As long as you aren’t touching the carpet in your opponent’s SP, it seems legal to redirect all their incoming boulders from their HP’s to their courtyard. You could even score these if you had a shooter.
You would have to have the frame of the robot mostly inside the volume of the SP, resting on the berms and prevented from tipping by a counterweight that’s 15" outside your frame, but I think there are teams who could do this.
If your alliance was able to score seven boulders, you would be able to keep looping the seventh boulder and their human players would have to keep loading it in your robot, which could rack up points really quickly.
Here I was thinking that you had to just redirect the balls, now you’ve come up with a way to just convey them to the counterweight section and shoot.
Seems legit. The only rule in question would be G39 + G38 vs G11. Waiting for Q&A now…
I feel like if they drop the boulders through the Brattice, then it may get stuck near the HP wall in a place where you would be touching the Secret Passage carpet in order to gain access to…not to mention you would be actively seeking control of the boulder.
Depending how G37 is interpreted, the alliance stuck in the loop could receive numerous and infinite amounts of penalties.
G34 No more than six (6) BOULDERS may remain in a CASTLE at any time. If the BOULDER count ever exceeds six (6), excess BOULDERS must be introduced to the FIELD immediately. Violation: FOUL per excess BOULDER
G3 could be interpreted that as soon as more than 6 balls are in the alliance station, a penalty is received.
Or, it could be interpreted that the alliance has a grace period to return to 6 or less balls by reintroducing them to the field, and if they don’t in a timely manner, then they will receive a penalty.
If interpretation 1 is used, a possible G11 could by issued against the team using this strategy as you are forcing them to take fouls.
Although your strategy is not directly aimed at causing fouls, an effect of your strategy is causing fouls so it could be argued your strategy indirectly involves forcing them to take fouls giving you a G11
With this interpretation, I would be fouled any time my alliance scores a boulder when there are six boulders in the corral, even if we weren’t doing a weird strategy, which doesn’t make much sense.
No necessarily, if you are not blocking the Secret passage and they have the ability to put a boulder into play and they end up with 7 balls that is there fault not yours. They would get a G34
However, if you are blocking the secret passage so that no matter what they do they end up with over 6 and cant get rid of any boulders because they are automatically redirected into their alliance station, you are putting them into an endless loop that no matter what they do, the end up with over 6 boulders and cant get rid of them, due to a strategy that essentially forces them to take penalties because they cant get rid of a ball. That’s where it gets a little grey. Do you get a G11 for using a strategy that involves essentially forcing them to have over 6 boulders? Maybe. I’m unsure but its a possibility and should be asked don the Q&A
I’ll remind you of
**G11 **Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FIRST Robotics Competition and not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in an assignment of a penalty to the targeted ALLIANCE. Violation: FOUL. If egregious or repeated, YELLOW CARD
That pretty much counts out blocking the feeding station.
True as G11 says “solely”. As forcing penalties is not the sole purpose of this strategy, I suppose a G11 would not be called . I stand corrected :rolleyes:
But you are not blocking the BRATTICE, so they can happily introduce BOULDERS back onto the field so you are not forcing a foul. Not your fault they are feeding balls to you. Unfortunately as long as you can shoot them fast enough such that they cannot get two boulders on the robot, they are mostly hooped.
As long as you are not touching the carpet in the SP you don’t run the risk of violating G21 or G39.
Only issue is with how you block the EMBRASURE. If they can get BOULDERS onto the field touching your robot you could end up in violation, via “trapping”, of G38.
I would like to see G38 clarified before building a robot around this strategy.
Poorly phrased… “The fact that the requirement to put balls back into play results in them feeding you, does not mean you are forcing a fault”, thus you don’t trigger G11.
G38 needs clarification. If a ball ends up between you and the EMBRASURE due to your position relative to the EMBRASURE, is this “trapping” or “herding”. You are not holding the BOULDER against a FIELD ELEMENT. They specifically state that “deflecting” is not “control”.
If a G11 is called on you because you are trying to draw an opponent into a G11 by blocking the feeder station, then that’s basically condemning any strategy that makes it look like “you’re asking for it”, which would set a really bad precedent. Basically any foray into the opponent’s secret passage could be considered G11 fodder.
As a side note the opponents just can’t keep more than 6 boulders inside their castle. It says nothing about feeding them to their own robots; that’s just preferred.
You would have to avoid touching the Secret Passage carpet at all costs to pull this off. If a defending robot came down the secret passage and pushed you down with more moment than the counter weight, you would incur (repeated?) G21 fouls. You would also have to get rid of balls faster than humans can load you or else you could ring up G38 fouls. (or avoid new balls if you already have one)
Would love to see someone address these concerns though
The mechanism to score stolen boulders would have to be incredibly robust - nothing is preventing their human player from introducing multiple balls at the same time. At the very least they can force you to incur G38 fouls, and possibly G21 fouls. There is also the questionable interaction with G11 and G34. I think a team would need to be very confident to utilize this strategy.
that’s kinda the point right? 
