Answered: Legal response to cage strategy

In the following response you indicate that an arm/cage extending across fence would be a legal strategy.
link text

My guess is that the strategy here is to create a protected zone to place scoring objects.

I have a couple questions on how to handle this strategy…

  1. In past years I have heard that protections under rule G12 (Strategies aimed solely at the destruction, damage, tipping over, ) have been reduced when a robot employs a purely defensive strategy (like the Wallbot in Sky Rise). Are there reduced restrictions on a team responding to this approach to disregard likely damage if the intention is to recovering protected objects.
  2. What if the arm/cage blocks access to the hanging bar. Is this still legal?

It would be legal in very certain conditions. It would also be illegal in different conditions. Just wanted to make that clear so there isn’t any confusion.

Not specific to Robot damage, however teams who extend beyond the wall do so at their own risk and will be scrutinized for any rules violations, especially <SG6>. For example if team reaches beyond the Fence to protect Stars and an opponent pushes the reaching Robot to try and get at the Stars, such that the reaching Robot touches the tiles across the Fence, the Robot which reached across the Fence would be in violation of <SG6>.

No. This would be illegal for two reasons.

  1. It could possibly likely violate <SG6a> for pinning or trapping a Robot on the other side of the fence.
  2. <G12> (quoted below, with bolded text for emphasis), prohibits strategies aimed at the disruption of Hanging. Blocking access to the Hanging Bar with a wall/arm would be a violation of <G12>.