Human Player

[lcoreyl]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

If you have two robots that don't interface well (for whatever reason), One robot could pass to the human and then they could drop it into the other robot, completing an assist. At least, I think an (1) assist can come from robot>human>robot combos. Maybe I am wrong though

that would be an assist yes. Don't worry about the passing between robots or robot to human. the ONLY thing that matters with assists is the possession. how possession changes from one robot to another doesn't matter at all.

robot 1 could shoot from the red zone and horribly miss and the ball goes out of the field and given to a human player who throws the ball at an opponent robot they don't like. the ball bounces around and robot 2 picks the ball up in the white zone. 2 robots possess in 2 unique zones. 2 assists. 20 points.

[lcoreyl]

Originally Posted by TruBlu13

I don't think a human player can score truss points.

3.1.4 Scoring
Points are awarded once per CYCLE for BALLS SCORED by ROBOTS in the GOALS, BALLS SCORED by ROBOTS over the TRUSS,and for each ROBOT CATCH. Additional points are credited to an ALLIANCE up on each GOAL base on the number of ASSISTS earned by the ALLIANCE for that CYCLE.

My understanding is that means that the human can't make any truss points because that was one of my first thoughts.

He wasn't saying the human actually scores the points--he is saying you can throw from a robot to a human (assuming you don't have another robot available to catch) to keep from needing someone to go retrieve the ball.

[Edxu]

From what I've read from Q&A, if the ball is going out, the Human player is technically allowed to hit it back into the court.

This means that you could significantly reduce cycle time by having a robot throw over truss to human player, and have the human player hit it to the robot in the next zone, thus having a controlled truss and assist.

[DStetzing]

Not sure if this is correct, but if a human player receives a ball from a robot in the white zone then passes it to a different robot in a colored zone, would it count as an assist? Like would it still count as a unique robot in a unique zone?

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by Edxu

From what I've read from Q&A, if the ball is going out, the Human player is technically allowed to hit it back into the court.

This means that you could significantly reduce cycle time by having a robot throw over truss to human player, and have the human player hit it to the robot in the next zone, thus having a controlled truss and assist.

Pass over truss to human player, who catches it and feeds it to the next robot. It counts as an assist, is hard to defend against, and you don't waste time chasing a ball around the field.

[Ikillee]

What would happen if a human player caught an opponent's ball because it was accidently hit their way? Would it be a foul if the human player doesn't let go of the ball?

Couldn't find out about this by checking the manual. It only states that it's illegal for robot to do such things but doesn't specify how humans could get fouls other than stepping out of their zone and passing to another human player.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Ikillee

What would happen if a human player caught an opponent's ball because it was accidently hit their way? Would it be a foul if the human player doesn't let go of the ball?

Couldn't find out about this by checking the manual. It only states that it's illegal for robot to do such things but doesn't specify how humans could get fouls other than stepping out of their zone and passing to another human player.

It's a technical foul for a human player to knock the opponent's ball back into play if it is heading out of bounds under G32. I would think that if the human player CAUGHT their opponent's ball, they'd get a Technical Foul, worse if they held it. Q&A confirmed the T-Foul.




Think someone might need to re-read the Manual. No such thing as reading it too much...

[gpetilli]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

Pass over truss to human player, who catches it and feeds it to the next robot. It counts as an assist, is hard to defend against, and you don't waste time chasing a ball around the field.

I totally agree that this is a great strategy. I have two concerns: 1) most teams will have trouble making a thrower that can be consistent at that distance. 2) if the human player misses, does it count as intentionally ejected from field and draw a foul?

We need a ruling on incomplete pass to HP.

[Andy Brockway]

The HUMAN Player on the side of the field is also used able to return the BALL that leaves the field per section 3.1.2.

This allows an inbound on the scoring side of the field versus the ALLIANCE side.

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by gpetilli

I totally agree that this is a great strategy. I have two concerns: 1) most teams will have trouble making a thrower that can be consistent at that distance. 2) if the human player misses, does it count as intentionally ejected from field and draw a foul?

We need a ruling on incomplete pass to HP.

On 1) -- Those teams shouldn't try this strategy, then.
On 2) -- I very much doubt it, if they try to catch it. Practice makes perfect!

[homerun33ss]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

If you have two robots that don't interface well (for whatever reason), One robot could pass to the human and then they could drop it into the other robot, completing an assist. At least, I think an (1) assist can come from robot>human>robot combos. Maybe I am wrong though

This is one of the ideas that our team was thinking about at the beginning of the year. Do you know if there is any documentation somewhere clarifying whether or not having the Human Player act as a middle-man in the assist process will still award you the points?

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by homerun33ss

This is one of the ideas that our team was thinking about at the beginning of the year. Do you know if there is any documentation somewhere clarifying whether or not having the Human Player act as a middle-man in the assist process will still award you the points?

According to the definition of "Assist", it doesn't matter how a unique robot comes to possess the ball in a unique zone, only that it happens.

[Qbot2640]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

I cannot find a rule that says if a Blue alliance ball bounces towards a Red alliance Human Player, that they can't possess it and return it to the field in a manner that negatively affects the Blue alliance.

If this is the case, then the human player will be more important than in most past games. (See Ladder Logic, or First Frenzy for important human player roles)

I think I am starting to understand this game.

This is an interesting catch...I originally took "An ALLIANCE may not POSSESS their oponent's BALLS." to prohibit this, as "ALLIANCE" is defined in such a way to include human players, but "POSSESS" is defined pretty clearly to NOT include human player actions. I tend to agree now, that the human player could be an active defensive participant.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by Qbot2640

This is an interesting catch...I originally took "An ALLIANCE may not POSSESS their oponent's BALLS." to prohibit this, as "ALLIANCE" is defined in such a way to include human players, but "POSSESS" is defined pretty clearly to NOT include human player actions. I tend to agree now, that the human player could be an active defensive participant.

That will have to be fixed. Else there's nothing to prohibit a HP from grabbing an opponent's ball and holding it for the remainder of the match.

[matthewdenny]

So now our team will have the following positions: programming, drivetrain, mechanical, pneumatics and linebacker.