Defense comprimise ideas

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by Tungrus

I am beginning to think that no defense rule probably nudged some teams to build a working, even if scoring one game piece at a time. Unlike in previous years, some robots (not talking about dedicated defense bots) just come with drive and keep bugging the other robots. At least now the newer teams will not be coerced into playing defense all the time. Hats off to many rookie teams who have built some amazing machines.

I've been saying something like this recently. One good thing about no defense is it is forcing some teams that would have given up on their manipulators to actually use them. You are seeing teams attempting to score totes and RC's instead of just giving up and playing defense as they would have in previous years.

[jvriezen]

Originally Posted by KosmicKhaos

Of the top of my head one of the most unique ways of a type of defense was Lunacy from 2009. Although many people hated that game if you recall, essentially your alliance controls the goals. For those of you who don't know what Lunacy was, the scoring objects were strapped to each robot and you had to get them into the other alliances goals that were being dragged around by them. Although many people hated it, it was a very unique game because you had to worry about staying behind a robot to score but that also leaves you kind of open for people to score on you. In my opinion it introduced a whole new leval of defencse and strategy.

Yes, that was a very unique defensive opportunity. I was a parent and score keeper, but not a mentor that year. From that vantage point, I sort of liked the game-- but I'll respect those that disliked it as they had the team's perspective which I did not have.

[Loose Screw]

What removing defense also allows teams is the ability to expand to (mostly) whatever they want. If you want two robots (148's Batman and Robin), you'll have to carefully design within the weight limits. If you add any opposing robot interaction, then you eleminate those unique designs.

My favorite FIRST game has to be FTC Block Party! for many reasons. One of those reasons was that at higher levels, playing defense cost you the game. They layed out the feild in a such a way that you have no reason to go to the other side. If you want to play some defense, you could try to block them from picking up blocks. But a better "defense" was just to go full offense. There were a limited amount of blocks, so the more you score the more you take away from your opponents.

Taking away your opponents' scoring pieces has been a staple for a while (Moon Rocks, Soccer balls, tubes, basket balls, and ground frisbees). However the game that this worked as a strategy was 2011. At Michigan States, the number 1 alliance lost to the number 8 because of strategy alone. Part of that strategy was to not throw out tubes and only deliver them in protected areas.

I would like to see a game where both alliances have to use the same scoring pieces like Block Party!. Defense might work at first, but if you're playing defense you're not scoring points. The game winning strategy has always been to score more points than the other alliance.

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

I really do believe safe zones are the best way to incorporate defense into the game while also not making it crazy aggressive. I understand that this means more work on refs to watch for contact in the safe zones but as long as the penalty isn't crazy high, it's not that big of a deal.

[Dan Petrovic]

This is one of the reasons why 2005's game, Triple Play, remains my favorite game to date.

While de-scoring tetras wasn't allowed, disrupting a row of goals owned by the opposing alliance would lower their score. Superior driving and strategy were the keys to Triple Play, not top-notch engineering.

Being able to negate the efforts of your opponents is probably the cleanest way for FIRST to incorporate defense into their games. However, now that I think about it, this is the first year since 2008 in that a team could de-score previously scored game pieces. Before then, being able to take away opponents' points had more or less been a staple of FIRST games.

2007 - Spoiler tubes
2006 - N/A
2005 - Eliminating goal rows
2004 - Removing doubling balls
2003 - Knocking down stacks or plowing boxes out of scoring zones
2002 - Moving goals out of your opponent's goal scoring zone
2001 - N/A
2000 - Removing balls from your opponent's goal

It just comes down to the GDC being willing to incorporate such defensive strategies into their games and to make them worth pursuing.