Defensive Strategy - cornering opponents ball

[Shadow503]

Originally Posted by s_forbes

As for whether or not the defense belongs in the game, it's obvious that the GDC was trying to encourage teams to build offensive robots this year (which is why all of these darn penalties are required...), but there are always going to be teams that cannot complete the task and end up with a half-done robot that can't run fast laps or hurdle the ball. I think this was anticipated, and so no rules were made to stop these teams from intercepting/playing keep away with the other alliance's trackballs. But with the way the scoring works, there isn't a good chance for a team to win with this type of defensive strategy.

I guess this is where our opinions split. I believe a team with a half-done robot should not be able to effectively compete.

Teams like us have spent too many hours building a powerful bot to have our scoring potential neutralized by a half-done box bot ("defensive bot"). The game creators intended to reduce pinning. This can be found by the lack of any 90 degree corners in the track. Unfortunately, teams are still able to pin a ball.

I've done the math and I have a counter pinning strategy: high speed ramming. If I can get our 120lb bot moving at 20 ft/s we should be able to disable/dislodge the defensive bot/track ball. A single lap w/ hurdle will be sufficient to cover 10pt penalty. After this, one of four things happens:
A) The defensive robot has been damaged and is no longer able to play defense
B) The defensive robot is still working, but we are able to keep control of the ball
C) The defensive robot, while still working, has realized it is in their best interests to not pin the ball
D) The defensive robot, still working, pins the ball after we come around the track again. We repeat the ramming maneuver and hurdle (with no net point loss) and hope for conditions A),B), or C) next time around.

Most defense bots are weak KOP bots, so I have a feeling condition is A) is the likely outcome.

Yes, it might not be the most GP solution, but neither is pinning. Pinning was not in the intent of the game creators and promotes laziness in bot design and construction. Pinning will lead to boring, low scoring matches. I intend to change that. I encourage other teams with competitive robots to do the same to keep this years game interesting.

See you at Nationals!

[Paul Copioli]

Shadow503,

You must not be playing the same game we are. As a team subjected to quite a lot of defense, there are some fully complete robots that have an excellent drive train and a decent shooter that can play some mean defense against that ball.

I watched every single one of our GLR matches on video and we had single, and sometimes double, defense against us in every match except 1 but we managed to play through it.

The ability to play through defense is key in almost every FIRST game, so I suggest you figure out how to play through it because camplaining about it isn't going to make it go away.

-Paul

[SL8]

I don't think its fair to say that most defensive robots are half done or weak KOP robots. Even if they are, you have to remember that it takes more than a well built robot or good programming and design. Put that on the field and the robot might perform half decent. Put a good driver who has had practice and it should do phenomenal. So even if a half done robot is blocking your way, think about this, why is it able to do so?

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

I watched every single one of our GLR matches on video and we had single, and sometimes double, defense against us in every match except 1 but we managed to play through it.

The ability to play through defense is key in almost every FIRST game, so I suggest you figure out how to play through it because camplaining about it isn't going to make it go away.

Great point, Paul. Ever since our FTC tournament in late February I've wondering why 575 didn't do better. Of the three robots our program fielded, they had by far the highest scoring potential, and worked perfectly every minute of every match. It was the only one of our three 'bots that didn't have some sort of mechanical problem during the event, and yet it finished qualifying ranked in the teens (out of 28), and only dominated a couple of matches. This week I finally got the video from the mentor who was shooting our matches and watched the entire thing. In every single match after the first, 575s opposition keyed on them. No matter what they were trying to do, there was an opposition 'bot trying to stop them.

417 finished ranked first after quals, using a lower-scoring strategy than 575s, but one that was much more difficult to block. 417 was ranked first after qualifications. By using a pretty-good strategy that was hard to stop they ended up being more effective than the high-potential, but easier-to-block 575. One more thing to add to my mentor's "strategic concerns to go over with the teams" list. If you build a good robot, the opposition will focus on stopping you -- even to the extent of abandoning their own scoring.

A good robot can score a lot of points. A great robot can do it when the other alliance does everything they can to stop it.

[Herodotus]

I don't see why people keep saying things like "It's not what the GDC intended." The truth is it doesn't matter what the GDC intended, they wrote rules, and we are to follow those rules. Anything that falls within those rules is a valid strategy. Our job is to play the game that the GDC gave us, not the one we think they should have given us.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Herodotus

I don't see why people keep saying things like "It's not what the GDC intended." The truth is it doesn't matter what the GDC intended, they wrote rules, and we are to follow those rules. Anything that falls within those rules is a valid strategy. Our job is to play the game that the GDC gave us, not the one we think they should have given us.

Exactly. I also think that we don't really know the 'real intent' of the rules. By saying 'that goes against the intent of the rules and thus shouldn't be done', is almost like saying 'the protection of hurlders goes against the intent of the rules, so I'm not going to follow that rule'. It doesn't matter what people think the 'intent of the rules' is, we have the play the game that was given to us and not make our own inteprentations and intents.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Shadow503

I guess this is where our opinions split. I believe a team with a half-done robot should not be able to effectively compete.

Teams like us have spent too many hours building a powerful bot to have our scoring potential neutralized by a half-done box bot ("defensive bot"). The game creators intended to reduce pinning. This can be found by the lack of any 90 degree corners in the track. Unfortunately, teams are still able to pin a ball.

If your "powerful bot" can be neutralized by a "half-done box bot" then I put forth that your bot isn't all that powerful.

More likely, the fact is your team did not take into account defensive strategies ... so now you are crying foul.

Originally Posted by Shadow503

I've done the math and I have a counter pinning strategy: high speed ramming. If I can get our 120lb bot moving at 20 ft/s we should be able to disable/dislodge the defensive bot/track ball. A single lap w/ hurdle will be sufficient to cover 10pt penalty. After this, one of four things happens:
A) The defensive robot has been damaged and is no longer able to play defense
B) The defensive robot is still working, but we are able to keep control of the ball
C) The defensive robot, while still working, has realized it is in their best interests to not pin the ball
D) The defensive robot, still working, pins the ball after we come around the track again. We repeat the ramming maneuver and hurdle (with no net point loss) and hope for conditions A),B), or C) next time around.

1> High speed ramming is against the rules
2> Strategies designed to damage other bots or the field will get you DQ'd
3> Most defensive bots I've encountered are built stronger than their offensive counterparts because they 'expect' contact.

Have fun with your strategy. I'll be there to assist the other guy putting his robot back together while your team goes home after being DQ'd

Originally Posted by Shadow503

Most defense bots are weak KOP bots, so I have a feeling condition is A) is the likely outcome.

Please show me your evidence that defensive bots are weak KoP bots.

Originally Posted by Shadow503

Yes, it might not be the most GP solution, but neither is pinning. Pinning was not in the intent of the game creators and promotes laziness in bot design and construction. Pinning will lead to boring, low scoring matches. I intend to change that. I encourage other teams with competitive robots to do the same to keep this years game interesting.

See you at Nationals!

Please show me your evidence that pinning was not the intent of the game creators. My guess is that they knew some teams would try this strategy and a few would actually get good at it.

If you try to destroy others robots and encourage others to do the same ... don't be surprised when it happens to you.

Have fun at the nationals

[SL8]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

If your "powerful bot" can be neutralized by a "half-done box bot" then I put forth that your bot isn't all that powerful.

More likely, the fact is your team did not take into account defensive strategies ... so now you are crying foul.


1> High speed ramming is against the rules
2> Strategies designed to damage other bots or the field will get you DQ'd
3> Most defensive bots I've encountered are built stronger than their offensive counterparts because they 'expect' contact.

Have fun with your strategy. I'll be there to assist the other guy putting his robot back together while your team goes home after being DQ'd



Please show me your evidence that defensive bots are weak KoP bots.



Please show me your evidence that pinning was not the intent of the game creators. My guess is that they knew some teams would try this strategy and a few would actually get good at it.

If you try to destroy others robots and encourage others to do the same ... don't be surprised when it happens to you.

Have fun at the nationals

I'm hearing yet another echo.
I think the concensus is that if you can be stopped by a defensive bot then it is your problem to deal with, not complain about. ( or at least not ours.)

[Shadow503]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

If your "powerful bot" can be neutralized by a "half-done box bot" then I put forth that your bot isn't all that powerful.

More likely, the fact is your team did not take into account defensive strategies ... so now you are crying foul.

I'm curious how you suggest teams take into account for defensive strategies. If a ball is pinned against a wall, what can a team do besides ignore it and do laps? My point is that any offensive bot can be neutralized by this technique.

If a ball is pinned against a wall there is nothing even the best bot can do about it. That is the biggest thing that separates pinning from previous defensive strategies. In previous years, a defensive bot had to be robust and have a solid drive train. This year, the rules protect a pinning bot from contact so a cardboard box with wheels could effectively carry out this "strategy".

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

1> High speed ramming is against the rules

Yes, and a single hurdle + lap will eliminate that penalty.

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

2> Strategies designed to damage other bots or the field will get you DQ'd
3> Most defensive bots I've encountered are built stronger than their offensive counterparts because they 'expect' contact.

If they are built so robustly then they have nothing to worry about. I don't intend to damage the robot. I simply wish to dislodge the ball. If the robot gets damaged, then so be it. A yellow card is just a warning, and it also disappears once the finals start.

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Please show me your evidence that defensive bots are weak KoP bots.

Originally Posted by s_forbes

. . .
but there are always going to be teams that cannot complete the task and end up with a half-done robot that can't run fast laps or hurdle the ball. I think this was anticipated, and so no rules were made to stop these teams from intercepting/playing keep away with the other alliance's trackballs.

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

I don't think anyone is proposing building your robot with this as its sole purpose. If your [mechanism] breaks and you're up against a couple of good hurdlers, this might be a very useful strategy in your repertoire. You could drive in circles for a couple points a lap, or you could pin the ball and reduce one of your opponents' scoring ability from ten points per lap down to two. That seems like a useful backup strategy to me.

Ok, maybe not KOP bots, but many people are suggesting that defense be used by defective/half-finished bots.

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Please show me your evidence that pinning was not the intent of the game creators.

135 degree angles on the walls. A right angle would be much more easily manufactured, but the GDC still chose to use 135 angles (which make it more difficult to pin). If you also look at the other rules, they discourage defensive play this year. I'm pretty sure the GDC doesn't want four bots to park themselves in the corners pinning balls while the other two remaining bots run laps. That leads to very dry gameplay.

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

If you try to destroy others robots and encourage others to do the same ... don't be surprised when it happens to you.

Have fun at the nationals

I don't encourage the destruction of other robots, I'm simply suggesting a way to prevent a loophole from ruining this years game. And as you've previously stated, defensive bots are built strong, so they should have no problem holding up to our attempts to bring the track ball back in to play.

See you at nationals!

[SL8]

Originally Posted by Shadow503

135 degree angles on the walls. A right angle would be much more easily manufactured, but the GDC still chose to use 135 angles (which make it more difficult to pin). If you also look at the other rules, they discourage defensive play this year. I'm pretty sure the GDC doesn't want four bots to park themselves in the corners pinning balls while the other two remaining bots run laps. That leads to very dry gameplay.


I don't encourage the destruction of other robots, I'm simply suggesting a way to prevent a loophole from ruining this years game. And as you've previously stated, defensive bots are built strong, so they should have no problem holding up to our attempts to bring the track ball back in to play.

See you at nationals!

I think you're forgetting the diversity that occurs every year.

[Herodotus]

Originally Posted by Shadow503

I'm curious how you suggest teams take into account for defensive strategies. If a ball is pinned against a wall, what can a team do besides ignore it and do laps? My point is that any offensive bot can be neutralized by this technique.

Very simple, push them out of the way. There is nothing to prevent bumper to bumper contact. If we had chosen to use our drive train from last year we could have pushed any of the defensive bots out of the way, very easily. We could even have pushed other bots sideways in some cases. Also, you could simply not let them pin in the first place. Part of the game this year, I would almost say the most important part, is ball control. You must be able to pick up quickly and reliably and a team that does this can make it so another team never has the chance to play defense in the first place.

Finally, I direct you to the eliminations at GLR. There you can see a very fine showing of counter-defense between us (910) and the Thunderchickens. Above all else teamwork can prevent defense from shutting you down.

Also the 135 degree walls are likely there to give the track a somewhat oval appearance, to simulate a race track. Not for any specific anti defense reason.

[lukevanoort]

Alex, I'll be honest with you, I think that your argument is baseless. Defense is a valid strategy, and as an offensive robot, you must play through it or lose. Also, if defense-oriented robots were so weak and flimsy, you should have no trouble dealing with them unless your robot is similarly weak or flimsy; all you have to do is push them out of the way. In addition, a strategy that has severely damaging or destroying opposing robots as one of its main goals has no place in this game, and I would hope the refs would DQ any team trying such a foul strategy. A side note, calling other robots "half-finished" or "defective" is just bad manners, and is very rude.

[Shadow503]

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

Alex, I'll be honest with you. Your argument reminds me of one you would hear from a spoiled rich kid with a sports car who gets pulled over for speeding.

Geez, has our discussion really regressed to personal attacks? I care little for how you interpret my arguments.

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

Defense is a valid strategy, and as an offensive robot, you must play through it or lose. Also, if defense-oriented robots were so weak and flimsy, you should have no trouble dealing with them unless your robot is similarly weak or flimsy; all you have to do is push them out of the way. In addition, a strategy that has severely damaging or destroying opposing robots as one of its main goals has no place in this game, and I would hope the refs would DQ any team trying such a foul strategy.

You're sending mixed messages. At first you say that offensive bots should have no problem dealing with defense bots if they are weak. Then immediately after that you condemn damaging opposing robots. I'm not sure I understand exactly what you propose offensive bots do.

I'll clarify my previous statement. The goal of my strategy is to simply dislodge the ball. The last thing I want to do is to destroy another teams robot. Herodotus suggested pushing, and I agree with him. This will allow competitive bots with a good drive train to move the pinning bot. Yes, my suggestion for high speed ramming may have been blunt. Pushing is a more reasonable solution.

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

A side note, calling other robots "half-finished" or "defective" is just bad manners, and is very rude.

I'm only using words that were used by supporters of pinning in the past few pages. Is it really rude if I haven't actually named any robots? Please consider your own personal attacks when you wish to point fingers about being rude.

[SL8]

I really don't like the way this thread is going,
how about we have some hot chocolate and heatedly discuss, rather than argue, about it eh?

Really, words do not peirce hearts, people do. So no, it is only the usage and implications of said usage that render words poisonous.

-Jesus

Edit. Or Lemonade.

[Shadow503]

Yes, lemonade would probably be a better idea right now!