Call me crazy, but there's a hidden op strategy

[2846 driver]

Hear me out here, because I think this strategy will crush in finals.

This is kind of like most of the events that First puts out. You have to go across the field and score on the other, while you are loading on the opposite side.

Now, I have read the rules thoroughly, and I think that defense is one of the best strategies that you can have in this years event.

Think about it though. Gears have a huge value to them. They make you think that shooting would be a waste of your time, practically. So why not create the ultimate gear robot and just crush everyone else and get those sweet RP?

Because, if you have a defense robot in your game, you are so screwed if you can't hold your ground.

You are allowed to hit those robots putting on those gears as much as you want (unless you pin them for more than five seconds :/) You can push them away from that pin and keep them at bay. The only saving grace they may have is the side bars, which don't protect them that much.

I think that this will be the most broken strategy, but most of my team doesn't, but we'll see at the regional competition.

[JesseK]

I'll happily take my 8/18 ft/s 6-CIM drive train and smush you into my receiving zone. Game on!

[g_sawchuk]

Hidden?
11:25AM today:

Originally Posted by g_sawchuk

While the dividers may make gear defense a bit harder (similar to STRONGHOLD batter shot defense, the robot could just go one way, force you close to the divider, bolt the other way, and you'd take too long to get out).
Gears appear to take some precision to be scored, so a robot should be able to easily hinder your scoring ability in the area - and that's slowing down some massive points.

Defense is most definitely viable for STEAMWORKS, but it can be done with most designs, and I don't think many individuals have thrown defense (specifically at the gear scoring area) out the window as a viable match strategy.

[Ari423]

Originally Posted by JesseK

I'll happily take my 8/18 ft/s 6-CIM drive train and smush you into my receiving zone. Game on!

You might run into a problem with C08 there.

Originally Posted by 2017 Game Manual C08

C08. Don’t expect to gain by doing others harm. 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.

<blue box>C08 does not apply for strategies consistent with standard gameplay, e.g. contacting an opponent while in your RETRIEVAL ZONE to retrieve GAME PIECES. C08 requires an intentional act with limited or no opportunity for the TEAM being acted on to avoid the penalty, e.g. pinning an opponent in your KEY such that they cannot help but violate G17.</blue box>

If you push me into your RZ and it's clear I can't avoid being pushed there, you should draw a C08 foul for forcing me to draw a foul that I otherwise wouldn't have.

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Ari423

You might run into a problem with C08 there.



If you push me into your RZ and it's clear I can't avoid being pushed there, you should draw a C08 foul for forcing me to draw a foul that I otherwise wouldn't have.

It's a statement about being able to do it.

[Ari423]

Originally Posted by connor.worley

It's a statement about being able to do it.

In that case, I'll happily let you do that to get 5 points

[Chak]

Originally Posted by 2846 driver

So why not create the ultimate gear robot and just crush everyone else

So... you're saying that if we build effective robots, we'll win? Wow! What a revelation!

[scca229]

Originally Posted by Ari423

In that case, I'll happily let you do that to get 5 points

Not a ref, but....

Don't put yourself into the position of having a ref need to make a split-second decision.

Let us say that the ref isn't looking directly at your pair of bots the entire time but is needing to be looking at another spot as well. When the ref focuses on your bots again, what he sees is you being in the retrieval zone no matter how you got there. Who do you think is going to get the foul? You put yourself into a risky position, you have to accept that risk.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Ari423

You might run into a problem with C08 there.



If you push me into your RZ and it's clear I can't avoid being pushed there, you should draw a C08 foul for forcing me to draw a foul that I otherwise wouldn't have.

This has come up many years before now. In the cases of protected zones, expect the referee to give the penalty to the person on defense. Especially if my team has only ever done offense, it is easy to say we're only pushing into our own zone and you getting a penalty as a result is not our intent - we simply want you out of our way and are doing what's within the rules to do it.

It will likely be Q&A'ed.

[BotDesigner]

Originally Posted by scca229

Not a ref, but....

Don't put yourself into the position of having a ref need to make a split-second decision.

Let us say that the ref isn't looking directly at your pair of bots the entire time but is needing to be looking at another spot as well. When the ref focuses on your bots again, what he sees is you being in the retrieval zone no matter how you got there. Who do you think is going to get the foul? You put yourself into a risky position, you have to accept that risk.

This is call that you will rarely get called to the defensive robots favor. Last year a robot flipped us in our own courtyard. The ref still gave the opposing alliance scaling points when their robots smashed into our robot inside of its frame perimeter, significantly damaging our robot. The scaling points "won" the match for the other alliance.

I can see where the call came from though. It could be argued that the other robot was acting within standard gameplay when tipped our robot (unintentionally) as it attempted to get to the low-goal (as well as at the end of the match while trying to get to the batter.) Same call should be made if a defensive bot is trying to block access to a receiving zone and it is pushed into it.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by 2016 Rule G11

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

Originally Posted by 2014 Rule G14

3.2.3.6 G14: Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FRC and are not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE.
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

Originally Posted by 2013 Rule G18-1

3.2.3.10 G18-1: Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FRC and are not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE.
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

Originally Posted by 2012 Rule G26

[G26] Strategies aimed at the destruction or inhibition of Robots via attachment, damage, tipping or entanglement of Robots
are not in the spirit of the FRC and are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul plus Yellow Card

We have not played an official match of STEAMworks yet. In the reffing of the above years with the listed rules, however, what you're discussing was never the interpretation. (I say having reffed that exactly situation several hundred times under those rules and having coached champion defensive and offensive bots under the same.) If an offensive robot had a right to be somewhere or do something, pushing a defensive robot that put itself in the way was not at all a "strategy aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule". The pusher's strategy is to "play offense", and the defense is just in its way. The foul is on the defense. The only time one of my ref crews has ever not given it to the defense is one case in which the defensive bot actually broke down in front of a protected zone, stayed there dead for a good chunk of the match, and an offensive bot went out of its to hit it repeatedly and then leave. When I coach, my rule is always Defend at My Own Risk.


You're of course free to Q&A this, but forwarning to phrase it carefully lest you provoke the dreaded Your FRC Overlords Do Not Comment on Hypothetical Situations response. (Myself, I wouldn't bother provoking them for such a perennial situation; this is by no means a new phenomenon unless you have an edge case in mind.)

[amesmich]

It is because of all this discussion and thought that I despise defense. I understand its part of the games but its not FIRST IMHO. Otherwise I would rater open it up to full contact and be more like battle bots. Bumping is ok with me but just getting in the way to stop a team from playing the game is silly in my opinion. I would rather just be able to have a function flip the offending bot over and be done with it. All or nothing. I realize I am in the minority here and many like the idea of defense and feel its important to the game. I disagree. I feel first provides enough challenges in the game to keep us occupied and silly bumping is remedial. Just an opinion I can respect the POV of those who do think its important. Either way its legal.

[BotDesigner]

Originally Posted by amesmich

I despise defense.

I am a Denver Broncos fan and I take serious offense at your comment.

[cloudroth6]

Originally Posted by 2846 driver

You are allowed to hit those robots putting on those gears as much as you want (unless you pin them for more than five seconds :/) You can push them away from that pin and keep them at bay. The only saving grace they may have is the side bars, which don't protect them that much.

.

where in the rules does it say that you can push a robot while it is trying to attach a gear to the spring

[Ari423]

Originally Posted by cloudroth6

where in the rules does it say that you can push a robot while it is trying to attach a gear to the spring

You don't need a rule telling you that you can do a thing, you need a rule telling you that you can't. If you have found a rule that says you can't hit someone when they're placing a gear, please let me know. I have not found such a rule.