Answered: Specification for G11

[Welshkiwi]

I have a couple questions regarding what G11 covers and doesn’t cover.

1. A ‘wallbot’ that can expand and contract willingly and is only used for defence. Eg a robot that after expanding, can contract to fit itself into the original 18" cube and is no longer using blockers in a defencive manner. Is is still discriminated against by G11a?

a. Robots which have expanded horizontally in an effort to obstruct the field will undergo even more scrutiny under <G11>, and will not be protected under <G11>

2. Once again in the case of a wallbot. If an offensive robot attempts to move the wallbot and gets entangled, then the wallbot contracts so there is no chance of un-entangling the robots. I assume this would be covered by <G11>:

In the case where referees are forced to make a judgment call on interaction between a defensive and offensive Robot, the referees will err on the side of the offensive Robot.

and thus the offensive robot would not be at fault. In this instance would the defensive robot [wallbot] be DQ’d for entanglement

That’s all! Thanks in advance.

[Karthik]

@Welshkiwi

I have a couple questions regarding what G11 covers and doesn’t cover.

1. A ‘wallbot’ that can expand and contract willingly and is only used for defence. Eg a robot that after expanding, can contract to fit itself into the original 18" cube and is no longer using blockers in a defencive manner. Is is still discriminated against by G11a?

<G11a> will only apply to a robot which is utilizing its expansion to obstruct the field. If a robot has contracted back to its original size, <G11a> would no longer apply.

@Welshkiwi

2. Once again in the case of a wallbot. If an offensive robot attempts to move the wallbot and gets entangled, then the wallbot contracts so there is no chance of un-entangling the robots. I assume this would be covered by <G11>:

and thus the offensive robot would not be at fault. In this instance would the defensive robot [wallbot] be DQ’d for entanglement

Yes, you are correct. In this case the “wall-bot” would be considered responsible for the entanglement and possibly punished by <G11>.

[Welshkiwi]

Thanks Karthik! I’m sure this will be useful to some other referees. I know it has been for me.