Shooting full-court: The uprising of the human-loader shooters

[JohnSchneider]

Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence

We've found with our relatively short robot, if anyone wants to get close enough to block us, we can easily rapid-foul them.

Because that's not a penalty in itself

[mikemat]

Out of curiosity, do any of the full-court shooters know how far from the front of the robot your disks exceed the 84 inch mark?

[sammyjalex]

Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence

We've found with our relatively short robot, if anyone wants to get close enough to block us, we can easily rapid-foul them.

Can you explain what you mean by 'we can easily rapid-foul them?' If you sit in your LOADING ZONE and a robot in front of you is 60" tall, where is the foul?

If you attempt to 'draw the foul,' you'll run into G-18-1, no?

G18-1


Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FRC and are not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE .

Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

[BJC]

Assuming that a really good feeder slot shooter robot is shooting out from the 60" mark, the parabolic ark the disk would take is so high that only an 84" high robot will be able block it (and even then only when about 5ft or closer.)

Theoretically if the disks were to travel in a high arc so that they apexed 5-7ft above the high goal they would be impossible to block. It seems like this would result in much greater shot variation though.

[bgg]

Quick remedy for full court shooters--a low functioning robot starts 84" tall and its appendage/piece of plywood parks 18" in front of full court shooters and blocks 90+% of shots. The defensive bot can't leave out of its offensive zone but prevents any attempt at full court shooting. Perhaps a quick addition at lunchtime on Saturdays??

Originally Posted by sammyjalex

If you attempt to 'draw the foul,' you'll run into G-18-1, no?

But we're not the ones doing the action. It would involve our opponents coming towards us to block us, touching us, and getting fouled. If they want to block us, they foul us. That happened at a scrimmage today. We stand still, they come forwards and backwards. Would a team do this in a real match? Maybe. Not sure. I definitely wouldn't defend against a team I'm getting fouled on. But other teams may.

[Donut]

Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence

But we're not the ones doing the action. It would involve our opponents coming towards us to block us, touching us, and getting fouled. If they want to block us, they foul us. That happened at a scrimmage today. We stand still, they come forwards and backwards. Would a team do this in a real match? Maybe. Not sure. I definitely wouldn't defend against a team I'm getting fouled on. But other teams may.

Not to speak down of another team's performance, but that seems like poor defensive play more than anything else. I would think a proper block would be a team driving forward to block shots, and then just sitting there, while not contacting the full court shooter. Even if there is a single incident of contact, the blocker should back up slightly once so that there is no longer contact and stay still from there. A 3 point penalty is better than 50+ points uncontested. If the shooting robot then went forward/backward to draw penalties that would almost surely draw the ire of G18-1.

Originally Posted by Donut

Not to speak down of another team's performance, but that seems like poor defensive play more than anything else. I would think a proper block would be a team driving forward to block shots, and then just sitting there, while not contacting the full court shooter. Even if there is a single incident of contact, the blocker should back up slightly once so that there is no longer contact and stay still from there. A 3 point penalty is better than 50+ points uncontested. If the shooting robot then went forward/backward to draw penalties that would almost surely draw the ire of G18-1.

Oh, it definitely wasn't the best defense (we were sure to let them know the fouls they were incurring, and helped them develop a better defensive strategy), however the point was it could happen. If they wanted to defend us, they needed to incur a foul. Teams need to be 100% sure they don't touch an opponent while they're in the feeding station if they want to play defense this year.

[dtengineering]

Ooh... the "Hassle bot".

A highly maneuverable machine equipped with rangefinders and programmed to maintain a constant distance from and opponent. You pull up to within a foot of a full court shooter, and when they try and bump into you and draw the foul, your robot automatically backs out of the way. There's still a day left... quick... get building!

Actually I'm thinking that the deflector fan ideas that were quickly written off in the first couple weeks might actually be really useful against a full-court shooter. The fans might not be able to move the frisbees much, but a small deflection would add up over a long distance, perhaps.

It will be interesting to see what shows up in the withholding allowances after week one!

Jason

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence

I've lost count of the teams able to do full-court shots. While this does include a lot of teams with a 50-60% accuracy, I've seen many teams reach 90-95%, my own included (and we don't usually do that well).

I could believe 60 percent. I'll believe 41/45 when I see a video of it. If you wanna hide your shooter that's cool, just a video of the goal with 41 out of 45 Frisbees will he enough.

I don't doubt that there are 469s out there, but I do doubt that every event will have one.

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by dtengineering

Ooh... the "Hassle bot".


It will be interesting to see what shows up in the withholding allowances after week one!
Jason

I'm going to take a random guess and say a 10 pt. climbing mechanism for most, and a 30 point for the others

[Negative 9]

I wonder how many teams can shoot at the pyramid goal accurately from the feeder station. Those guys are going to be the real winners.

[gurellia53]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

Does anyone else think these full court shooters are 'bad' for Ultimate Assent?

That being said, I've never been one to turn down a boring or ugly win.

I though this at first too, but as mentioned earlier, many full court shooters are easy to defend. Full court shooting increases the value of a tall defender robot strategy. In qualifications, full court shooters could have an advantage of no one to defend them, but in eliminations I see them much less effective.

No, full court shooters are not bad for the game.

[T^2]

Seems like a good year for a fanbot...

[Rangel]

I forgot to ask but are their any videos from the scrimmages of a robot lining up and making full court shots? I missed the webcasts and so if anyone had any that would be great.