G405 Don’t mess with the opponents’s GRIDS.
A ROBOT may not move a scored GAME PIECE from an opponent’s NODE.
violation:FOUL and opponents are awarded the SUSTAINABILITY BONUS Ranking point
So if my opponent and I discuss it and make sure we both break the G405 rules during the match, we can both take a free ranking point.Since it do good to both alliances ,I don’t think we will have any reason to avoid doing that.That would be a very ridiculous thing .
The Noodle Agreement of 2023.
One of the students on my team pointed this out. We’re planning on writing a Q&A
Sure, but how about you go first? 
I would be VERY wary of doing this.
First, both of you will take a penalty for extension in your opponents zone.
Second, this lands under a class of things known as the “Noodle Agreement” (or other terms) that HQ frowns on.
Third, and this gets a bit on the edge: H105 and H106 (and possibly H107?) COULD apply.
Fourth, @ohowe nailed it. Backstab expected.
H107 is the spicy new “throwing matches” rule, right?
I think this could be argued as falling in that category. Both alliances throw the match.
Note that “a team may not … sacrifice ranking points” to “manipulate the rankings of other teams”.
It’s not exactly what you are saying given that you aren’t really sacrificing ranking points – your opponents gaining isn’t quite you losing – but they could probably clarify in a Rules Update that yields this illegal.
All three are “match throwing”.
105: Don’t convince others to throw their matches.
106: Don’t throw your matches under others’ convincing.
107: Don’t throw your own matches intentionally.
At one point some time back I asked about a similar scenario. IIRC the answer was something to the effect of “these rules, rapid escalation, all teams involved”. shudder
Fine, I’ve just discuss this with my team leader.It seems that this may not be a useful strategies, for backstabs may happen. It will make us lose games that we could have won, causing a 2 ranking point loss. Besides, it’s not quite difficult to reach the SUSTAINABILITY Bonus，not to mention the risk of potential fouls
Per the rule, making an agreement to descore one of the other team’s gamepieces, and following through on that agreement should not violate the rule. The equal offsetting penalty points would have no effect on the outcome of the match. And you are delivering a RP to the other alliance, NOT sacrificing your own ranking points. So neither team has engaged in prohibited behavior.
This is a more effective way to cooperate than the coopertition bonus because it guarantees both alliances get the sustainability RP, instead of just lowering the threshold at which it might be earned.
However, the cases where entering into such an agreement would be beneficial to both alliances may be relatively rare. First, both alliances would need to have robots capable of descoring the opposite teams gamepieces. That’s not normally a robot capability most teams design for. Second, both alliances would be fairly low performing. Because, why bother with the distraction of such an agreement if you are easily capable of earning the bonus through your normal gameplay anyhow?
Then there’s the philosophical angle. My feeling is: I’d rather earn my ranking points through excellent gameplay than have them gifted to me by the opposing alliance. I think the game is funner for everyone if we don’t enter into these types of agreements, and just play the game as intended.
Still, it’s a fun rules hack. Hopefully it will be addressed in a QA.
H111 (don’t violate rules for ranking points) now specifically disallows this- the blue box even refers to this exact strategy.
Team Update 03 explicitly removes this.
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
