I’m concerned this season for the heavy penalties associated with G10/G11 as they are both 15 point tech fouls. I understand the reasoning for their value, 5 cells in the 3pt goal is worth 15pts, and a robot excessively blocking one of these zones can certainly deny the offensive bot 15pts. However, standard practice in similar games has been to class this kind of violation as a regular foul with escalation to a tech foul on repeated attempts:
2019 G13: opponent contact behind their hab line was a foul unless in the endgame
2018 G15: blocking opponent exchange zone for >5 seconds was a foul
2018 G16: opponent contact in null zone was a tech foul (I’d note though that there were more places to play effective defense in 2018 than 2020 and also that I think 25 points in 2018 will be less valuable than 15 points in 2020)
2017 G13: contact within retrieval zone was a tech foul (but this is just one very small part of the field, there are other places to play defense)
2016 G21: contact within opponent’s secret passage was a tech foul (although note that tech fouls weren’t much different than regular fouls in 2016)
2013 G30: contact in opponent loading zone or while touching the opponent’s pyramid was a foul with escalation to a tech foul or automatic climb
2012 G28: contact in opponent’s key, alley, or bridge was a foul with escalation to a tech foul
I could go back further, but in my opinion the three most similar games to this one in the last decade were 2012, 2013, and 2016. In 2012 and 2013, initial violation for similar penalties was a foul with escalation; and in 2016, a violation was indeed a tech foul, but a tech foul was only slightly different than a regular foul that year. I personally don’t recall any excessive abuse of this penalty structure in those years, but please share if you do.
My fear is that, with their huge associated penalty points, G10/G11 will unnecessarily swing a large number of matches a la 2014. Additionally, the penalty values are so large this year that I don’t know that I would feel comfortable assigning a team with minimal ball scoring capabilities to positional defense, leaving this team without a good way to meaningfully contribute in teleop. It just seems like such a high risk to have a defender this year. I could see even good defenders getting shoved a few feet twice in a match which would cause a 30-pt (!) score swing.
I’m not saying G10/G11 shouldn’t be penalties, as they are certainly needed to protect scoring teams and keep match flow moving. However, I do think the initial punishment outweighs the crime, which will cause other unintended problems. I’d strongly prefer that G10/G11 start out as fouls and escalate to tech fouls more like 2012/2013.
While I understand your concerns regarding the valuation of these penalties at lower levels of play, there also needs to be sufficient deterrent to prevent strategically timely abuse of these penalties at higher levels of play. Don’t give teams a chance that breaking the rules will be beneficial to their match outcome.
I understand that the ideal valuation varies with level of play. Hitting a robot that can shoot 5 balls accurately in 2 seconds right when they shoot might indeed cause a 15-pt swing, while hitting a team that takes 10 seconds to shoot a round as they shoot their first ball might only cause a 3-pt swing.
Those same concerns would seem to apply to 2013 though. Some teams could shoot 4 frisbees in quick succession, and a hypothetical hit at the right time could swing the score 12 points. I genuinely don’t recall that kind of malicious rule breaking in 2013, and I think that such an action could/would reasonably be called egregious and immediately awarded a tech foul.
I think it has to start as a tech foul. As Caleb pointed out in the OP, the 15 point value of the tech foul is not a coincidence. It’s the value of a five ball volley into the Inner Port. The maximum volley size is a big driver of foul values in shooting games. The reason a tech foul could be less in 2016 is because teams could only carry and shoot one ball at a time. The same actions in 2020 can result in five missed shots as opposed to one missed shot.
While last year’s G9 (two defenders) and G10 (outside frame as defender) were easy to exploit because of the close location of the last cargo bay to the midline the open field this year makes it harder for a defender to push a robot into violating G10 (opponent in your loading, target zone getting hit) this year. Plus you have a safe zone close by (target or loading zone) that if the defense is too aggressive they might be called for G11(hitting opponent in their target or loading zone)
Still, the 15 points for causing a G10 foul might make it too attractive a strategy for a defensive bot. This is definitely going to be a game where field awareness is critical for drivers.
These rules are also going to be a huge deterrent to getting the H9 related feedback loop going; in fact, I think they’ll prevent it almost entirely, outside of a few isolated matches.
Personally, as the coach of a team that played tons of defense last year with no problem avoiding fouls, I like the implications of these rules on match flow. It remains to be be seen whether these fouls are too easy to draw in regular play.
I was thinking the opposite - that a defensive robot near their own loading station could be dominate. If ~10 power cells get pushed into the loader station corner - a defense robot guarding those between two protected zones is going to be a pain to get around. But 10 power cells are going to be hard to ignore.
It is also worth noting Q141. G10 and G11 are separate penalties and can both be called on the same contact.
That comes close to G22, I think - shutting down major elements of match play. It’s not quite the same thing, since this scenario would be only one robot denying access to some of the power cells, but it’s definitely a gray area.
Although I realize just now the irony of saying something is ‘definitely a gray area.’
Thanks for bringing that up. Frankly, that’s ridiculous, 15 points already seems excessive to me, but the fact that you could hypothetically get 30 points of penalties just from one bad driving motion (or getting shoved too far) is just brutal.
A better way to structure these rules might be to have G10-1 cover interactions between robots near loading zones, G10-2 cover interactions near target zones, and G10-3 cover interactions near the trench run. Grouping them as they are now does clearly allow for G10 and G11 to be called one after the other for the same interaction, although I honestly hadn’t even thought of that interpretation since it’s so absurd to me.
i know we’re already planning to significantly coach any defenders on our alliance to avoid penalties first. My experience is that many teams come into competitions (especially week 1/2/3) without firm understanding of the rules and penalties associated with certain actions. Even experienced teams are going to come into a competition confused about the difference in trench protection vs loading and scoring zones. I believe too many matches this season will be decided by penalty, which would be disappointing.
(Spoiler)
And no…we are not planning to be a defender first this year.