Picking up a tube in opponent's Safe Zone

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by 2611.Shooter

For example, my team got yellowcarded in qualification for "egrarious robot conduct" and we were one of the top picks for finals.

I probably wouldn't pick a team playing penalty-worthy defense consistently.

[Wayne TenBrink]

What is the "GP" difference between intentionally violating your opponents' safe zone to retrieve a game piece, and intentionally violating your opponents' safe zone to bump a robot that was trying to hang a critical, logo-completing game piece? How much more "egregious" is one than the other?

BTW, as I interpret <G32> as of Update 4, it would be legal to pick up a tube that was lying partially in the safe zone, as long as your robot didn't break the plane and you were quick about it.

[2611.Shooter]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I probably wouldn't pick a team playing penalty-worthy defense consistently.

We only did this once, our robot tipped over 2 really top-heavy ones. just saying that it emphasized our traction, not that they picked us for our ability to tip others over. And we were by far the best defender.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

When did that happen!?!?!

When he posted on CD, at the very latest.

Remember, anything Dave (or Aidan, or any other known GDC associate) says that is not via an official channel (Manual, Update, Bill's Blog, Q&A, etc.) is not an official GDC saying. So when he said that, he was perfectly correct in doing so.

I also remember that he wasn't introduced with the GDC at the Kickoff. There are a number of reasons that could be, though, and the most likely is he'd already been introduced once.

[Molten]

Originally Posted by EricH

When he posted on CD, at the very latest.

Remember, anything Dave (or Aidan, or any other known GDC associate) says that is not via an official channel (Manual, Update, Bill's Blog, Q&A, etc.) is not an official GDC saying. So when he said that, he was perfectly correct in doing so.

I also remember that he wasn't introduced with the GDC at the Kickoff. There are a number of reasons that could be, though, and the most likely is he'd already been introduced once.

I thought that since it had him and then "or any other known GDC associate" meant he was one. I guess thats why I'm confused on this matter as well.

Dave: I think I'm not the only one curious about the details of the parting, but I believe you've had your reasons for keeping it private.

Let's all just let the man have his peace(now let us have ours when hint season comes around).

Hopefully that will stop this from becoming a 3 page discussion.

[martin417]

Originally Posted by liam.larkin

Ohhh how diabolical

Its how would I say very Bill Bellicheck

In the spirit of FIRST and as the coach for my team I would avoid such a thing out of principle. Would never command my team to do something I knew to be illegal. I would rather win straight up and if I couldnt well then.

It is a very intresting hypothetical however. I could see where this is a very plausable scenerio.

I disagree with the notion that knowingly drawing a penalty is "illegal". The game rules describe team actions, and the cost or benefit of those actions. If the cost is a red card, you might consider it illegal, but if the cost is a penalty, then it is just a negative score (in the way that a tube hang is a positive score) the coach must perform a cost / benefit analysis and make his/her decision based on the relative strategic advantage. GP does not play into it.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Molten

Dave: I think I'm not the only one curious about the details of the parting, but I believe you've had your reasons for keeping it private.

Independently, both Woodie and I made the decision to resign from the GDC last week. I will not speak for Woodie and his reasons why. I will just say that I felt it necessary to reconcile actions and decisions that were being attributed to the GDC with my personal standards for professional behavior. When I perceived that I could no longer be an effective advocate for the teams in a way that would maintain my personal integrity, I felt it was appropriate to remove myself from the committee. End of story.
-dave


.

[gbrettmiller]

Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink

What is the "GP" difference between intentionally violating your opponents' safe zone to retrieve a game piece, and intentionally violating your opponents' safe zone to bump a robot that was trying to hang a critical, logo-completing game piece? How much more "egregious" is one than the other?

BTW, as I interpret <G32> as of Update 4, it would be legal to pick up a tube that was lying partially in the safe zone, as long as your robot didn't break the plane and you were quick about it.

As of Team Update #6, bumping an opposing robot in their zone, or lane for that matter, will get you a RED CARD. I would say reach in at your own peril.

Picking up a game piece that it only partially in the zone or lane would be fine as long as you don't break the plane.

[craigcd]

Martin 417, Alpha Beta and Dave were right. Take the penalty and go for the points. Taking chances is what make this country great.

[nitneylion452]

This will get you a yellow card, as per Team Update 6. It says that you can't knowingly take a penalty in order to gain a competitive advantage.

Also, if you were to try and get a piece that was partially in the opponent's zone, you would be penalized once you possessed the piece because neither your robot nor a possessed game piece can break the plane of the safe zone.

[gbrettmiller]

Originally Posted by nitneylion452

This will get you a yellow card, as per Team Update 6. It says that you can't knowingly take a penalty in order to gain a competitive advantage.

I believe that the update to <G32> and <G33> in update 6 result in a YELLOW CARD only for those specific instances, not for all cases of "knowingly taking a penalty".

Also, if you were to try and get a piece that was partially in the opponent's zone, you would be penalized once you possessed the piece because neither your robot nor a possessed game piece can break the plane of the safe zone.

Excellent point. I guess it all comes down to what the refs consider a "momentary incursion".

[martin417]

Originally Posted by nitneylion452

This will get you a yellow card, as per Team Update 6. It says that you can't knowingly take a penalty in order to gain a competitive advantage.

Also, if you were to try and get a piece that was partially in the opponent's zone, you would be penalized once you possessed the piece because neither your robot nor a possessed game piece can break the plane of the safe zone.

I don't see it. I read,and re-read the update. nowhere does it state that knowingly getting a penalty will result in a yellow card. Can you quote the rule that states this?

[OScubed]

Originally Posted by 2611.Shooter

And, at least in the qualifying rounds, the object is also to get spotted by other teams. For example, a team with a great defense might not have a high enough w/l ratio to be an alliance head, but still be recruited heavily. For example, my team got yellowcarded in qualification for "egrarious robot conduct" and we were one of the top picks for finals. Again, taking a penalty can HELP you if it makes other teams notice you. (Just for the record, the second robot we tipped was unintentional.)

Even tipping one robot on purpose is not graciously professional.