|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Rule question (G29 and G27)
Quote:
I would assume that if an E-stopped robot fell into it's opponent's zone while a partner was there, the partner would need to get its *wheels* out of there in a hurry to avoid getting penalized. I can "easily" block both goals with one working robot that can push and one E-stopped one, leaving the door open for blocking both goals and not getting any penalties, if <G29> isn't applied to the running robot. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Rule question (G29 and G27)
It depends on which of the two robots are penalized if there are two robots in the opponents zone. If only the first or only the second robot to enter the zone gets penalized, then the robot that would incur the penalty could be E-Stopped. But if both robots, or the alliance is given the penalty, then it doesn't matter which robot is E-Stopped.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Rule question (G29 and G27)
This brings up the intresting point of what if there both estoped? blue team cant score and the bots cant take penaltys.
Remember though, preventing scoring doesnt help anyone in this game, seeding rating is all based on the winners score so winning a low scoring game doesnt help you. I think also you would get a red card if you didnt pull the estop off fast enough. Once again, possible finals strat, definatly not the way to play for seeding points in qualifying rounds. |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Rule question (G29 and G27)
<G27> excuses a robot from further penalties.
It appears <G29> is a single penalty. So once it's assessed, that's it. No more penalties, so there's no further penalties under <G27> to excuse. Except <G29> has more to it: "plus a RED CARD if effort to remedy is not immediate." If you E-stop, you have removed all possible remedies. Do you want to risk a red card for this strategy? |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Rule question (G29 and G27)
Quote:
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Rule question (G29 and G27)
I think this is one of those Gracious Professionalism strategies if you're talking about using it as a strategy. If you have a robot in the defense zone that gets knocked over, and there's no hope for recovery so it gets E-stopped, I would guess that any other robot on your alliance to enter that zone would get a penalty. Even if that is not true, it's just not cool to try to pull something like that on purpose. The E-stop is an EMERGENCY stop, and shouldn't be used as part of a strategy.
It is an interesting point though, I'll give you that... |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| G27 | ALIBI | Rules/Strategy | 12 | 08-01-2008 01:05 |
| rule <g29> and flag | gondorf | Rules/Strategy | 4 | 28-01-2007 22:43 |
| Rule G29 | stillwaters130 | Rules/Strategy | 3 | 08-01-2007 18:14 |
| Rule G11 and Springs Rule | mtaman02 | Technical Discussion | 3 | 23-01-2004 17:43 |