OffensePlayTest checking that there is Never Excessive Dribbling

[adrianchan787]

Description

• Added a validation status check in offense play test that checks if the friendly team has excessively dribbled
• Changed the validation status check (NeverExcessivelyDribbles and EventuallyStartsExcessiveDribbles) to look at the dribble_displacement field in World instead of the previous "brute force" method; this (theoretically) aligns more with the AutoRef's implementation of excessive dribbling
• Added a testing file for the validation status check

Testing Done

- Reran all pytests that used NeverExcessivelyDribbles; some of them were flaky for unrelated reasons e.g. pass_defender_test had a robot enter region validation error first time around
- Created a testing file that tests never excessively and eventually starts dribbling, using the dribble_tactic. (since the main dribbling done in offense_play_test is in dribble_tactic). These tests typically pass but are also flaky; I'll expand more in the comments at the end.

Resolved Issues

Resolves #3452

Length Justification and Key Files to Review

Review Checklist

It is the reviewers responsibility to also make sure every item here has been covered

• [x ] Function & Class comments: All function definitions (usually in the .h file) should have a javadoc style comment at the start of them. For examples, see the functions defined in thunderbots/software/geom. Similarly, all classes should have an associated Javadoc comment explaining the purpose of the class.
• [ x] Remove all commented out code
• [ x] Remove extra print statements: for example, those just used for testing
• [ x] Resolve all TODO's: All TODO (or similar) statements should either be completed or associated with a github issue

Additional Comments

• Not really an addition and more of a few observations and questions. Wanted to still make this PR since I feel like it's not directly related to my current ticket (and also because I've dragged this on for too long lol).

• Was looking at how the Autoref implemented dribble distance, and from what I understood it seems to compare initial position of the robot to the final position of the ball (see the code snippet below, taken from https://github.com/TIGERs-Mannheim/AutoReferee/tree/53063578e38ac4818849df3196b32a856a5fa41d). If I'm mistaken, please tell me and I'll edit the comments in my branch lol

• However, because they use robot to ball and not e.g. ball to ball, the dribble displacement field is extremely inconsistent. For example, in my tests, if you start the robot in the same location as the ball, you get a different dribble displacement than if you started the robot a meter way. (which I think makes sense? since the orientation with which you start dribbling will probably be different).
• Similarly, that's why the maximum distance between the initial point location of the ball and its location after dribbling is greater than 1 m. From tests I got up to 1.03 m. However, this maximum limit was pretty flaky for me, and fluctuated between 1.03 and 1.01 m. (which is why there's a decent chance my code won't pass my own tests).
• So I was wondering if this is an issue? On one hand, (I think?) if this mirrors the Autoref's behaviour, it doesn't matter how inconsistent it is. On the other, I know William said the 1 meter max dribbling was a pretty strict limit, so would it be worthwhile to be conservative and use like 0.98 max distance in testing and tactics?

Sorry if that was a bit unclear, please let me know if it was. Thanks!

[adrianchan787]

(oops really sorry not sure if i was supposed to resolve the merge conflict)

[nycrat]

Added some comments, just some refactoring changes recommended but the new implementation of excessive_dribbing validation seems good and the test are thorough

[nycrat]

LGTM

[nycrat]

Hey @adrianchan787 could you pull from master so that the ci passes?

[adrianchan787]

Hey @adrianchan787 could you pull from master so that the ci passes?

really sorry that it took this long, should be good now

[adrianchan787]

Hey @adrianchan787 could you pull from master so that the ci passes?

really sorry that it took this long, should be good now

Wow I have messed this up horribly one sec (ok i am so incredibly sorry for this cursed git log)