Potential issues with changes to G21

[rpaulsen]

Originally Posted by JesseK

The rules do not say the playing field is meant to mimic an actual Stronghold. It's more like a theme or guideline.

I don't like your suggestions. At lower-levels of play if the opponents didn't (or couldn't) get to their secret passage then you wouldn't have any action for your side of the field because you couldn't go get the ball that was just sitting there all alone for 30 seconds in their secret passage (reference 2011 tubes for that scenario). At the highest levels of play there would be huge swings in momentum that would lead to a lockdown of the game in teleop that then would reduce the game to "who won autonomous mode", like back in 2006.

These are certainly fair real world possibilities supporting a middle ground to the rule, and I do understand that "Stronghold" is just a motif, though you must forgive a World History teacher for his excesses sometimes. I think that as the rule is written, it is a half measure that is weighted seriously against a robot in their opponents secret passage that it almost breaks the spirit/motif of the game. Maybe a better rule guiding robot actions in an OPPONENT'S secret passage would place the violation for contact/pinning on the reaponsible party, and would allow for a Robot to make a Gameplay Action one only one (1) BOULDER each time the robot crosses the BERM from the OPPONENT'S COURTYARD into the OPPONENT'S SECRET PASSAGE.