SG6 - New ruling concerns. Opinions?

So, some forum members have been trying to get clarification on what is legal or not regarding SG6A.

See this official ruling:
https://vexforum.com/t/competition-port/16864/1

It basically sounds like Karthik is saying that you cannot interact with an opposing robot at all if you are reaching over the fence even a millimeter. So if you are trying to prevent the opponent from dumping a huge load of stars you CANNOT cross the plane of the fence to perform that bit of defense, you simply have to allow them to dump all the stars. That seems absurd to me. This basically will make the game completely defense free. There will be no battling at the fence for dominance like there was during Sack Attack over the troughs.

The new ruling also makes wall bots even more useless than they could have been. Up until now there was at least a chance someone could make a wall bot of some sort. Now it’s pointless.

What are others thoughts and interpretations of this new ruling? I am really really really disappointed. This will be two years in a row of essentially zero robot interaction between alliances, which is just boring.

Summary: SG6A says “contact is expected” but Karthik’s new ruling (linked above) basically rules out any practical use of contact thereby essentially nullifying “contact is expected”

You can still make a wallbot on your side or simply extending the plane of the fence. I personally don’t like the idea of wall bots, however it is still possible. You can make it right against the fence on your side, or somehow just above the actual fence. This can still block your opponents if you engineer it properly.

It’s weird though and this is going to be something the GDC will have to sort out. If you build a wall and the other alliance touches you while trying to dump, they would be breaking the rule since they are going onto your side and touching you. But then again scoring is the object of the game and you would be forcing them to break the rule to score…

When I asked the original Q&A, I expected a simple “no”. I had no idea this would happen.

Yea, It seems that Karthik opened up a can of worms now…

At least (and I know I’m going to jinx it, I’m sorry), it’s not as bad as the Expansion Zone fiasco last year.

It seems like the GDC is trying to remove defense from gameplay, starting with NbN. Maybe the potential of VCAT’s wallbot in Skyrise scared them? I don’t know, but I do know I like defense.

Me too. Defense is half the fun.

Basketball without defense is what the Warriors did last night in Game 6. No fun.

Yea, Im also afraid that there is going to be no more defense games. One of the reasons that I think this is true is becuase the gdc is worried that too many people with limited funding are going to break parts since over all, the Vex design system was not made to withstand lots of contact with other robots. However, I do miss the defensive aspects of the older games. Im guessing that another situation is going to arise out of this just like with the prevention of lifting and going on an opponent’s lift in NBN that caused a large argument between the gdc and some forum membes. Probably another ruleing is going to be made on it with something about “intent to stop the opposing robot from moving from their present position on the field” instead of just “restrict movement” which could be interpreted widely. @4149G game 7 go cavs! I personally thought game 6 was fun lol

@infinity_dragon More of a Warriors fan myself, but gotta give respect where respect is due. Cavs played a heck of a game 6.

I think it would be more related to 127C (TU) if anything because the GDC couldn’t have known what VCAT was doing since they plan a year in advance

Bolded the important part.

<G12> Strategies aimed solely at the destruction, damage, tipping over, or Entanglement of Robots
are not part of the ethos of the VEX Robotics Competition and are not allowed. However, VEX
Starstruck is an interactive game. Some incidental tipping, Entanglement, and damage may occur as
a part of normal game play. If the tipping, Entanglement, or damage is ruled to be intentional or
egregious, the offending team may be disqualified from that Match. Repeated offenses could result in
a team being Disqualified from the remainder of the competition.
VEX Robotics Competition Starstruck is intended to be an offensive game. Teams that partake in
solely defensive strategies will undergo extra scrutiny in regard to <G12>. 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

Also, you can’t exactly “battle it out” over the fence, because of a few reasons:

Your CoG will be very high, so if anyone tries to “fight it out” without anti tipping pegs, someone will fall over, which could be egregious and thus a violation of G12, getting you a DQ

You can’t exactly prevent the opponent from scoring by just fighting them. It’s not Clean Sweep where most dumpers were side rollers, which couldn’t dump if something was in front of them. The stars are also very big and will be hard to block by a bot that isn’t a pure wall bot.

First, it gets pretty boring when no one even tries to play defense. Even in Nbn we didn’t just let the robot get to their starting area for the easy, non contested lift.

Second, every robot will have an anti tip mechanism of some sort if they are dumping stars over the fence, it’s a given.

Third, if you have a large plate on your dumper it can act as sort of a blocker (on your own side because of the new ruling) the stars aren’t too big to block

I suggest you go back and watch some Sack Attack games. Your analysis doesn’t hold up.

Let me get this back on track to what I feel is really important,

Let’s ignore wallbots. What about interaction between robots at the fence. If I understand the new ruling correctly, there can be NO interaction at the fence now because if you go over your side of the fence even a tiny bit and you are in the way of an opposing robot trying to dump you are now “restricting their movement” by definition.

So literally zero defense/blocking can occur. All you can do is sit on your side of the fence and perhaps catch the stars as they drop them.

If you get into a pushing battle over the fence, with the point of initial contact somewhere directly over the fence, and your robot pushes them away from the fence enough that the point of contact is now on their side, will that violate the new interpretation?

I believe so, since you are on their side and are impeading their movement

That’s what I thought. That means losing a pushing battle is strategically superior to winning one.

Exactly. These are the problems I forsee with this new ruling. It is full of issues, all of which would be very difficult to consistently enforce for refs.

If you’re looking for the beginning of defense in VEX, or the peak of it, it probably wouldn’t be that. Most notable in my opinion would be 2W from Gateway. 127C from Toss Up (which I was not a part of) was also very effective.

I am concerned with the seemingly arbitrary calls that will arise. I believe Karthik does not intend to prevent interaction over the fence, but it seems that the update to the rule would create a rule violation in a situation where one robot is dumping, and of course hanging slightly over the fence, but an opposing team tries to lift and is “restricted” by the robot dumping above them. Overall, it seems like there is a very fine and subjective line around interactions over the fence.

I know that I would generally try to avoid any interactions that could possibly be construed as illegal on my end, but if I were to follow that precept for this season, I wouldn’t be able to dump over the fence.