|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Good reply DjAlamose - thanks for keeping this thread on the high road.
Look - there are going to many times when some ninnie dreams up a devious strategy that many will think is totally unprofessional and truely ungracious - when that happens teams will be given the real test of character - copy the ungracious behaviour or ignore it for the "high road". Some live by a higher standard regardless of what the written rules say - some play the game by the rules, and what isn't written must be okay. Once each team makes that decision, the greater masses at the event can then decide what they think about it - treat them like pariahs, ignore them, pick them as alliance partners, or whatever. Sorry - I got off topic - My answer to this is to "just don't push the opposition if they are "dead, disabled, or tipped over" - that is what I tell our drivers my expectation is of them. Legal or not, if that is the only way to win a match, I'd rather lose. |
|
#17
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
Last year there were a lot of rules and updates about the loading zone infractions, and many of them discussed if the opponent caused the infraction, it would not penalize the other person. Applaud your reply, and glad to know you aren't planning to use it. It was good of you to bring it to attention for discussion. Last year was chaos with the loading zone infractions and questions of "did they intend to make you cause a 30pt penalty" etc. This year, if you go over to the dead backbot, and pull him to the other side, it's quite obvious of your intent. I would not consider them exactly the same situations, but relatively the same concept. |
|
#18
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
To add to Amy's post, the text of <G26> which I believe applies is:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
This is where I draw the line: if a team is running a strategy that harms or is likely to harm another team's bot it is not GP. If a team is using the rules to their advantage then go ahead, I congratulate you on your ingenuity. Last edited by Ethulin : 21-02-2006 at 16:29. |
|
#20
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
This is not really a defensive play, persay. As always stated, nobody says Defense is un-GP. The perceived intent behind this strategy is to make your opponents score go to 0, while you sit back and watch, maybe? The rules basically tell you that playing defense on a would-be backbot does you absolutely no good. If one wants to think of this as a legit plan, ok. But I guess I don't understand the advantage of wasting all your time pushing a dead robot, rather than scoring offensively with your partners. To each his own. If a robot is dead, it's likely that the dead bot could be damanged by the pushing, shoving, beating by the opponent to get it moved on the other side of the line. That is not acceptable and likely will be penalized for damage. I would hope they'd give up if it doesn't budge. The question is cause of infraction. In G26, if the opponent is preventing you from becoming a backbot, the backbot doesnt' get penalized because they are not causing their own inability to get behind the line. Now if a dead bot is sitting there, they are fine. If the opponent pushes them back to the other side, the opponent caused the infraction, not the deadbot themselves. The alliance did not cause themselves to violate the rule, so if you interpret the rule that way, then no penalty. Would seem the same logic that applies in the moving case would apply in the dead case. Therefore, the deadbot did not cause his situation, therefore by implication would not be penalized. Why would they penalize a dead robot who was perfectly fine as a dead backbot minding his own business when they don't penalize a robot that is actually moving to become a backbot but is prevented by the opponent? This logic implies that it does not good for the opponent to try and screw up your ability to get in backbot position. I will ask Q/A and get it answered. Good debate though. |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
At the Winter War Zone scrimmage(the FIRST "testing" ground(as far as I know, it is the first place that FIRST actually sees the game in play by a real robot. Anyone can feel free to correct me via p.m. if that assumption is false.)) the head ref moved a dead bot over to the other side after calling about 30 seconds worth of penalties on the dead bot's alliance.
|
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Ethulin : 22-02-2006 at 00:30. |
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
|
|
#24
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
I compiled a video of just that instance last night, and will post it later tonight. |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
so lets do the math at 35 seconds=-5 at 30 seconds=-10 at 25 seconds=-15 at 20 seconds=-20 at 15 seconds=-25 at 10 seconds=-30 at 05 seconds=-35 now assuming that no one is gonna wait the entire 40 seconds, and will probably head back at around 38, you might actually get a -35 instead of a -40, in any case -45 is NOT possible by this kind of penalty ALONE, I didn't get the whole Nimrod thing, in any case don't make fun of my name...Nimrod is the guy who ENGINEERED the BABYLON TOWERS! so HA! (how FIRST of me hehe)... about the defensive strategy DJ proposed, I think it's great, really "out of the box" thinking, and I wouldn't have any problem doing it UNLESS it so happens to be that while pushing the other bot (for example if he tipped over), that bot's sensitive parts might be harmed, that could be VERY expensive to repair... now here's a question, if that bot tipped, and when pushed, it's components tear-apart the carpet and or poof balls, who's fault is it? the pushed bot, or the bot which is doing the pusher? if it's the pushed bot's fault, will it still get a penalty after pushing the ES buttom? |
|
#26
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
We might note that a live robot could get significantly more than 40 points in penalties, if it continuously wavers offside and onside. If this was done about once per second for the entire 40 seconds - WOW, a 200 point penalty! Quote:
The reason ESPN thought the name "interesting" is that nimrod is a somewhat derogatory term meaning a silly or foolish person. dictionary.com thinks that meaning derives from a Bugs Bunny cartoon, where Bugs describes Elmer Fudd as a "poor little Nimrod". Elmer of course was always hunting Bugs, and Nimrod was a hunter - but Elmer was a very ineffectual hunter, so Bugs clearly didn't mean it as praise. |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
and yeha I even know that episode buggs rocks =) in anycase about the rules isn't the backbot allowed to get across the line for 5 seconds? if not...man DJ's strategy could get pretty mean, I mean who cares about scoring, just have one bot pushing him unto one side, and another pushing it to the other side, you get so many points in penalty for the other team you don't NEED to score |
|
#28
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
If it is a robot that can move then no penalties will be assessed per <g26> but if it is a deadbot then penalties (from my interpretation will be assessed). But that still doesn't mean that you don't need to score points. It is not only bad to do this but not wise. Your standings at the competition are based on how many points your OPONENT gets at the end of the match not by your score (only if you win of course). So it would not be wise to make your opponent get zero pts. BUT because the number of QP (qualifying points) gained is the lowest number before penalties this could be good. here is how QP is given:
No penalties: Opponents score You had penalties: Opponents score Opponent had penalties (and without penalties would have won the match): your score Opponent had penalties (would have lost even without): their score before penalties. Both have penalties: either opponents score before penalties or your score with penalties, whichever is highest. (should be right unless it has changed) Now that I have confused you, If could be advantageous to use this strategy (i wouldn't no matter what) for QP seeing that their score to begin with is higher and your score is lower (before penalties). This is the only time that I can see it beneficial. Plus this year with real time scoring it will be easier to decide if we should score for the opponent to get more QP. (yes I would do this because if you can then you must have a good robot, plus you help them out with QP) Again, I brought out this strategy to let people know about it so if it does happen they can have an idea as to what actions should be taken. Also, Hey Amy, has the GDC answered the question yet? |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
|
|
#30
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Off Side Penalty?
Quote:
You can check yourself also at yttp://www.usfirst.org/robotics/2006/qa.htm . The subject title was "Dead backbot". Also, Ethulin, good points! However, your example of Quote:
The GDC might just make a difference between dead and live bots. We shall see soon hopefully. I like health of this debate. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New Penalty Thread - | skrussel | General Forum | 25 | 12-03-2006 09:37 |
| 2 human players on one side? | Sscamatt | Rules/Strategy | 11 | 22-02-2004 23:34 |
| scoring penalty unfair | archiver | 2000 | 4 | 23-06-2002 23:55 |
| About the light that need to be seen from four side | archiver | 2000 | 3 | 23-06-2002 23:01 |
| Goal on side... What's the final word! | archiver | 2001 | 4 | 23-06-2002 22:39 |