Nope
The area denial is really only when we have 3 MGs and park ourselves in front of the human player loading station, thus further restricting the capacity for the opposing alliance to score. This could also create a situation wherein it may be difficult to access the zones, depending on the robot’s orientation, and final size expansion. SG7 states that area denial/“blocking access to portions of the field” is illegal for 2 robots to do, not just one. So this could work.
Do you mean MGs or cones? We do intend on hoarding MGs, not cones. However, grabbing one of the far MGs is going to be difficult without at least grabbing one cone.
On the subject of the opposing alliance taking MGs into a scoring zone then retrieving them for scoring later, it is a double edged sword. If they put the MGs into the 5 point zone as a form of safety, I believe that our alliance can go in and take them, only if we do not touch the starting bar (SG10). However, if the opposing alliance attempts to put MGs into the 10 point zone, it may be difficult to retrieve the MGs if the robots retrieving them have a similar intake to 8059Z, being a straight linear intake, rather than a chain bar such as the RI3D “RIPPER” robot. Plus, there can be an active defense robot like 8059A or 8059J that can block the robot from coming out of the corner of the field, as long as it is not entrapping them. It can also slow them down in terms of total cone scoring, as they can spend time trying to take the MGs out of the 10pt zone. Additionally, the two closet opposing MGs are most likely going to be taken by us, as they are the primary targets in auto.
Let’s think about this from our perspective in terms auto:
We really need 3 MGs in order to make this effective. (4 is almost game over, 2 depends on your alliance partner alot, and 1 or 0 is a guaranteed loss. 3 MGs for most qual matches will work because I expect our partners to get all 4 MGs into the zones, and defend the rest of the match. If we grab 3 they are basically behind by 35 points. [30 for the MGs in the 10pt zone, assuming they put the 4th in the 20pt zone. 5 for the bonus high stack for the 10pt zone.])
Thus, we have 5 autos in the works (ask @CHINESEISASIAN for questions). 1 and 2: Grab the 2 nearest opposing MGs, and then attempt to grab the 3rd farthest one, one auto for each side. 3 and 4: Instead of grabbing the 2 nearest MGs, we go for the furthest MG on one side, then swing back around to get the 2 nearest opposing MGs. One for each side. 5: perform a 1 or 2 auto, but as we grab the 2nd MG, we swing around and grab the MG on the opposite side, basically a “fake out” auto.
1 and 2 will be our default autos. 3 and 4 will be alternatives if they try to rush their nearest MGs for security. 5 is for if one robot tries a near MG rush and the other does not, basically trolling them. ** I HIGHLY DOUBT that they will grab a far MG in auto, as our far MGs are in the way, and there is a large amount of cones in the way. ** Thus, referring to your quote, these two I would not worry about in auto, as they are safe, IMO, thus the 3 and 4 autos. Teleop might be a different story, but it will be close when we try to get the two near opposing MGs, if not in auto. Basically a push battle for them, and considering we have 8 High Torque drive motors, and they will probably have 4 or at most 6, and probably not High Torque, as those robots that will try to steal them will probably have the foresight of us stealing them, and will probably have good stacking abilities, and an OK drive, we will have those MGs in our robot one way or another.
Plus, we will have a containment system consisting of a vertical slide door, which will contain 2 MGs and the 3rd will be in our lexan sliding wall things. . Look at 195A on the Red Alliance.
And that is how we plan on combating a MG rush to place them in a safe zone.