The Best Idea Ever

[xMATTthe]

So i thought of the best idea ever, but then i thought that there must be something wrong with it becuse it hasn't been used before and i've never heard of the idea. This would work for any competition with the 2 vs. 2 scenario.

Couldn't u just build a big unfolding wall and completely block out the opponents human players' field of vision? i can't find a rule against it and i can't think what a huma player can do about it, they could try and use there robot to move yours out of the way, but how would they know which way they are going, they can't see their bot?

And without seeing your bot it is extremely hard to pick up boxes or to know what zone your robot is in or if it is on top of the bridge none-the-less. And if your robot set up the wall than your alliance would have there way with the rest of the field and be able to move buckets and gain king of the hill points without resistance!

the wall would just be 12 feet wide to cover that side of the human player station and be like five feet tall to cover the entire plexiglass veiwing surface. they can't look around it cause then they get DQ'd for intentionally stepping out of the human player box and they can't bring a ladder or anything because the control station has to be on the mount they give u for it, which is only like 3 or 4 feet high or so.

If this idea really doesn't work, or if there are some rules against it, i would really like to know!

please give me your ideas, and if it proves this idea is as perfect as i believe it is now, it was my idea remember... MY IDEA... MATT from team 279's IDEA... lol

[Jeremy Roberts]

That would go against everything gracious professionalism stands for. I believe that this idea comes up yearly and I think FIRST has delt with it with a "no that is not allowed (GP)."

[xMATTthe]

and BTW.....

I want credit for this!!! lol

[Joe Menassa]

...yea i thought of that last year.. the thing is that is just NO FUN! also it doesnt really display gracious professionalism..

..who am i to talk.. we are the team that used a flipper back in 97...it was legal

[xMATTthe]

i haven't heard of it before and i don't know whats not graciously professional about it. It is just realizing the truth of robotics, the mind is more important than the physical matter.
So obviously the best way to excell at the game is to win out in the more important battle, the mind and it's control. i just don't see how this goes against FIRST. i mean, if there were rules against it or something, but there is nothing in any part of first rules or other documents by first that says this idea is a bad idea or completely is not what first wants? I mean, really, its just another stratagy. i would like to know how this goes against gracious professionalismm or any other part of FIRST.

[Doug]

i thought of that last year but im fairly sure there was a rule against it at the time something along the lines of devices constructed to impair the vision of your opponents but that might just be a battle bots rule i get these things confused.

[xMATTthe]

i agree, it is no fun, but i still don't know what it goes against as far as gracious professionalism. what, is a robot that just always beats the opponent against gracious professionalism.... if so, beaty should be eliminated from first because there robots are strictly superior to everyone else's every year.(well, at least the last two, thats how long i've been doing this, and i heard they did the same thing previously)

[Ricky Q.]

Originally posted by xMATTthe
If this idea really doesn't work, or if there are some rules against it, i would really like to know!

please give me your ideas, and if it proves this idea is as perfect as i believe it is now, it was my idea remember... MY IDEA... MATT from team 279's IDEA... lol

No....this was asked last year, and is just totally against what the game is, you could build basically the same robot every year, with a screen.....whats the point of that?

[shaddoe]

there's not a rule against stacking the crates right in front of the opposing alliance's driver stations to block their view is there?

[Useless member]

What about just spray painting the other sides window.

[EStokely]

I believe you would be intentionally interreing with the controls of a robot (like radio jamming)

I don't have the rule book in front of me but I believe it is worded in such a way as to show thatyou wouldn't be able to do this

(And yea I suspect many teams have considered this idea over the years)

[JVN]

In the past I believe that FIRST has specified in the rulebook that "intentionally obscuring" the other alliance's vision is against the rules. However this year this rule may have been left off purposely for one main reason.

Has anyone stood in the drivers station and tried to look over the ramp to the far side of the field?

Now imagine how it would be with 4 - 5' robots on top of it. (or a ramp blocker bot)

I think it will be almost impossible for teams to obey this rule.

In responce to your "curtain" robot:
I feel that FIRST would disallow it in the spirit of gracious proffesionalism. However near as I can tell, no specific rule exists limiting this.

[Tom Schindler]

Look at the "Part use" flow chart in on page 27 of the manual... to check if it is legal.....

i think this would violate Rule M9

Tom

[MacZealot]

I *Think* it's legal, but even if it is, that's a pretty dirty thing to do, I mean, it won't help your reputation any.

It's like running in to your opponent's zone and knocking down all of the boxes.. it's fine to do, but won't make the other teams think highly of you.

The whole idea is to have all of your points on your own, you get the stack, take it to your zone, protect it, and win.

Meh, maybe I just don't see the idea yet.

[Gadget470]

You aren't the first one to think of it. You havn't seen it for a good reason. Whether or not it's legal I don't know but I don't think any alliance that had previously been nulled by your wall would want to pick you as a partner. For more than just that reason.

If you are impeding the view of your opponents, your alliance must do all the work in controlling the score. Not many teams want to do that