No offence but how is this season still playable with this? I think although this is legal the ref will still DQ u. Well design thou.
Homie, it literally says in the rule book wall-bots are legal, I have a screenshot to prove it !
Maybe read the rules a couple more times?
Anyways, while I do agree this is a really good robot and I’m glad someone did it, I don’t see it realistically being a viable strategy for the season, especially late season. Since you can’t intentionally cross the line in auton it really hampers wall-bot’s strategy. If the wallbot is going against two bots with alright autons scoring around 4 or 5 cubes each, the wallbot’s team is already at a disadvantage. Late season I expect teams to definitely achieve more then 5 cube autons. You could maybe even get another kid-sized stack in before the wallbot deploys. For example, even with the inconsistency of their auton, if the wallbot went against something like Uncharted, the team that won Benton, and their auton worked then all Uncharted’s alliance needs to do is secure towers and play heavy defense on the one stacker on wallbot’s team.
I theoretically see multiple strategies to void the wallbot after auton. If one of the bots against the wall after auton focus on just stopping the wallbot getting to its deployment zone (because it does seem like it can get pushed around) it is now a 1v1 stacking battle with an auton advantage on the team without the wallbot because of 2 robots running auton. Another strat would be just focusing on towers according to your auton stacks and playing defense on their stacker so they can’t out stack, and 2 bots playing defense on 1 bot doesn’t sound fun. Or of course, you could stop the wallbot with a wallbot and hope your stacker outscores them in autonomous and then has the better tower bot, if both partners are tray bots that can’t do towers that sounds like a really boring match.
My favorite strat is my cube-apult, no leeks tho
Well, no - speaking as a certified head ref, that would be a serious breach of the rules and probably a major controversy as well. Wall-bots are explicitly allowed per <G12>.
The reason they likely won’t be very popular is because it’s a high-risk strategy that requires high-quality design and execution, and because it depends on having the right partner - not much point in restricting your opponent from scoring if your alliance can’t score itself.
(Not to say I don’t think it’s a viable strategy if done properly. The robot in this thread is really cool and I’m super excited to see what kinds of crazy defensive strategies people come up with this season. I just don’t think wallbots will be crazy popular.)
I dont think eden was saying this robot was illegal, I think he meant that refs will be another one of your opponents.
What would the ref DQ you for though?
All I am saying is that it takes a lot more to convince a ref that your wallbot is legal than it is to convince them that your more conventional bot is legal. And this plays out in matches where the refs constantly have to watch the wallbot since it uses a primarily defensive strategy focusing on fighting head to head with the opposition robots.
Only problem I say is possible entanglement, if it gets DQ’d anything else about the bot being illegal I believe that is bad reffing.
On the discord we came up with anothe viable method of thwarting the wall bot. After autonomous have one of the bots sit in the protected zone, theoretically the wallbot cant deploy anymore with trapping you and since they have the option of just not deploying G14 doesn’t go into play because you aren’t forcing them to break a rule. It would most likely just be a bot a bot stare down well the other bots on both teams just try to outstack the other. And if the wallbot doesnt realize this it should be a dq right?
After I looked at the rules again though i’m not so sure.
It says trapping has to be 1 tile of space but it uses the corner of the field as an example, what do you guys think?
I’ve always liked wallbots. And tether bots. So, you know what? I like this robot.
However, taking auton stacks into consideration, your partner could have their work cut out for them.
Left without means to score, the other alliance can double team your partner in defense, making it exceptionally difficult for your team to score points.
On top of potential double teaming on defense, your partner will undoubtedly have to play 1v2 on towers.
Even if the wallbot’s tether bots can help defend their alliance (which is considerably easier due to having 2 tether bots), no defense is perfect. So you’re really relying on a top tier seed to pick you, otherwise you’ll just be outmatched defensively.
There’s only so much speculation can do. This is an impressive RI3D. I’m excited to see it compete in a few tourneys.
Glad to see this has got some people excited
We’re doing a full FAQ document release soon which should address a lot of the specific questions. Here’s some quick answers to the “big” ones:
Yes, to the best of our knowledge. Entanglement concern exists only for the wire tether, which we would have redone in the Master and Puppet style by OYES if we had the chance. Legally should meet all criteria of being connected, of NOT trapping anybody, etc.
Needs good partner?
Yes. We made the call early to focus purely on the defensive side of things, instead of trying to be a jack-of-all-trades that had a normal traybot tether or something. As such, the actual scoring falls solidly on our alliance partner. Our aim is to create that mythical 1v0 situation - turning that advantage into a win is up to our partner.
Wall -> ganged up defense on our partner?
No, by virtue of the basebots. Either the basebots can play direct man-to-man defense, or we can play “O-line”. The expanding x drive is large enough to create a zone of safety for our alliance partner (“quarterback”) behind the x drive. This should allow them to stack away uninhibited.
Block deploy = instant win?
No, we have specifically anticipated this counter and done our best to counter-counter. Here’s a quick outline:
Firstly, deploying the wall exactly at the tape line of the outer protected zone with an opponent inside the zone leaves enough room that it should legally NOT be Trapping, based on our understanding of the definition.
Secondly, if the opponent tries to get exactly in the path of the wall deploy instead of sitting nicely on the side, then the controlled deploy gets its turn in the spotlight. The x drive enables us to have the large wall “grow” to fill the available space, and to thus apply constant pressure on the blocking opponent. This capability is critical for the overall counter.
Finally, the only way this counter would work is if the blocking opponent can create an opening for the second opponent to pass by the wall. However, we have both the tank drive basebot to play defense on that second opponent, and also the torque to physically push the blocking opponent out of their position.
Unfortunately, it is hard to prove that this counter doesn’t work without actual competition experience. Despite this, I am reasonably confident that a properly executed wallbot can resist the blocking strategy.
wow this is stunning! I love it! I really enjoy unique designs like this. My biggest concern would be your opponents pulling your walls out of the way. doesn’t look like
anything is stopping your opponent from using an arm or something to drag the wall away from the protected zone, and especially the mini-wall by the unprotected goal zone. Also, seeing as how you can’t deploy during auton, your opponents will likely put a ton of effort into stopping you from deploying. I feel like this has enormous potential, and if you can solve those 2 problems consistently, you have a good shot at blocking all scoring. Another thing I just thought of is that if you do deploy correctly, and both of your opponents are blocked from scoring, they may decide to give your partner maximum defense. 1 robot getting defended by 2 robots doesn’t have too good a shot at overcoming your auton disadvantage. I’ll be very interested in the development of wallbots this season, and I hope you find this approach successful.
Not sure if we’ve mentioned this earlier, but the large wall is 11lbs and the small wall is 5 lbs. We had a tough time moving them as humans, and there is a clip in the reveal of a 6m Turning Point robot ramming into the wall to no effect. I’m willing to assert that a “normal” robot will be entirely unable to move either wall by the weight itself.
Also, I want to stress the fact that there are still 2 basebots that exist after the wall deploy. A central element of this strategy involves playing “man to man” defense against the opponents, in order to prevent them from defending our partner. See the note in my previous post for more.
wow ok. i wasn’t thinking about ramming into the wall tho, I was thinking like a lift reaching over the wall and pulling it away from the corner. but they sound too heavy for most robots to budge, so that’s good.
Good concept, and I love how it was put together. Just one thing: If I run across a robot in a competition like this one, it boutta be robot fighting time.
So for driving, is it correct that you have one driver on each base?
Also, what was the reasoning behind making one base an X drive and one a Tank Drive? Wouldn’t defense be a lot easier with two tanks?
Also, how long does it take between getting the robot from the end of the match, fully reset to starting configuration?
Hold up, my concern here isn’t the legality of the wallbot, but the number of motors. Isn’t the V5 limit 8 and since they have 10 it is technically illegal?
they are using a differential for the arm for a total of 8 motors
Sir I’m afraid your robot is to much of a absolute unit and will have to confiscated immediately
Oh I see it now thanks!