View Full Version : Shooter or Dumper?
nssheepster
31-01-2012, 19:03
My team is currently deciding between whether we want to "shoot" the balls, or go up close and "dump" the balls, into the hoops. Due to the rules, a dumper could only hit the second hoop, unless the appendage stuff changes. But shooters are clearly less accurate. So, I'm asking CD's opinion. What do you guys think? (See poll at top of page.)
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100788&page=2
Another poll of mine, if you're interested.
But shooters are clearly less accurate.
Yes, a shooter will miss shots. That's better than not being able to take any because a defender parks in your way or jostles you hard. And there are going to be some very accurate shooters.
Your best option is to make a shooter that has the option of dumping. Shooting is going to be harder, it will be a lot easier to add a dumping option later than it will be to add a shooter.
nssheepster
31-01-2012, 20:10
Yes, a shooter will miss shots. That's better than not being able to take any because a defender parks in your way or jostles you hard. And there are going to be some very accurate shooters.
Personally, I agree, but my team still has some dissent, even though a shooter is clearly the majority vote.
Personally, I agree, but my team still has some dissent, even though a shooter is clearly the majority vote.
You guys need to decide ASAP. This is week four and if you haven't decided yet you are at least a week behind.
I would suggest to do whichever you can get done quickly.
Billfred
31-01-2012, 20:17
Agree with IndySam. You have 21 days until it has to be in the bag. Whatever your strategy (and there are several not listed here, mind you--including some that may be better moves at this stage of the game), you need to settle on it ASAP. Clock's a-ticking.
josephburns2487
31-01-2012, 20:18
The team I am mentoring is doing a shooter and I agree for this year’s game that it is a better idea. I think that it is just a better idea simply for the fact that you are protected when you shoot from the key, if you were not protected in the key this would be a whole different conversation in my opinion. and like said above it is getting a little late to be changing your mind on major design components.
Personally, I agree, but my team still has some dissent, even though a shooter is clearly the majority vote.
You take an official vote, you make your choice. After that vote, anybody who doesn't like it needs to shut up and help the project or go elsewhere.
Why choose when you can do both? Well...we are hoping to be able to do both...as in really hoping all of this stuff works when it is put together. :-)
Tetraman
31-01-2012, 21:48
You guys need to decide ASAP. This is week four and if you haven't decided yet you are at least a week behind.
I would suggest to do whichever you can get done quickly.
We have decided and have been working on it since the first week. There were some thoughts to the other way of doing things that a few students still wished to pursue and have the rest of the team consider, that's all.
Andrew Lawrence
31-01-2012, 21:53
It depends on your robot and strategies.
For us, we plan on doing both. We will have a shooter that can shoot far, but our main offensive strategy is to be a fast collector and dump our balls into the middle hoop really fast, and then get more balls. Just slam up against the fender, fire away, and then get away really quickly to gather more balls.
In a test run of this, we successfully out-maneuvered the defending robot and were able to rack up points pretty quickly.
We shoot far if we're feeding from the other side of the field, or in autonomous.
pfreivald
31-01-2012, 21:57
We are building a shooter that can be easily retrofitted to a dunker if the shooting challenge doesn't work out (consistency is difficult; we're not yet sure how difficult -- it's quite the challenge to shoot balls at the correct speed and angle, much less in the right direction, and this problem is daunting on both the programming and the mechanical side.)
Walter Deitzler
31-01-2012, 22:41
We have not decided a style of shooter, but the way we are going right now it looks like we will be able to succesfully dump and shoot balls. I would have to agree with all of the people before me that said that you should be able to do both effectivly.
We have a robot rite now inthe middle of shooter and dumper our shooter is within a day or to from being completed and our dumper will be functiion by the middle of the next week.We decided to throw it on in case their no defenders.See ya at CHeaspeake regional:eek: :yikes:
MichaelBick
31-01-2012, 23:32
I personally consider shooting in the top basket while touching the fender to be dumping, If that is the case, then I believe dumping is the far better strategy.
DampRobot
01-02-2012, 00:54
Our team is going with a shooter. It is much more risky than a dumper, but with a practice robot and some excellent programmers, I hope we can pull it off. I would recommend that any team that has yet to decide should concentrate on having a consistent dumper rather than a shooter that might never work.
nssheepster
01-02-2012, 07:26
Can you really do that? I didn't think you could touch the fender. I thought it was a foul.
LinuxArchitect
01-02-2012, 07:59
Can you really do that? I didn't think you could touch the fender. I thought it was a foul.
Not sure which message you are commenting on. But the rule [G10] is that you can't sit on or push off of (or "react against") the top of the fender.
You can touch the sides of the fender.
wilhitern1
01-02-2012, 12:45
Can you really do that? I didn't think you could touch the fender. I thought it was a foul.
CHeck the rules. Find one that concerns you. And ask back here.
As I have been learning lately, if someone can't quote you a rule number, ignore the heck out of them. If they can, don't believe them till you look it up.
Voting is dangerous. Votes mean an option is chosen because it is popular, not because it is right. Votes are intrinsically subjective. Votes generate divisiveness and hard feelings. This is an engineering challenge. If one system can be shown to be superior to the other, given your team's constraints, then it is the better system for your team.
There will be excellent shooters. There will be excellent dumpers. There will be dozens of opportunities for "I told you so"s. It's up to your team to not fall into that trap - whatever you decide as a team, is the team's decision. Believe it or not, these moments are pivotal in a team's identity and cohesiveness. Attack the problem as a united front, and reap the success on the playing field.
wilhitern1
01-02-2012, 15:01
Voting is dangerous. Votes mean an option is chosen because it is popular, not because it is right. ... This is an engineering challenge. If one system can be shown to be superior to the other, given your team's constraints, then it is the better system for your team...
And who gets to decide this. Do we arm wrestle for it? Do the mentors decide? No mater what method you choose your objections in voting also apply...
There are lots of ways - decision making matrix, weighted values table, list pros v cons - there are a litany of ways to make a scientific decision based on process rather than emotion.
And who gets to decide this. Do we arm wrestle for it? Do the mentors decide? No mater what method you choose your objections in voting also apply...
Not really. Ever hear of a weighted objective matrix? If you haven't, I'll explain below.
Voting should only be used if two designs come out the same or extremely close to the same on a weighted objective matrix.
The way this sort of matrix works is the you have a number of requirements or goals, each with a weighting of how important it is. For example, rules compliance would get a 5 on a scale of 1-5, while "cool" gets maybe a 1 (if it's even considered). Each design is evaluated against the same set of requirements and given a score (on a scale of 1-5 or 1-10) on how well it meets that requirement. High score wins. Very close high scores get sent to a more detailed matrix for further evaluation, and the process repeats.
nssheepster
02-02-2012, 07:29
Not really. Ever hear of a weighted objective matrix? If you haven't, I'll explain below.
Voting should only be used if two designs come out the same or extremely close to the same on a weighted objective matrix.
The way this sort of matrix works is the you have a number of requirements or goals, each with a weighting of how important it is. For example, rules compliance would get a 5 on a scale of 1-5, while "cool" gets maybe a 1 (if it's even considered). Each design is evaluated against the same set of requirements and given a score (on a scale of 1-5 or 1-10) on how well it meets that requirement. High score wins. Very close high scores get sent to a more detailed matrix for further evaluation, and the process repeats.
We used a weighted decision matrix. But I am staring, currently, at 104 votes, 94 of which are for shooters. So they seem to be the really popular choice.
We used a weighted decision matrix. But I am staring, currently, at 104 votes, 94 of which are for shooters. So they seem to be the really popular choice.
Very few of the voters are on your team. Just because shooters are popular with the CD community, which tends to skew toward the more proficient, does not mean that's the best choice for your team this year.
Mecanum wheels tend to be rather popular among the larger FRC community, but I don't expect to see any on 2791's machine any time soon.
One important thing that Mr.Bill taught me was that every team needs one person with the authority to make the final decision when there is a dispute to avoid long delay's.
His two rules are:
Putaside - if your design or idea isn't you need to put it aside and move on.
Golden Rule - It's his gold so he rules!
JohnFogarty
02-02-2012, 09:40
Mecanum wheels tend to be rather popular among the larger FRC community,
We tested them on our off season.
They won't be on our robot any time soon either.
Andrew Lawrence
02-02-2012, 09:41
Very few of the voters are on your team. Just because shooters are popular with the CD community, which tends to skew toward the more proficient, does not mean that's the best choice for your team this year.
Mecanum wheels tend to be rather popular among the larger FRC community, but I don't expect to see any on 2791's machine any time soon.
Exactly. Another thing to consider is WHO is voting. The "wow factor" of a turreted shooter seems cooler, but how accurately will most teams be when shooting, especially farther away from the baskets? I'm not saying people won't be aiming well, but which is more accurate: A shooter from the key, or a dumper right in front of the basket?
pfreivald
02-02-2012, 09:43
We tested them on our off season.
They won't be on our robot any time soon either.
Let's not turn this into yet another mecanum thread. The point is taken -- people have different opinions on solutions, and some of those people are likely more right than others... and some of those answers will be different for different teams, based on many, many factors.
JohnFogarty
02-02-2012, 09:50
The thread seems to have veered into more team politics than actual advantages or disadvantages of shooters/dumpers.
And who gets to decide this. Do we arm wrestle for it? Do the mentors decide? No mater what method you choose your objections in voting also apply...
Someone needs to be leading the strategy/design discussions. They need to build a consensus around ideas that fits within your teams constraints. This is done through the observation and discussion of facts.
DampRobot
02-02-2012, 09:58
Our team made the shooter vs. dumper decision based on how consistent we thought we could be scoring, as well as the risks associated with the systems.
Dumper:
Dumps Per Match:3
Points for Dump (second basket): 6
Percentage: 95%
Points per Match: 17
Shooter:
Shot Sets per Match:3
Points per Set (third basket):9
Percentage (from key/closer to basket):66%
Points per Match: 18
Both scenarios were assuming we had a manipulator optimized for the task at hand.
We concluded that assuming we could make a fairly good shooter, it would b slightly better in terms of points. Additionaly, we theorized that a shooter would be more versatile and harder to defend. While a dumper needs go right up against the box at the base at the basket (where defense can push it around), a shooter can shoot from the key, right up against the basket, and anywhere else on the field.
In addition to where it could score from, we thought that even a mediocre shooter that could still throw the balls far could act as a good feeder. We concluded, slightly surprisingly, was that a shooter was in fact a "safer" go in terms of manipulator. And, its definitely more cool.
josephburns2487
02-02-2012, 11:17
that is a good point a decent shooter can be used for more things than just shooting. of you can throw the balls a considerable distance like if your shooter is made for the top hoop you can also be a good feeder to a more relaible or better shooter that is on the other end of the feild. a dumper is only good at dumping and does not have to much flexibility for other stratigeys other than a good defensive robot because you will need to be powerfull to avoid geting pushed around.
pfreivald
02-02-2012, 14:54
a dumper is only good at dumping and does not have to much flexibility for other stratigeys other than a good defensive robot because you will need to be powerfull to avoid geting pushed around.
This is simply not true. The right drive train can be both high-speed/mobility and high-torque pushy as needed. From nonadrive to octocanum to 6wd with shifters, there are a lot of possibilities out there for a dunker (NOT dumper! :ahh:) besides "good defensive robot".
nssheepster
07-02-2012, 18:41
This is simply not true. The right drive train can be both high-speed/mobility and high-torque pushy as needed. From nonadrive to octocanum to 6wd with shifters, there are a lot of possibilities out there for a dunker (NOT dumper! :ahh:) besides "good defensive robot".
Personally, I prefer "dumper", but either way, I feel shooters have distance, even if they aren't accurate. But a dumper can't get distance, ever, so accuracy might be wasted. A dumper depends on every other system being perfectly suited for it, and no defense in the way. Our drive train is awesome, and we won't get pushed around, but if a defender just stands in our way (ie., in front of the fender), we'd be hard-pressed to get rid of them in a timely fashion, if at all. So, shooter all the way!:]
Rogue Leader
07-02-2012, 18:47
Personally I prefer shooter, but a dumper would be nice if you could get in close enough, which could prove difficult when you consider that you will be a few inches away from the hoop. But there IS an alternative...
...That ball kicker from the kickoff video! Come on! You saw how effective it was to use a boot and a plunger!
Wolfgang
09-02-2012, 19:44
If you dump, it might be tough to hit some of the higher hoops, so I would prefer shooting. Accuracy is important though, so don't be afraid to go dumping either.
nssheepster
11-02-2012, 12:02
Sorry, I meant "Dumper" as a term, not a shooting mechanism. Shooters are better, in my opinion. Didn't make that quite clear, huh?
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.