Can teams damage their own defenses?

[KevinG]

3.1.3 says that "A DEFENSE is CROSSED by a ROBOT when that ROBOT starts free of contact with the DEFENSE and completely in the NEUTRAL ZONE, traverses the DEFENSE such that its BUMPERS go fully between the adjacent SHIELDS/GUARDRAIL, and ends up fully contained by the opponent’s COURTYARD." If a robot from the blue alliance goes from the neutral zone across a blue defense into the blue courtyard, and then later on enters the red courtyard, who gets the points for crossing a defense and is the defense damaged?

As far as I can tell once the blue robot enters the red courtyard the defenses would indeed be considered crossed, the points would go to the blue alliance, and the defense would be damaged. I suspect this is an oversight.

[MaGiC_PiKaChU]

what i got from it is that it's considered a crossing from the other alliance's perspective, so you'd give them 5 points

[Bkeeneykid]

Originally Posted by KGenson

3.1.3 says that "A DEFENSE is CROSSED by a ROBOT when that ROBOT starts free of contact with the DEFENSE and completely in the NEUTRAL ZONE, traverses the DEFENSE such that its BUMPERS go fully between the adjacent SHIELDS/GUARDRAIL, and ends up fully contained by the opponent’s COURTYARD." If a robot from the blue alliance goes from the neutral zone across a blue defense into the blue courtyard, and then later on enters the red courtyard, who gets the points for crossing a defense and is the defense damaged?

As far as I can tell once the blue robot enters the red courtyard the defenses would indeed be considered crossed, the points would go to the blue alliance, and the defense would be damaged. I suspect this is an oversight.

This would be a good question for the Q&A...

[rich2202]

What is presumed in the rule is: Only the last defense contacted by the Robot is considered.

The "Courtyard" part of the rule is to have a bright line to determine how far the robot has to go in order to be considered traversed.

Assuming that your interpretation is correct, you could partially traverse multiple defenses (red and blue), and then once in the courtyard, you get scored on all the defenses.

Note: In the Definition section, the wording is a little better:

CROSS an act performed by a ROBOT, such that it starts free of contact with an opponent DEFENSE ... traverses the DEFENSE ...

The first use of DEFENSE is qualified by "opponent", and the second use is reasonably interpreted as the DEFENSE previously mentioned in the same sentence.

[davidstorer14]

Really there wouldn't be a reason to cross your own defenses since you can go through your own secret passage to get past your outer wall.

[Chase Haddleton]

Originally Posted by davidstorer14

Really there wouldn't be a reason to cross your own defenses since you can go through your own secret passage to get past your outer wall.

Might be faster if you're on the other side of the field and you want to go over the "ground level defences" (moat etc)

[bjtheone]

Originally Posted by Bkeeneykid

This would be a good question for the Q&A...

Nope. CROSSING is NEUTRAL ZONE -> DEFENSE -> opponent's COURTYARD.

Any other sequence is not a CROSSING. You cannot "undamage" your defences by crossing them, or generate points for the opposing alliance.

You get points for CROSSING their DEFENSES, they get points for CROSSING yours.

Further, each ROBOT can only score points for one CROSSING and weaken one DEFENSE in AUTO, no matter what further actions they complete in AUTO.

[rich2202]

The "crossings" have to be entered by a Ref.

A "Ref" is NOT going to remember that (let alone look for) you crossing your own defense for possibly entering as a score way later in the game.

The Ref will be looking for a robot currently crossing, and once the crossing is complete, enter the score.

[JesseK]

and then later on enters the red courtyard

More specifically, 3.1.3. outlines the definition of CROSS as 3 individual requirements (bullet points) rather than a sentence. Since all of the wording in the three bullet points is singular, only one CROSSING is awarded per meeting of the bullet points.

For example, if blue cross its own defenses 8 times it has met the requirements of the first two bullets 8 times and the third bullet point is never met (it's not the opponent's courtyard). If it then crossed a red defense once it has met the requirements for the first two bullets 9 times, but the third bullet point has only been met one time, thus is only awarded for one CROSSING.

It's an interesting edge case to think about, for sure.

[KevinG]

Originally Posted by JesseK

More specifically, 3.1.3. outlines the definition of CROSS as 3 individual requirements (bullet points) rather than a sentence. Since all of the wording in the three bullet points is singular, only one CROSSING is awarded per meeting of the bullet points.

For example, if blue cross its own defenses 8 times it has met the requirements of the first two bullets 8 times and the third bullet point is never met (it's not the opponent's courtyard). If it then crossed a red defense once it has met the requirements for the first two bullets 9 times, but the third bullet point has only been met one time, thus is only awarded for one CROSSING.

It's an interesting edge case to think about, for sure.

Hopefully it's an edge case they'll clarify, since I could definitely see there being a reason to cut across your own defense if it's faster (say to pick up a loose boulder or go on defense). As others have said in this thread it puts an undue burden on the refs, but the rules also emphasize that it falls on the team to inform the refs when conditions are met.

I'll try to submit a Q&A once I get the team password. I suspect this is a simple oversight and teams will be allowed to cross their own defenses with impunity, although it would be interesting if they decide not to permit it.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by KGenson

Hopefully it's an edge case they'll clarify, since I could definitely see there being a reason to cut across your own defense if it's faster (say to pick up a loose boulder or go on defense). As others have said in this thread it puts an undue burden on the refs, but the rules also emphasize that it falls on the team to inform the refs when conditions are met.

I'll try to submit a Q&A once I get the team password. I suspect this is a simple oversight and teams will be allowed to cross their own defenses with impunity, although it would be interesting if they decide not to permit it.

To me, as a planned ref at a district event, it's pretty clear cut that the robot only met the requirements of CROSSING one time.

[Doug Frisk]

While you cannot damage your own defenses, I would suggest that if your strategy involves traversing your own defenses you keep an eye on what the refs are doing the first week or two.

It's quite possible that in the heat of the moment a ref may not notice the bumper color and mistakenly award the opposing team credit for crossing the defense.

If that's the difference between fully breaching the outer defenses or not, it could affect seeding. But at least you'll get to hang out in the question box for a bit.

Or you could use the secret passage to avoid the potential issue.

[Ceering]

Well, even if you could, you can only damage by going into the courtyards (from my understanding), and you have the secret passage.

But I would assume you can't damage them.

[logank013]

A huge questions shouldn't be about the rules but about the field. How do the LEDs turn off when crossing a defense. Is it done by a referee or is there a sensor on each defense that allows them to recognize when someone crosses it? Thanks. I'm now curious

[rich2202]

Originally Posted by logank013

A huge questions shouldn't be about the rules but about the field. How do the LEDs turn off when crossing a defense. Is it done by a referee or is there a sensor on each defense that allows them to recognize when someone crosses it? Thanks. I'm now curious

If you look at the field drawings (not the team version), you will see that there are no sensors.

Look at the box in section 3.1.3, and tell me if you still don't know the answer.