The most recent update to the game manual.
I presume this rule is in place so that teams don’t remove stacks out of other team’s robots.
However, would a single straight c-channel knocking over a stack that is unprotected in a robot be grasping, hooking or attaching?
As per G12c:
“A Team is responsible for the actions of its Robot at all times, including the Autonomous Period.
This applies both to Teams that are driving recklessly or potentially causing damage, and to
Teams that drive around with a small wheel base. A Team should design its Robot such that it is
not easily tipped over or damaged by minor contact.”
As the stack is an “extension of that robot” with the minor contact of a c-channel touching the stack causing it to topple (damaging it), would the team knocking the stack over be at fault, or should it be up to teams to make more of an effort to protect their robots to prevent others from easily making the stack topple?
4 Likes
I think the intent of the rule is to prevent opposing teams from removing cubes that are possessed by another robot. Anything that would do this is a violation. So a C-channel that would accomplish that would be in violation. Notice the use of “e.g.” - that is “for example” and not intended to be an exhaustive list. So even though grasping, hooking, and attaching are listed as examples, there are other ways to knock cubes out of a robot and those would also be against the rule.
1 Like
Ah - that’s true missed that out. But yh, I do think the point of the rule is to stop any “stack stealing” from happening. Thanks for clarifying.
Well, would it be Entanglement to remove a mechanism from a robot if it came off quickly and easily? (That might be illegal under other rules, but would it count as Entanglement, too?)
What do you mean by “mechanism”, could you give an example?
A mechanism would include something like the part of the robot that holds the cubes.
A better example for my question might be unplugging another robot’s battery cable, or breaking chain, although these and removing a mechanism would have a much worse effect than just removing cubes from a stack.
I’m sure unplugging a battery cable would count as Entanglement, and so would anything else that involved hooking onto part of the robot or a cube.
And causing a mechanism or stack of cubes to fall off by bumping into the robot wouldn’t be Entanglement.
Edit: And I agree with @Gear_Geeks that it sounds like they don’t want people removing cubes from other people’s robots (except perhaps by bumping into them), even if it didn’t count as Entanglement. (Although this would technically be legal as long as it wasn’t Entanglement and didn’t violate any other rules.)
And causing a mechanism to fall off would count as damaging the robot (whether accidental or intentional), no matter how it was done.
1 Like
People that want to do that should join battlebots.
5 Likes