I recently witnessed a match in which one robot sped off during autonomous and crashed into (or very close to) the protected zone of its opposition, pushing cubes of both colors well into the opposition’s protected zone. The resulting mess made it difficult for the victims to extricate themselves, and I thought such a crash would have resulted in a DQ but it wasn’t. Maybe refs were trying to be forgiving this early in the season(?), but I wanted to ask - is such a crash an acceptable form of behavior during autonomous? Is crashing like that normally a DQ-able offense? I would have thought it violated a ton of rules, but maybe such an action in autonomous is forgiven???
SG13 was not violated in the description of events. If the robot went into the other teams colored tile violating SG9 then they should have been DQ, but this is not described. Robot “crashing” is ok as long as the entanglement rule is not violated and robot or field damage rule is not violated. There is also pinning rule, but crashing is only frowned upon not directly a rule violation. So by your description no rules where violated.
You are not the only one
Yes, the refs granted the autonomous bonus to the victims and stated it was for the violation. But I was worried this crashing “technique” might be considered legal, worried because it appears so disruptive and potentially damaging. I don’t recall seeing that happen any more that day, so perhaps it was a genuine mistake - or perhaps the refs warned the violators that it had better not be used again in other matches. I’m guessing the team that did it, didn’t do it on purpose.
If they were relying on sensor outputs to stop them, they should have considered using watchdog timers as a crash-preventative backup.
Sorry if the thread’s title seemed a bit misleading. To the victims, I presume the “burn” was more psychological than physical.
The robot nearly entering the protected area wasn’t the only problem, the bigger problem was
which (I’m fairly sure) would be considered indirect contact per SG9.
Personally were I refing I’d award the autonomous to the other side and then warn the team that they should fix the autonomous, and should they keep doing it
Everything in autonomous is intentional! The robot is programmed and when it runs that program it is doing exactly as was intended or, at least , exactly as could be expected from those commands within the capacity of the bot as built.
I’m going to put this thread here: https://vexforum.com/t/answered-autonomous-interaction/27571/1
The situation is slightly different in the question to Karthik, but the jest of it is similar. The main difference is that the robots never became entangled, and it was only one alliance’s cubes.
Okay, this is beginning to worry me somewhat. It’s starting to look like a legal strategy in autonomous is to have a super-fast pushbot crash cubes into the protective zone and botch up everyone’s autonomous, not to mention muck up any chances they might have of building the skyrise in the midst of the resulting wreckage. Is this really what Karthik and company wants to have possible? Do they really want to allow the autonomous to become a kind of smash-up derby/destruction contest? If there isn’t something to specify this is not allowable, then what’s to stop that from become theee game-changing strategy? :(:eek:
I agree. The refs (I was at that competition, and on the alliance, but it wasn’t my robot, and it was an accident) ruled after a heated debate with our club sponsor, ruled that it was legal, even though it was match affecting. The auton did decide the match. There’s nothing in the rulebook right now to stop people from running across the field and negating the bonus.
No, the main difference is the robot never broke any rules in that case. There are no rules about contacting game objects on the opponent’s starting tiles (provided you somehow do it without breaking the perimeter of the tile) except for ones that are on the Skyrise. Therefore bumping a robot which is not fully on the tile is entirely legal because they are not protected by being fully on it, and if you happen to make a floor goal point get nullified good for you.
However, in the case in this thread they are indirectly
with the game objects they pushed into the protected area, which is definitely illegal.
That’s the difference. I think. I’m not Karthik though so, you know, not an official ruling.
Forgive me, but I’m beginning to suffer cognitive overload on this topic.
What I’m hearing is that there is no rule against autonomous activity cramming opposing colored cubes and/or opposing colored robots back into the opponent’s protective zone.
For example, does that mean if a blue team is building the skyrise in autonomous but then a red team shoves a blue team’s other robot or blue cube into the blue team’s skyrise builder, that’s perfectly legal because the red team did it in autonomous?
The rules as written actually say its legal always to ram a number of cubes and let them fall where they fall. The rules are only broken when a cube is in the opponents starting tiles and your robot touches that cube. If force is applied to a cube and the cube falls/rolls into the opponents way it is legal.
Part of autonomous is dealing with the other robots autonomous.
But this seems to violate the sense of teams not being allowed to interfere with a skyrise construction in any way.
So does this mean the ultimate strategy against a skyrise builder is to bury them in their own cubes during autonomous? totally trash their protective zone in autonomous? You know that’s going to happen if it’s not against the rules. Pushbot vs. Skyrise builder - just trash the whole neighborhood before the rules kick in??? Am I the only one who thinks that’s a depressing scenario.
It is illegal to place cubes on robots that are touching a protected tile ever.
The ramming of the pyramid is legal though. The cubes can be pushed up until they are touching the opponent’s tiles.
I actually ran into this problem trying to make an autonomous. I have an 8 motor 1:2 drive so if I hit the pyramid with some speed it propels a ton of cubes across the field pretty uncontrollably. I avoided using an auton like that because I was afraid of being penalized for putting cubes in their zone and interfering with the opponents skyrise. I don’t think it should be legal since it is an intentional action that interferes with the skyrise building.
Technicalities aside…I just want to remind everyone that this is meant to be an OFFENSIVE game this year! (to a much greater extent than other years)
I know it is important to get all the “what if’s” answered as well, but just wanted to throw that out as a reminder.
Basically, score your own points! Don’t mess with any opponent robot when near or on their protected tiles or building a skyrise. If that logic is followed it seems that it is clearly not ok to trash the heck out of an opponents corner by dumping tons of cubes there.
I’m just placing this link here to remind me to check on Karthik’s answer to this:
As far as I know, as long as they did not cross the plain of the other teams colored tiles, it should be completely legal in autonomous.
From the description this seems like a clear-cut <SG9> violation (clause f and possibly clause c) to me. If it affected the outcome of the match, it should have resulted in a disqualification. If it did not affect the outcome of the match but did affect the outcome of the autonomous bonus, it should result in the autonomous bonus being awarded to the fouled team as per <SG12> and a warning should have been given. If neither condition was met there should have been a warning.
FullMetalMentor, I understand your fears but I don’t think you need to be worried. Strategies like this are illegal under <SG9>. It’s possible that referees at your event were too lenient. On the other hand, a team that does something illegal won’t necessarily be disqualified. If they lose they will not be disqualified. If they win by a large amount and the referee judges that the win wasn’t a result of the illegal action, then they will also not be disqualified. If the rules are being enforced properly, then teams might be able to win despite using this strategy but they won’t be able to win because of it.
Yes, <SG9> applies during autonomous. The only rule that doesn’t apply during autonomous is the pinning rule, <SG3>.
No, you are definitly not the only one.
To be honest, that’s the reason I clicked “#$%^&”
These kinds of tactics is equivocal.
Whether or not, it’s would get a DQ, I think it’s very much likely depending on how much the victim team protest and the mood of the referee:eek: