Game Play - All Match Periods - Answers

[Billie Jean]

Official Answers to questions about Game Play can be found here.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: <GS3> Control/Possession Limits of Minerals - A Robot exiting the Crater accidentally sweeps some Minerals out of the Crater.

While exiting the Crater, a Robot Possesses two Minerals and it accidentally sweeps additional Minerals out, these Minerals roll happily to finally rest in the middle of the field. They are now easier to reach than Minerals in the Crater but the Robot clearly wasn't doing this intentionally.

Question 1: Do these Minerals count as Controlling?
Question 2: If yes: any guidance on when they are deemed no longer Controlled (e.g. once they stop moving or always considered in control)?

Answer 1: The action described violates rule <GS3> because the Robot Controls, via Possession plus Herding, more than two Minerals. Referees may excuse infrequent, unintended removal of a few Minerals from a Crater by a Robot. Removal of excess Minerals during each Robot exit from a Crater, or the removal of three of more Minerals above the allowed maximum for a single occurrence of Robot egress will likely be Penalized for violating rule <GS3>.
Answer 2: The Herding action ends when the Minerals stop moving.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: Incidental Robot contact with the Lander while Latched.

In the rules regarding Latched, it talks about incidental contact with the Lander. Many Robots are being designed with the Robot weight resting against a Lander side panel, With discussion, there is concern that this is not incidental contact.

Question 1: Is a Robot allowed to lean/rest against the vertical outward facing surface of a Lander side panel while the Robot is Completely Supported by the Lander Support Bracket?

Question 2: Some designs by the teams use wheels to help guide the Robot up and down the Lander, is this considered incidental contact and thus legal?

Question 3: Is a Robot that is Completely Supported by the Lander Support Bracket with virtually no contact with the Lander side panel considered to be legally Latched?

Answer 1: Yes
Answer 2: Yes
Answer 3: Yes

[Air Jordan]

Subject: What is the Crater boundary for the purpose of determining Inside?

Question: What defines the vertical plane for Parking In or Completely In the Crater?

Answer: The outside edge of the Crater Rim.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: <G16> Robots Grasping Game Elements - Robot resting on the Lander.

Question: If part of the Robot is resting on a Game Element, such as a part of the Lander that isn't the Lander Support Bracket, but would be removable without use of significant force (ie: just resting on the top of the Lander), does that violate <G16>?

Answer: No

[Air Jordan]

Subject: <GS10> Robot Scoring while in Crater and <GS11> Obstructing Travel Between Lander and Crater

Question: Can a Robot extend into the Landing Zone from the Crater, to be protected under the scoring clause of GS6, as it has broken the vertical boundary of the Lander Zone, while having the infinite number of minerals due to the ruling in GS3?

Answer: The action describes violates rule <GS11>. If the Robot attempts to Score, it violates rule <GS10>.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: <GS3> Control/Possession Limits of Minerals

Question 1: Given there are relaxed limits to Controlling Minerals in the Crater, would it be allowed to Control the majority of the Minerals indefinitely?
Question 2: If not, could you give guidance on what the limit is (quantity restriction? Time restriction? )

Answer 1: No. Per rule <GS3>, Herding or directing multiple Minerals beyond the allotted maximum to gain a strategic advantage (i.e., Scoring, accessibility, defense) is not allowed.
Answer 2: Referees will issue a warning to the Drive Team after it is clear that they are no longer attempting to stop Controlling/Possessing excess Minerals. Following the warning, the Drive Team has 5 seconds to comply with rule <GS3> constraints before Penalties are assessed.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: Questions about Latched, Landing, and Deployed

Game Manual Part 2 definition of latched and section 1.5.1.1 include the following: A Robot is considered Latched when it is Completely Supported by the Lander Support Bracket on the Lander and is not in contact with any other Game Element, Robot, or the Playing Field Floor. Incidental contact with Scoring Elements, the Lander sides or legs is allowed.

Question 1: Can a definition of incidental, as it relates to this scenario, be provided?

Question 2: What criteria will the Referees use to evaluate a legal latch release/landing?

Question 3: Will it be legal if: A robot is attached to the lander support bracket such that all of the vertical component of force resulting from weight of the robot is supported by the bracket, but the robot hangs at a non-vertical angle, thereby applying a horizontal force against the lander side.

Answer 1: A definition of incidental in this context is contact with the Lander that is accompanying but not a major part of being Latched. For example, a) a Robot resting against the Lander's outward vertical side panel is allowed; b) Robot weight supported by the top of the Lander is not allowed.

Answer 2: The criteria for Landing is clearly described in section 1.5.2 of the Game Manual Part 2.

Answer 3: Yes

[Air Jordan]

Subject: Controlling Minerals while the Robot is In a Crater

Question 1: Can a robot intentionally cause minerals to roll towards the depot from inside the crater, as long as it is not in contact with more than 2 minerals that have cleared the crater boundary?
Question 2: Can a robot launch minerals into the lander if it has components in both the crater and the lander area simultaneously.
Question 3: Does control of a mineral end when there is no longer contact with the robot?
Question 4: Can a robot impel minerals towards the crater boundary with the intent of removing the minerals from the crater?

Answer 1: No, per rule <GS10>.
Answer 2: No, per rule <GS10>.
Answer 3: No
Answer 4: No

[Air Jordan]

Subject: Scoring Game Elements during multiple Match Periods

Question: Does a Mineral scored during one period score again during the next period - for example, if a Mineral is scored during Autonomous, would the Alliance receive additional points for that same Mineral during the Driver-Controlled Period?

Answer: No

[Air Jordan]

Subject: Robot Entanglement with a Playing Field Element

Since the ring of the release pin for the mineral release ramps in the lander are exposed, a robot might get entangled.

Question: If such a scenario occurs, would that be a field fault, penalty, match and scoring continues?

Answer: Match play will continue. The Mineral release pin is a feature of the Lander. Robots should be designed and operated to avoid entanglement with this device.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: <GS11> Obstructing Travel Between Lander and Crater

Question 1: If a robot has expanded to 36" wide and wants to drive between the crater and the lander, does a robot have to move to get out of its way since there is no room for the large robot?

Question 2: If there is room for an 18"x18"x18" robot to go past the lander while you are in the area between the lander and the crater, but they want to go exactly where you are, are you obstructing another robot's path of travel?

Question 3: In years past if there was another path they could take to get to objects then it was not considered blocking. What is the difference between blocking and obstructing?

Answer 1: No. The intent of rule <GS11> is to allow unobstructed travel by Robots sized no larger than an 18 inch cube.
Answer 2: No
Answer 3: Obstructing in the context of rule <GS11> is a Robot preventing an open path of travel for another Robot in the Area between the Lander and Crater. The open path does not have to be the Robot's preferred path through this protected Area. Blocking is defined in section 1.4 of the Game Manual Part 2.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: Placing Minerals in the Depot or Lander

Question: Is sliding the Minerals out of an intake by either reversing the intake, dumping via gravity, using a servo to push from the intake into the depot or lander considered placing?

Answer: Yes

[Air Jordan]

Subject: <GS5> Blocking Access to both of an Alliance's sides of the Lander and <GS6> Interfering with Scoring at the Lander

If a robot parks under the lander in the last seconds of the End Game, it may be able to prevent both opposing robots from accessing their lander brackets and thus latching. The rules appear to say that this action would result in a 40 point Major Penalty. But as this action would prevent 100 points scored by the opposing robots, it would appear that this strategy could be numerically worthwhile.

Question: Are there other penalties that should be called in such a scenario that would cost the offender more than the 100 points gained and thus make this action numerically not worthwhile?

Answer: The action described in the scenario should be Penalized for violating both <GS5> and <GS6> for each opposing Alliance Robot that attempts to access the Lander to Score. The Penalty for obstructing two opposing Alliance Robots in this manner is 160 points plus additional Minor Penalties every five seconds as described in the two rules. Repeated violations of this type are likely to be considered intentional rule violations and additionally Penalized as egregious behavior.

[Air Jordan]

Subject: <GS6> Interfering with Scoring at the Lander - Robot running into the Lander

Question: We have found that the lander has a lot of side to side movement. If a robot is running into the lander and causing it to sway back and forth, will this be considered interference with latching and/or scoring minerals?

Answer: Robot interaction with the Lander while it is attempting to Score is likely to cause some Lander motion. This motion is expected and teams should design and operate their Robot accordingly. A Robot that is "running into the Lander" without an intent to Score while an opposing Alliance Robot is attempting to Score a Lander achievement will probably be viewed by Referees as a violation of rule <GS6>.