2012 Picklist Formation and Strategy

[Wetzel]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

No matter what you do, ANY list this year NEEDS to have robot orientation on it. In my opinion, if you're not trying for the triple balance, you're not trying for the World Championship. Have fun trying to score 7 balls in the extra ~15 seconds you have over a good triple alliance, or rolling the dice with legally hazy defensive strategies that take a robot away from an offensive contribution anyway.

What legally hazy defensive strategies are you referring to?

[Duke461]

Originally Posted by Wetzel

What legally hazy defensive strategies are you referring to?

He's probably eluding to something similar to this...
See posts 71 through ~90

-Duke

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Duke461

He's probably eluding to something similar to this...
See posts 71 through ~90

-Duke

For those who don't want to read through the thread, it's the "Park a robot in front of their bridge and force them to force you up it" strategy. Ruled legal at Queen City and illegal at MAR District Champs.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

That would be extremely hard because if the two long robots score until the end they have to overcome a 31 pt deficit (11 balls have to be scored to overcome the triple balance and they need to make sure their third robot gets the solo balance). That is a lot of points to make up for two robots. Even if you have two robots go for you bridge and you keep one good robot scoring they still need to make up 21 pts to overcome the triple which is an even harder task.

Your best bet is to for for the triple yourself and if you are down, pray that the other alliance can't pull it off.

This makes the incorrect assumption that two long robots cannot triple.

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

For those who don't want to read through the thread, it's the "Park a robot in front of their bridge and force them to force you up it" strategy. Ruled legal at Queen City and illegal at MAR District Champs.

I don't believe it was "ruled illegal" at MAR. If I remember correctly, what happened at MAR is that a member of the "balancing" alliance that was already on the bridge repeatedly hit the defending robot, and a large number of [G28] penalties were assessed without any application of [G45]. This was not what many people expected to happen, but I don't believe the same scenario has happened anywhere else.

[nerdherdmember]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

For those who don't want to read through the thread, it's the "Park a robot in front of their bridge and force them to force you up it" strategy. Ruled legal at Queen City and illegal at MAR District Champs.

At the NC regional, the hedgehogs 587 were successful in outpushing a robot, so that only the defensive robot was able to get on the bridge. Good defense is always legal. Unfortunately, that wasn't enough to upset the #2 alliance. Good job 1771, 2614, and 4083 anyway! Speaking of defense bots, 4083 was a triangle with wheels that could t-bone pin any robot at the competition.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by Cory

This makes the incorrect assumption that two long robots cannot triple.

Cory I never said that. In fact we have a long bot that can triple and in CT I saw three long bots triple twice on the practice field with much ease. I dislike the prejudice against long bots this season in that most teams assume based on our dimensions that we can't triple. Whenever a pit scout came to our pit and asked our dimensions we told our students to state our orientation and size and that we can triple balance. Sigh such unbelievers!

I was replying to the topic of if two long bots who are great scorers can forego a triple balance and outscore the other alliance in ball points alone.

[3098 callahan]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

For those who don't want to read through the thread, it's the "Park a robot in front of their bridge and force them to force you up it" strategy. Ruled legal at Queen City and illegal at MAR District Champs.

2337 tried to do that to us 33 and 2137 and then we went to the other side of the bridge and they followed us so 33 kept trying to push them out of the way so they could get on and 2337 ended up getting a lot of pentalty points

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

For those who don't want to read through the thread, it's the "Park a robot in front of their bridge and force them to force you up it" strategy. Ruled legal at Queen City and illegal at MAR District Champs.

At MAR, 25 (and their epic drivetrain) slipped past 1218 and got in contact with the bridge. We then proceeded to follow 25 up the bridge, knocking 1218 into 25 repeatedly (G28 with the G44 exception*) while 341 cornered them between the bridge and the barrier, effectively trapping them without instituting G29 pinning.

*Our alliance sought head-ref clarification well in advance to ensure there was no G45. The key was that we knew we wanted a G28 (without G44) rather than a G25 (with G44), so we took this approach instead of the Queen City style.

Moral: know your rules, and be willing to take the licks they require.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Siri

At MAR, 25 (and their epic drivetrain) slipped past 1218 and got in contact with the bridge. We then proceeded to follow 25 up the bridge, knocking 1218 into 25 repeatedly (G28 with the G44 exception*) while 341 cornered them between the bridge and the barrier, effectively trapping them without instituting G29 pinning.

*Our alliance sought head-ref clarification well in advance to ensure there was no G45. The key was that we knew we wanted a G28 (without G44) rather than a G25 (with G44), so we took this approach instead of the Queen City style.

Moral: know your rules, and be willing to take the licks they require.

It sounds to me like you clearly knew what you were doing and were trying to cause your opponent penalties through your actions for the sake of causing penalties, not as a byproduct of legitimate gameplay.

This is G45 in action, is it not? Perhaps I am misunderstanding you and you are not bragging about causing your opponent to take penalty points.

[lemiant]

Originally Posted by Cory

It sounds to me like you clearly knew what you were doing and were trying to cause your opponent penalties through your actions for the sake of causing penalties, not as a byproduct of legitimate gameplay.

This is G45 in action, is it not? Perhaps I am misunderstanding you and you are not bragging about causing your opponent to take penalty points.

It depends how broad of a view you want to take on the game. In that moment they are just taking penalties for the sake of it, but in the grand scheme of the game they are trying to discourage the blocking of their bridge.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Cory

It sounds to me like you clearly knew what you were doing and were trying to cause your opponent penalties through your actions for the sake of causing penalties, not as a byproduct of legitimate gameplay.

This is G45 in action, is it not? Perhaps I am misunderstanding you and you are not bragging about causing your opponent to take penalty points.

My apologies, my rambling was not about causing penalties, but rather about how MAR differed from Queen City's call. Queen City was called around G25; MAR was called for G28. However, our strategy was still the same: get on the bridge. And every action any of us undertook was towards that end, or towards the end of getting/keeping the defender out of the way of that action. 25 got on the bridge [check], we attempted to follow [check] by pushing past 1218/pushing them away (into the into the the barrier+bridge+341 triangle) [check], and 341 attempted to do the same [check].

G28 exists to make defenders move if offensive robots can create the needed situation, the same way anyone picks up a ball and has to use G28 to get a clear shot on the key, or crosses into their lane uses it to load from their inbounder station. The point is not to force penalties, but rather to force movement via penalties/threats thereof. 1218 being over there was not a result of our actions, but rather theirs*. Their decision to stay (rather than get out/sit beside the bridge) was also their own, despite our attempts to dissuade them.


The most important part though, is the head ref aspect. Any alliances thinking of doing this at Worlds (I expect we'll see at least one) may want to check themselves very early as well to make sure everyone is prepared and understands the relevant intricacies.


*The only G45 I've ever known (not implying it's the only one) was when an defensive bot pushed a offensive bot across the field and into their lane, repeatedly smashed them, was waved off by a ref, and came back and smashed them again.


Is that better? I hadn't intended to sound pompous. Strategy gets exciting to me.

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Cory

It sounds to me like you clearly knew what you were doing and were trying to cause your opponent penalties through your actions for the sake of causing penalties, not as a byproduct of legitimate gameplay.

This is G45 in action, is it not? Perhaps I am misunderstanding you and you are not bragging about causing your opponent to take penalty points.

We were not trying to win with fouls. We were trying to get robots balanced. 25 and 1640 were battling for position to try and get the bridge lowered, and I think that the majority of the fouls occurred prior to the third robot (341) arriving. Keep in mind that 25's bridge lowering maneuver is a wheelie with a running start; they had to keep backing up and trying again in order to have a shot at getting the bridge down.

With the clock ticking down, I told our driver to try and dislodge 1218's robot from its position in front of the bridge. They have a long robot and I was hoping that by pushing them from a corner, we could "spin" them out of their position at the front of the bridge. You can see from the video that we were able to turn them out of position partially, but still didn't give 25 enough room. I believe that at no point 1218 was truly "pinned in" - had they applied forward throttle they would have scooted out towards the co-op bridge.

You can see what I mean here:
http://youtu.be/w2bQ_frSNlk?t=1m57s

The discussion with the referees prior to the match was to clarify that trying to balance a bridge is "within the spirit of the game" and not an abuse of G44. It's exactly like lining up for a key shot; you can keep hitting a blocking robot until they move out of your way.

[Cory]

Thanks for the explanations. The initial post made it sound like the strategy was to force the other alliance into penalties. Makes more sense now.