[nuclearnerd]

I've been thinking about this one. Here's another hypothetical:

Imagine Blue had been preparing to shoot on goal, rather than attempting to pick up their ball, while being defended by Red. Blue fires their shooter (which extends beyond the frame perimeter in this example), causing the same damage to Red described originally.

My intuition is that most people would give Blue the penalty in this scenario because they fired their catapult (that's certainly how I see robots behaving on the field). However as far as I can read, this *should* incur the same penalties as the original scenario, under which several people have argued for Red's penalty. The intentions and outcomes are the same - Blue was trying to accomplish normal play, Red was defending in a manner which could and did incur damage.

If my intuition is correct, then there is something that separates "shooting" from "intaking" that needs to be articulated. If I'm wrong, then teams should be playing a lot less carefully with their shooters on offence.

Thoughts?