the electronics to build a flip-flop"

Edit: Beaten to it.

Re: Team Update #6
 

All you'd need is a D flip flop - the "top" sensing limit switch feeding both the clock and input.

Re: Team Update #6
 

the catch is making it work at the correct voltage and current. you would have to use a relay to do that... very doable indeed...

so to do that, you would need an 74LS74 IC (or other d-flip-flop), a resistor or 5v voltage regulator, and a relay.

good thinking chris!

Re: Team Update #6
 

Get those items added to R92 and you're golden.

Re: Team Update #6
 

The new rules are really quite simple if you just consider what their intended purpose is: If you are playing defence and your opponent overpowers you into their scoring zone while on their way to score then you have to GTFO or you get nailed. However, if your opponent is just having their way with you around the field and pinning you in one of their zones for no other apparent reason than to attempt to incurr penalties agaisnt you then they get nailed.

The bottom line is that if your opponent is more powerful than your robot, then you best get out of their way however, they cannot use this advantage to maliciously force penalties upon you. If you find yourself in a no-go zone then you best be doing your darn'dest to get out. If you find your opponent has ended up in your zone, you better give them a chance to leave or just go about your business of scoring or collecting a gamepiece.

Re: Team Update #6
 

I'm quite relieved by this update. We built our robot to be able to "push through" defensive robots, in the hopes that there would be a clarification that robots needed to leave opposing alliance zones immediately upon being pushed in. We finally got that. The <G61> exception is a wonderful bonus for us, far more than we had hoped for, I honestly think it is a little bit excessive. Forcing a robot to waste crucial seconds trying to maneuver out of an alliance zone is enough of a disadvantage. They didn't really need a penalty on top of that, but it works well with our strategy, so I won't be too vocal with my complaints. :rolleyes:

I'm with mathking regarding defense. This rules update makes for some very interesting defense strategies, and, of course, some interesting counter-defense strategies. Consider that a robot can block an alliance lane singlehandedly if it's maneuverable enough; that could significantly slow a logo delivery. Also keep in mind that robots coming out of alliance lanes can interfere effectively with the other alliance's scoring.

Keeping this in mind, I can envision a two-robot "pickup crew" scenario: Red1, an offensive robot, goes to pick up a logo piece from its feeder station. Blue1, a defensive robot, tries to block Red1 from leaving by the end of the lane. Red1 moves to the side instead. Blue1 moves to block that side, but Red2, a maneuverable support bot, blocks Blue1 from moving to block - almost like a screen in basketball.

As Red1 leaves the lane from the side, it encounters Blue2, which is approaching the blue scoring rack. Red1 pushes Blue2 hard out of the way, forcing Blue2 to waste precious seconds realigning. Red1 then moves down the field toward the red alliance station. Red2, the defensive bot from earlier, moves to block the blue alliance lane, preventing Blue3, which is at the feeder station, from leaving by the side to interrupt Red1 while it scores.

Offense is defense.

Re: Team Update #6
 

Is everyone agreeing that a RedBot pushing a BlueBot into the RedZone automatically means a penalty for the BlueBot, no matter what?


what if the RedBot just wanted to get to a peg behind BlueBot in order to complete a logo, and intentionally pushed the BlueBot, not in order to have it in the zone, but in order to get to the peg... is that a Yellow Card for RedBot

Re: Team Update #6
 

Yep. <G61> exception.

Tougher call, left to the ref's judgment. The best that RedBot could hope for would be a BlueBot penalty, and no penalty to RedBot. Depending on the ref, it could be BlueBot penalty, RedBot yellow card.

Re: Team Update #6
 

After thinking about it some more, i'm now sure that it would mean a yellow card for BlueBot, since he must have known that pushing BlueBot into the Redzone would mean a penalty. Thus if he purposely pushed him into the Redzone, regardless of his intent (which was to reach the grid, not to have BlueBot incur a penalty), he must receive a yellow card since he knew his actions would mean a penalty for BlueBot.

If this analysis is correct than it is imbalanced and may indeed be an advantage for BlueBot!

consider:
Bluebot on the edge of the RedZone, zipping up and down the border to block RedBot. RedBot has two options: he can wait for the match to end, or he could try and force his way in. if he forces his way in Bluebot get's a penalty, but RedBot get's a yellow card!