Loophole in rule G39 and G43 for defense??? (Repost due to edits)

[Tymethy]

G39:"ROBOTS are prohibited from launching BOULDERS unless they are in contact with the opponent’s
TOWER or carpet in the opponent’s COURTYARD, and not in contact with any other carpet.
Violation: TECH FOUL per BOULDER"


The rule states that you may not launch a boulder unless in contact with the courtyard (not fully within the courtyard). Does this mean that you are allowed to be partly within the outerworks while launching.

I ask this because under rule G43:

"ROBOTS on the same half of the FIELD as their ALLIANCE TOWER may not interfere with
opponent ROBOTS attempting to traverse OUTER WORKS (regardless of direction). A ROBOT is
considered traversing the opponent’s OUTER WORKS if any part of its BUMPERS are within the
opponent’s OUTER WORKS.
Violation: FOUL. For every five (5) seconds in which the situation is not corrected, FOUL"

You can not be defended while even partly within the outerworks. The outworks is not a carpeted area so does it count because it states "and not in contact with any other carpet." Does this make this halfway area a safe spot. This does not seem intended due to other rules of defense and want to ask due to this.

Thank you for your time.

(ADDED NOTES)

Does this not also break G11:

"Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of
FIRST Robotics Competition and not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in
an assignment of a penalty to the targeted ALLIANCE.
Violation: FOUL. If egregious or repeated, YELLOW CARD"

Or G40:

"A ROBOT may not cause a BOULDER to move from the NEUTRAL ZONE into the opponent’s
COURTYARD unless:
A. the ROBOT contacts the BOULDER within OUTER WORKS, and
B. the ROBOT completes its CROSSING (i.e. doesn’t completely back out of the OUTER
WORKS into the NEUTRAL ZONE)
Violation: TECH FOUL per BOULDER"

Because with G40 you must be fully crossed for that boulder to be counted within the courtyard. So can you shoot it if the object (boulder) is technically not within the courtyard based on the rules. (Rule G40 can be fixed by going all the way through then backing into the outerworks after the completed cross. Rule G11 still stands.)

[rich2202]

Yes, you can be partially in the Outerworks and launch the Boulder.

However, G40 implies that the robot must fully enter the courtyard (either before or after launching the boulder) to avoid the penalty. A good question for the Q&A.

Note: this also gives the offensive robot a "safe zone" to avoid contact from a defending robot.

[AndyBare]

Yeah. You must just fully cross before backing up and shooting. You can shoot from "mostly the outer works" however you must be touching the courtyard's carpet and only the courtyard's CARPET aka no other carpets (etc. neutral zone)

[Tymethy]

Originally Posted by rich2202

Yes, you can be partially in the Outerworks and launch the Boulder.

However, G40 implies that the robot must fully enter the courtyard (either before or after launching the boulder) to avoid the penalty. A good question for the Q&A.

Note: this also gives the offensive robot a "safe zone" to avoid contact from a defending robot.

Thank you for your thoughts.

[Tymethy]

Originally Posted by AndyBare

Yeah. You must just fully cross before backing up and shooting. You can shoot from "mostly the outer works" however you must be touching the courtyard's carpet and only the courtyard's CARPET aka no other carpets (etc. neutral zone)

Thank you for your thoughts.

[Basel A]

We identified this as well. There are concerns with traversing vs. attempting to traverse, but I believe that if you are traversing (your bumper is partly within the outer works), a referee will have to count that as attempting to traverse. This feels like a loophole, but "any other carpet" seems like very intentional wording to allow it.

G40 doesn't get in the way as long as you fully enter the courtyard either before or after your shot. Not much of a problem, if you ask me.

[DWNichols]

My only concern is the phrase "attempting to traverse OUTER WORKS". If you are actively aiming and shooting, are you still attempting to traverse the defenses? Definitely a question that should be asked.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by DWNichols

My only concern is the phrase "attempting to traverse OUTER WORKS". If you are actively aiming and shooting, are you still attempting to traverse the defenses? Definitely a question that should be asked.

The act of multi-tasking is not explicitly listed as an exception to the fact that the bumpers are still over the outer works.

[Zach101]

This would be a very interesting loophole. I have taken it as you need to be fully in the courtyard to shoot but this would be a great thing to take advantage of unless FIRST changes it.

[DWNichols]

Originally Posted by JesseK

The act of multi-tasking is not explicitly listed as an exception to the fact that the bumpers are still over the outer works.

Multi-tasking isn't an issue for me. I'd love to see a robot design that can accurately shoot while travelling over an outer defense. But, if you are just sitting on, or your bumper is over, a defense, and your drive train is not driving, are you "traversing"? That's the important question.

[Basel A]

Relevant Q&A below. Sounds like there'll be clarification in the next team update.

Originally Posted by Q511

Q. Per G43, ROBOTS are not allowed to interfere with opponents attempting to traverse the OUTER WORKS. What constitutes as "interfering with an attempt?" Does the my opponent's ROBOT have to already be in the act of traversing the OUTER WORKS per the definition of G43, or is peventing them from reaching the OUTER WORKS considered "interfering with an attempt"?

A. Good question. The rule was written with the intent being that a ROBOT attempting to traverse was in the process of traversing, but that language isn't consistent with our actual intent. Team Update 02 will update G43 to clarify that ROBOTS on the same half of the FIELD as their ALLIANCE TOWER may not interfere with opponent ROBOTS traversing OUTER WORKS (regardless of direction). Our apologies for the confusion.

[Lil' Lavery]

I interpreted this as an intentional design choice, similar to being "protected" while shooting while in contact with the pyramid in 2013.

[Bryce2471]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Relevant Q&A below. Sounds like there'll be clarification in the next team update.

Thank you for finding and posting that Q&A here. I don't think the people posing the question really understood the wording of the rule, (seeing as they asked about the "interfering with an attempt?" but the rule prohibits interfering with a robot that is making an attempt) but they still seems to have yielded an informative response.

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I interpreted this as an intentional design choice, similar to being "protected" while shooting while in contact with the pyramid in 2013.

Yes. I think the GDC intended for that area to be a safe zone, because without it this game would not play as well.

[Lord Basket]

Looks like even with that clarification taken into consideration, the safe zone will still work, as long as you keep going in the direction you were moving in at the time when you entered the defense.

[Hadi379]

I'm interpreting it as a safe zone, but I can picture the field elements getting damaged due to defense in those areas otherwise.