I’d like to call your attention to this QA:
https://frc-qa.firstinspires.org/qa/89
I, for one, welcome the absolute carnage from balls colliding with robot electronics. That is all.
30 Likes
Accidents happen, and that’s important to note.
However intentionally damaging another robot for competitive gain is, in my opinion, a problem.
How to distinguish between these two, I have no idea. Ref’s call I suppose? Interested to see how this turns out.
3 Likes
At the rate of 2 shots per match…
If a human player manages to bounce-shot all of their opponents’ main breakers in auto, I’ll be laughing my head off, and I’ll owe @Marshall lunch.
Well… I can’t seem to recall any rules about humans intentionally damaging another robot, though there are the rules about robots doing that. Might need the Head Refaroo to chime in.
2 Likes
They should patch this hole… this would clearly be G201 if a robot did it but a human is OK?
Why wouldn’t this count as “delivery” of CARGO to an opponent robot, violating H506. Seems to me that this decision needs reversing.
Otherwise, let’s play some Eschaton
1 Like
What if said throwing of ball at a robot was preceded by the human player loudly screaming “DIE ROBOT DIE DIE DIE”?
22 Likes
Robot main breaker vulnerable… Add that to the scouting list!
6 Likes
I believe this is what FIRST means when they talk about the spirit of the rules….
But I mean….
Ball go brrrr
It’s the radios and other assorted electronics that worry me far more.
1 Like
“Think fast!” seems more GP.
7 Likes
If a team installs their main breaker and other electronics so a ball thrown by a HP can open the breaker or cause damage, they are going to be far more likely to get shut off or get damaged by what happens in normal game play.
1 Like
I’m just glad we already decided to put everything inside the frame and under a polycarb shield this year!
2 Likes
I’m just glad we have a whole drawer of wrenches our robot can use to practice dodging balls with.
18 Likes
Quite true. But beside the point of this thread.
@Nate_Laverdure , shame on you for killing the fun! (/s)
With the sarcasm out of the way, I have a suspicion that Q94 is going to be dropped back to the Referees on intent. Whether or not any guidance is made public on that… yeah, about that. 
1 Like
Ok, but hear me out. In soccer, if I kick a ball off the shin guard of an opponent and it goes out of bounds, I get the throw-in. If a HP bounces their cargo off an opponent HP in a “human dodgeball” game in the terminal area, who gets penalized for improper introduction of cargo to the field? Is human dodgeball prohibited by any rules? /s [Edit from below post, to make it clear H101 and E102, don’t actually play dodgeball with the other HPs]
Also, G210 says robots cant touch cargo on the other side if it is still in its staged location. Can a HP throw their cargo into staged cargo on the other side?
4 Likes
Is this an offer for me to come visit 900 and throw some balls for old times sake?
1 Like
H101 “Be a good person”, blue box example c is “assault, e.g. throwing something that hits another person”. There’s also basically-identical language in the event rules, E102.
The problem with this is that a team asked if this was legal and within the rules and they responded with “there is no penalty” so… throw as many balls at opponent robot radios as you’d like I guess…
I was just answering the question of if there was a rule about throwing a ball at another person, and that looked to me as it could be an example of H101/E102. (Based on circumstances, intent, your referees may vary, etc.; I’m not trying to make an actual “ruling” of any sort here.)
I wasn’t attempting to make any comment on Q89 and attempting to throw at an opponent robot (though I’m following the discussion with interest). Naively, I don’t expect it will become a big issue in practice, just given the difficulty with throwing/aiming the ball across the field and that robots should be expecting to get hit with random balls from missed shots anyway. I suppose I could be wrong and they’ll end up needing to add some sort of G402-equivalent rule for human actions.
2 Likes
