Is throwing worth it ?

[mitchklong]

Does anyone know what the rule is if the ball leaves the arena ? I assume that if one of the human players catches or stops it they can throw it back in and nothing is lost but time, but what if the blue ball goes into the red player area ? I assume they dont have to throw it back in. Or what if it leaves the arena and isnt playable ?

In particular I am wondering if all of the assist and truss points still stand.

[Zuelu562]

Section 3.1.2 of the Manual:

BALLS that are ejected from gameplay during a MATCH will be delivered to the closest HUMAN PLAYER of that BALL’S ALLIANCE by event staff at the next safe opportunity. This includes BALLS that go in GOALS but don’t meet the criteria to be considered SCORED.

[Whippet]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

Something not explicitly stated in the rules, but I feel like it works against the spirit of the game (and expect a Q&A regarding it) is whether a robot can throw a ball over the Truss and catch it themselves.

Effectively kills a "Teamwork" element of this game, but if you get some space, I feel like it could be an easier 20pt bonus than trying to coordinate throwing and catching with 2 different robots.

If it ultimately IS legal, than throwing is definitely worth it. If not, unless you plan to shoot for 10's, I'd say NO.

Originally Posted by FRC Game manual

A CATCH occurs when a BALL SCORED over the TRUSS by a ROBOT’S ALLIANCE partner is POSSESSED by that ROBOT before contacting the carpet or HUMAN PLAYER.

(Emphasis mine.)

I.e. Not the same robot.

[RRLedford]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

Something not explicitly stated in the rules, but I feel like it works against the spirit of the game (and expect a Q&A regarding it) is whether a robot can throw a ball over the Truss and catch it themselves.

Effectively kills a "Teamwork" element of this game, but if you get some space, I feel like it could be an easier 20pt bonus than trying to coordinate throwing and catching with 2 different robots.

If it ultimately IS legal, than throwing is definitely worth it. If not, unless you plan to shoot for 10's, I'd say NO.

That approach is legal, but only gives 10 points, since by definition a "catch" requires that the thrower and catcher be DIFFERENT partners on an alliance.

So only 10 points, but possession maintained, which has its own value.

-Dick Ledford

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Thanks for the quick answer. I read that rule at least twice and somehow never got that interpretation.

[roush14r]

I'm fairly new with FIRST but I feel like if it is worth for one robot to be throwing per alliance. Beyond that, I think that it become a little excessive and not necessarily worth it.

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by Team3266Spencer

But the ball has a 12 inch radius, so I imagine it wouldn't be that difficult to push in.

There is at least one video on YouTube already of a basic box bot being easily able to just shove the ball over that edge with very little in the way of trouble.

[TheMadCADer]

Originally Posted by roush14r

I'm fairly new with FIRST but I feel like if it is worth for one robot to be throwing per alliance. Beyond that, I think that it become a little excessive and not necessarily worth it.

If you want "full" 60 point cycles, you will need to throw over the truss and shoot into the high goal. To be the most time-efficient you can be, each robot should ideally only possess the ball in one zone. This would make an "ideal" match flow as follows:

Robot A receives ball from human player in Red Zone.
Robot A launches ball over truss to catching Robot B in White Zone.
Robot B somehow gets ball to Robot C.
Robot C launches ball through High Goal while in Blue Zone.

However, if you replace the High Goal with a Low Goal in that last step, you only lose out on 9 points per cycle.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by TheMadCADer

If you want "full" 60 point cycles, you will need to throw over the truss and shoot into the high goal. To be the most time-efficient you can be, each robot should ideally only possess the ball in one zone. This would make an "ideal" match flow as follows:

Robot A receives ball from human player in Red Zone.
Robot A launches ball over truss to catching Robot B in White Zone.
Robot B somehow gets ball to Robot C.
Robot C launches ball through High Goal while in Blue Zone.

However, if you replace the High Goal with a Low Goal in that last step, you only lose out on 9 points per cycle.

If you already have a method of launching over the truss, why would you not shoot for the high goal anyways? Just have Robot A launch, then go down to the other end of the field for a pass from C to launch into the goal?

[TheMadCADer]

Originally Posted by CalTran

If you already have a method of launching over the truss, why would you not shoot for the high goal anyways? Just have Robot A launch, then go down to the other end of the field for a pass from C to launch into the goal?

It simply takes too long.

Robot C then needs to possess the ball and deliver it back to Robot A. Robot A also has to wait around for the B --> C exchange and can't play defense in the Red Zone, which means they also aren't there to pick up the new ball as soon as it comes into play.

Instead, you could keep Robot A in the Red Zone playing defense while Robot C brings the ball to the Low Goal (instead of to Robot A). Robot A plays defense instead of driving back and forth, picking up the ball, and lining up for a shot.

The only time I'd say the high goal is better is if there is heavy defense on both Low Goals.

[marissa1215]

I think that even though it may be harder the ball into the higher goal, it still is worth it considering the amount of points you can get, with a ratio of 1:10, when there is a good amount of time on the clock it is better to just risk the higher shot and make more points, but rolling the ball into the lower goal is ideal for when the score are neck and neck and you only need 2 or 3 points to win.

[Koko Ed]

The best teams never ask "Is it worth doing?"
They ask "What's worth the most points and how can we do it?"
That's why they are always playing deep into Saturday @ Champs all the time.

[loyal]

Throwing the ball is way faster. Forget the 3 assist. Take the 2 assist, over the truss, catch if you can, if not no worries. Gain control and sink the high goal. That when done correctly will be the quickest and most efficient scoring. Imo

[Alan2338]

Originally Posted by TheMadCADer

If you want "full" 60 point cycles, you will need to throw over the truss and shoot into the high goal. To be the most time-efficient you can be, each robot should ideally only possess the ball in one zone. This would make an "ideal" match flow as follows:

Robot A receives ball from human player in Red Zone.
Robot A launches ball over truss to catching Robot B in White Zone.
Robot B somehow gets ball to Robot C.
Robot C launches ball through High Goal while in Blue Zone.

However, if you replace the High Goal with a Low Goal in that last step, you only lose out on 9 points per cycle.

The way i see it, the fastest and highest scoring way is to do this:

Robot A receives ball from human player in Red Zone.
Robot A passes ball to waiting Robot B in White Zone (before the truss).
Robot B throws/lobs the ball over the truss
Robot C reacquires thrown ball
Robot C shoots/throws ball into high goal.

I just think maybe a thrower should be in the white, and not the red. Just my thoughts...
P.S. I might think this just because I don't believe catching is going to be a big deal...

[Celia]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

The best teams never ask "Is it worth doing?"
They ask "What's worth the most points and how can we do it?"
That's why they are always playing deep into Saturday @ Champs all the time.

This ^^^

When we start brainstorming, we make a prioritized list of what we want our robot to do. High goal/truss shooting is worth ten points. Having a shooter means getting nine - or nineteen - more points per cycle rather than going for the low goal with no truss pass. Even if only one or two assists are managed, the shooting robot comes out on top. A well-designed robot should be able to efficiently harvest and shoot the game piece in nearly the same amount of time it takes another to herd the ball into the low goal. In autonomous, the point values speak for themselves.

Another positive to throwing: Let's say your alliance partners are unable to assist (broken down, goalie, etc.). Theoretically, couldn't one throwing robot cycle the field on its own, throwing over the truss and score in the high goal by itself? Earning twenty points per cycle with one robot doesn't seem half bad.