Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory
I think this is a blatant violation of the intent of the rules.
Any way that the rules can be read to allow defense (pushing/interaction between one robot that is trying to stop another from getting to a certain location, or from doing a certain task) seems to be complete lawyerism to me.
I think everyone is sick of seing boxes on wheels that just run around the field bashing the heck out of anyone who can score (Let's see how long it takes for Travis to come in here and tell me some people enjoy it  ).
My understanding of the rules is that they are intended to keep this from happening.
I would be very disappointed if teams took to subterfuge to attempt to play defense (ie: "bumping" to pass, by pushing a team halfway across the field, etc). |
Not very long, Cory. But perhaps my response won't be as expected as you originally thought.
"Defense" cannot solely be defined this year by the extensive "pushing" interaction you describe. I do believe the GDC does not want to see robots being pushed "halfway across the field" this year. It would be akin to Tony Stewart sacrificing his car to remove an opponent from the race....not that Tony Stewart would ever do such a thing....
I would not qualify such an act as "subterfuge", either, for it should be pretty durned obvious to the referees if such an involuntary trip were occurring in front of their eyes! However, I also do not believe this was anywhere near the type of strategy Lucy was suggesting in her original post, and she and other defensive-minded individuals are entitled to this thread discussing its legality and merits, along with any other methods of defending which are brought up.
Personally, I'd certainly like to know the GDC's intent for robot interaction during the last second moments when a team is trying to put bonus balls up and another is trying to knock them down. At this point, there is no more hurdling - teams are "capping" - freezing their balls in mid hurdle, so to speak
- so are their anti-defense liberties removed during these times? Is pushing in the bumper zone ok then? Is posting straight up to block capping attempts with your arm a legal manuever? And when one defending robot is actively herding an opponent's ball, playing keep away, how aggressive can the would-be offender be in trying to retrieve their scoring object? These are all seemingly legal strategies and reasonable questions - bumper zone interaction is explicitly allowed (whenever it isn't - ha) - what kind of contact does the GDC expect and approve of during such situations? I'll be looking for these to show up on the Q/A once the system opens up.
Quote:
|
I think everyone is sick of seing boxes on wheels that just run around the field bashing the heck out of anyone who can score (Let's see how long it takes for Travis to come in here and tell me some people enjoy it ).
|
I don't think anyone enjoys watching any robot get "bashed" in the most crippling of senses, whether the damage occurs by intent (unless you are the twisted transgressor), via ignorance of the rules, or via mistakes in judgement during the heat of competition. However, it seems you wish to suggest here that all forms of defense have this negative connotation. I think this does not respect those teams who on the whole work hard every year to play defense well and play it within the rules.
And yes, I DO think teams who build those "boxes on wheels" and play that D correctly very much enjoy it when their robot is able to do something productive on the field, especially when the "glitziest" of offensive game objectives may be out of their technical reach.
The offensively proficient certainly have had ample opportunities to shine and bring excitement to many an event even in the most defensive of recent seasons - 2004, 2006, and 2007. The FIRST community rightfully celebrates the accomplishments of those who have achieved such successes. I know (boy do I) how many of us believe it shouldn't be that hard for all FIRST teams to slap together some sort of rudimentary arm and off they go just because a drive base is simple and boring and they should challenge themselves to do more, but I believe the true reality is that some teams just don't have the experience, the time, the organization, or the money. They may very well have the desire, though, and seek only a little bit of assistance from those in the know to nudge them on their way toward technological improvement. Are we fortunate ones doing enough to facilitate their growth and advancement? Or would we prefer they just stay out of our way?
For those "lost" teams, I would hope we can still reserve a bit of room for praise and recognition of their achievements, relatively miniscule they may be to those of us who are used to so much more.
In 2008, I applaud the GDC in providing a much wider variety of both offensive and defensive options that are accessible to rookies and other teams who may not necessarily be as fortunate in the resource department as those of us who can be adept at scoring each year.