Quote:
Originally Posted by bduddy
I respectfully disagree-one of the challenges in the game is building a reliable, resilient robot. Professionalism is just as important as graciousness, and it is wholly unprofessional, in my opinion, to not take advantage (in a legal way!) of your opponents failures. Of course you should offer to help them with their problems so you can decide the match on the field, but I think forfeiting goes way too far.
|
While you were responding to Dordai, I was the first one to mention e-stopping in this thread so I felt I should reply to this and explain my position further. Based on what I read regarding the situation the other two robots were working (or at least well enough to go on the field). I suggested a coordinated, immediate e-stop of all 4 robots that would lead to a 24-24 tie (although a bit of a boring 2:15).
At the MN regional our alliance advanced through the quarterfinals through a match where one opposing robot e-stopped after their drive broke down in hybrid. I felt terrible taking a win this way. Being on the "winning" side in this situation is not a whole lot better than being on the losing side.
An immediate e-stop of all 4 robots in an elim match would give the other two robots a chance to get on the field for the next match (or call in a backup bot if one was still broken) so that the match could be played out, fair and square, with six working robots.
I would never look down on someone who would make a different choice here. As you said, building a reliable robot is part of the competition, and I don't think anyone could be faulted if, presented with the proposal of the e-stop, they chose to play out the match instead.