Vex Over Under Rules Discussion

[Parde9273]

Hello, i have a question.
In the secction of VEX U, they dont mention abaout the limite of motor.
what is the limiting about that for vex U?

PD.sorry about my grammar

[kmmohn]

@Parde9273

they dont mention abaout the limite of motor.

No limit on motors is stated; therefore, there is no limits on the number of motors (other than what you can plug into a controller, of course.

[meng]

@vexreally

If my numerous years of VEX has taught me anything, it’s that being able to think outside of the box can have some seriously beneficial impacts when you eventually go into the real world of problem solving in the workplace.

So don’t try and harp on people finding cool and unique solutions to things, and instead imbrace it and think how it can improve your thinking process!

Hope you are not referring to me regarding harping on people on finding cool and unique solutions.

I have long went over to the Dark side. Lol…

@vexreally

But the thing that some teams don’t realize is that being able to bend the rules and look beyond the distinct writing on the page can allow you to really expand your thinking process and enable you to find unique (and sometimes really effective) solutions for a lot of problems.

I am in total agreement with what you have said.
In fact, @bobbybarton3 emailed me to apologise about asking the question about putting balls on the goal.

I told him no worries and nothing to apologise about. And I will leave it to my students to figure something out (which they have always been able to do so)

[Fidget]

There’s no specific rule against stealing from the MLZ of the opposing alliance, so it would be legal.
My personal rationalization is that it’s the alliance’s triballs to do with what they please. Just like in Spin Up last year, if the alliance dropped discs onto the field, they were free to steal and use. The robot could also sit in front of the match loads and the alliance could give them discs if they wanted to (idiot move, but still legal). The same logic applies to the triballs this year, even if it feels different.

[Fidget]

The only thing stated in the rules is that you cant go into your OPPONENT’S goal, so it would be legal to descore your own goal, but my guess it would take a lot of effort for a three point difference. So I doubt this will be happening a lot.

[RoboCatz]

Yes, I suggest you read the Q&A, as one asked a very similar question to yours.

[Asinkid]

If your reading this don’t post gray area idea’s ( ideas that seem illegal but aren’t stated to be illegal in the game manual). the last time there was a post about a gray area idea vex updated the manual and made it illegal.

[Raehal_Mark]

I wanted to ask for clarification on SG2 the 36 inch rule expansion limit and how the ruling on size works . Is it similar to tipping point in this regard .

From my current understanding is the robot can not exceed 36 inch . So for example if your robot is at 20 inches from the front to the back to the drive train . That in order to be in compliance with the wings that are robots like 229V aces you would need to make sure that the back of the robot and the edge of the wings are in compliance with the 36 inch rule .

[EcstaticPilot]

@Raehal_Mark

20 inches

Firstly, 20 inches is outside of the starting size limit

From the current game manual, the expansion limit is that no horizontal dimension exceeds 36". They are similar, but the over under expansion limit does not rotate with the robot. You are correct in that you would need to make the distance from the wings to the back of the robot does not exceed 36".

[sazrocks]

Hopefully this post helps:

Clarification on <SG2>

Also tagging @kmmohn. That’s not what the rule says. Let’s take a look at the rule again: Once the Match begins, Robots may expand, but no horizontal dimension can exceed 36” (914.4 mm) at any point during the Match. There is no mention of a circle in this definition, because the expansion limit is not (necessarily) a circle. For example, let’s think of a simple shape, say a triangle with sides of length 36", that does not violate this rule but would not fit into a 36" diameter circle. Her…

[Raehal_Mark]

Question on this rule here

We had an Unoffical Scrimmage for a few middle schools so that they could narrow down teams 15 to between 6-8
We were helping run the scrimmage and this rule came up . There was this discussion over Solo Awp was brought up in this post.
Here is what happened during autonomous . Blue alliance shoot a triball at their goal into the opposite side of the Feild . We didn’t DQ the team however should that have been a disqualification in a match .

Which according the head rule of SG9 it should have been a disqualification for the section in the rule stating “Robots May not contact field tiles Triballs or Field Elements in the Opposite Offensive from which the field began”. However the sub note defines that it can touch the opposite side of the field where red alliance begins the match if moved/launched by the robot into the other side of the field in which the red robots reside.

The ruling was made not to DQ them in a vote 3-1 so the team was not DQ and so auton was a tie .

Should the team have been DQ because of the triball being launched into the offensive zone meaning that red would have taken auton.

[Mentor_355U]

While I can’t find a conclusive Q&A or citation in the rule, it was generally understood at MOA that robots attempting a “self-AWP” by shooting triballs from their non-Offensive Zone into their goal is acceptable. As is/was robots in auton in the non-offensive zone trying to push triballs across the barrier and into the Offensive Zone.

There are caveats, such as attempting to use triballs to disrupt an alliance from achieving the AWP by shooting triballs into the opposing Alliance’s Match Load Zone on the non-offensive side.

Personally, I think this comes down to common sense. Triballs are scored by contacting the offensive zone. If the non-offensive robot is not allowed to manipulate triballs in their neutral zone, autons will have a high likelihood of ending in ties most of the time.

[Mentor_355U]

Further, in the game release video (which, admittedly does not have the same level of “force” as the Rules or Q&A), Grant mentions that self-AWP will be “impossible” (cough cough) not because it is illegal, but because it is physically difficult to launch the triball from across the court and into the goal.

Again, this seems to go back to common sense. The only possible “legal” points in Auton would be:

1. Getting Offensive Zone Green Triballs into the Goal.
2. Getting Offensive Zone Match Load Triball into Goal or out of MLZ and into a “scored” state
3. Getting the Offensive robot’s PreLoad into Goal or in a “scored” state
4. Getting the Non-Offensive Zone robot’s Preload into the opponent’s goal or a “scored” state in the opponent’s Offensive Zone.

Attempting the AWP by removing the non-Offensive Zone Match Load from the MLZ would then not be allowed to be pushed/launched to your Offensive Zone, thereby giving your opponent 2 points (as it would now ONLY be allowed to contact the opponent’s Offensive Zone) would seem ridiculous.