Terrifying Karthik [Archive]

Joe Johnson

08-02-2016, 18:27

bobjones227

08-02-2016, 18:32

Karthik is afraid that the small low bar robots will eventually rise up and form one super bot, so that they can commence conquest of the planet.

Basel A

08-02-2016, 18:33

Most low bar robots will have very low points of release on their shooters. Many low robots could be blocked simply by a robot that is at the height limit. The idea that many or most teams could be blocked by 2013-style pool noodle blockers is pretty terrifying in my opinion.

Kevin Sevcik

08-02-2016, 18:37

It's going to be a confluence of factors, I'm sure. I'm guessing the primary concern is that 90% of robots using the low-bar implies that 90% of robots on the field have apparently decided to use a one robot wide section of the field as as their main thoroughfare. In a game that's going to require constant cycling over defenses to score points. Thinking back to 2013, where something like 90% of robots were too tall to sneak under towers, this sounds like a recipe for a traffic jam of immense proportions. Of course in 2013, you could score 4 discs per cycle. This year it's just one boulder, so cycling is going to be more frequent.

But the terrifying thing is this: In 2013, being low was a significant challenge you took on to gain field access and mobility. This year, it appears that a significant number of teams have probably sacrificed other functionality, including defense crossing ability, in order to throw themselves into a traffic jam and likely reduce their overall field access and mobility.

Chris is me

08-02-2016, 18:44

I think the terrifying thing is how compromised robot shooter / defense breaking / hanging effectiveness will be by the massive design compromises teams made to do a task that, while having value, does not need to be done by every member of an alliance.

I'm thinking we will see at least one top tier team totally skip the low bar in order to play the rest of the game at a very high level. Even powerhouse teams skip important game tasks. 1114 completely ignored floor loading in 2013. It was important, but only one (or maybe two) robot(s) on an alliance needed to do it, and it allowed them to put more focus on, and devote more space to, their end game mechanism. They played a different role on an alliance and played it better than nearly anybody else. I'm not saying 1114 is skipping the low bar this year, but some powerhouses will.

tindleroot

08-02-2016, 18:50

(Most) Low Bar robots will have limited capabilities in other aspects of the game as a trade-off. If 90% of robots are opting out of high goal, hanging, or other defenses (or all of the above), the game is not going to be played to its full potential. An "ideal" alliance would probably have one low bar robot, not three.

Bryce2471

08-02-2016, 18:52

Thanks for this Joe. It should be entertaining at the very least.

My two cents:

Karthik might be scared because 1114 built a low bar capable robot in anticipation that it would will be rare and valuable, only to find out that it will likely be overcrowded.

Jon Stratis

08-02-2016, 18:53

Being a team that is working towards the low bar, I can tell you... it is a SIGNIFICANT engineering challenge to do the low bar and everything else. The low bar is one of 5 defenses your team will have to face in each match, and successfully tackling the other defenses becomes much easier when you have more room in your robot to work with. Add to that scoring - as others have said, a low point of release makes you easy to block on the field. Then add on climbing at the end - having a mechanism that lets you successfully climb with this year's rules limitations is difficult. It's even more difficult when you ask said mechanism to fit within ~10" of space and expand to over 6'.

These are all significant engineering challenges to fit into such a small space. What he's afraid of, I think, is that the challenge is way too big for most teams. Yes, there will be some that accomplish it with style. There will be others that accomplish it by intentionally forgoing other aspects of the game. But I think most of them will end up compromising too much, leaving themselves with a robot that has poorly performing mechanisms in every other aspect of the game. That's the fear - that teams are turning an already difficult challenge into a nearly impossible one for the sake of a single defense.

nighterfighter

08-02-2016, 18:54

Let's start by examining the results of the poll:

90% of responses said they are planning on going under the lowbar. That is a LOT of teams planning to go under the bar (Note: I didn't bother checking to see if every response was from a unique team), especially compared to past years game where some objectives were not even attempted by most teams (2015- Can grabbing, 2013- Scaling the pyramid, 2012- Triple Balancing, 2010- Hanging, and I'm not familiar with FRC games prior to 2008). Of course, Chief Delphi is not representative of all of FRC teams.

I think Karthik's fear might be 1 of 4 things:

1) He fears that rookie teams will think it is possible/easy to do everything. Go under the low bar, shoot in the high goal, climb, etc. And then they will be able to do none of those effectively.

2) He is worried that teams will misjudge the actual height requirement, (see this thread: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=141439), and based on the time of the poll (19 days into build season) it might be too late for teams to redesign their robot.

3) He thinks that 90% of ChiefDelphi-going teams are overvaluing the value of the low-bar.

4) He realizes that so many teams are doing it and they aren't! :ahh: What did he overlook! (Okay, this option is basically a joke. I'm sure 1114 will pull everything off. I wouldn't be surprised if they literally fly under the bar and above the tower!)

PS- I see by the time I have finished writing my post, others have already posted. Sorry if this post contains repeated information/opinions.

Edit: It seems like Dr. Joe secretly wants to be a barista! First giving out Starbucks, now Mountain Dew? What sugary beverages come next!

Lidor51

08-02-2016, 18:56

I'm not looking after get into Karthik's mind, but here is a
pretty simple thing.. 90% low bar robots-> Limbo robots are the standard -> you won't get any advantage on others being short, because almost every team chose to build a Limbo bot-> being a good tall robot will be more rare and unique than being a tall robot-> the unexpected is the big advantage that good high robots can acheive (can't be blocked, can block, easier scale, easier to cross C category).

rsisk

08-02-2016, 19:01

Karthik is from Canada
Candada is cold
QED: Karthik has brain freeze.

I'll PM my address to you for that Mt. Dew

Ginger Power

08-02-2016, 19:03

I think the answer is simple and has already been stated: design tradeoffs. If a team is designing to be low bar capable they will be less capable in other aspects of the game. That makes the game less interesting to watch, and lowers the floor of the competition which nobody wants to see.

efoote868

08-02-2016, 19:03

Karthik is afraid that 85% of the teams designing a low bar robot will not execute the design properly (not enough clearance), and that a team getting disabled on the low bar will be part of 90% of all Triple Tortugas.

That leaves a crowded field of short bots to play defense. Worse than robots jumping the moat will be those robots landing on top of other robots.

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Fish-Jumps-Out-of-Water-Hits-Fisherman-in-Head.gif

Jcarbon

08-02-2016, 19:05

The idea that our team could be blocked by 2013-style pool noodle blockers is pretty terrifying in my opinion.
FTFY Basel

But more seriously, I think a factor is how easy it is to underestimate the amount of design and planning a short robot requires. I know I didn't realize how hard the packaging would be, and I'm very impressed with my team's efforts to CAD and lay out everything so it fits. With a little less planning, a team could be in big trouble by the end of the season.

Rangel(kf7fdb)

08-02-2016, 19:09

Depending on where bumpers are mounted, a robot designed to go over the Rock wall may be able to go over a short robot. Anyone know off the top of their head how penalties might work for that. :yikes:

Andrew Schreiber

08-02-2016, 19:12

There's a disjoint between low bar capable robots, robots capable of crossing defenses reliably, and robots capable of manipulating balls reliably. As many of us are learning, any one of these is hard.

Karthik is scared teams are going to overestimate how much they don't suck.

And I don't drink Mt Dew, but I need judges for Boston District, I'll take payment in points of contact at iRobot. ;)

pwnageNick

08-02-2016, 19:16

Obviously he's terrified that there's 10% out there who don't understand how crucial it is that every team be able to go under the low bar this year. You're all just looking at this the wrong way.

Keefe2471

08-02-2016, 19:19

I'm pretty surprised, and just a little worried, by how many teams are responding "yes" to this poll. I say all this as part of a team that, after much deliberation, decided to go for it, but I'm worried that there are a lot of teams out there who are not fully thinking through the rather dramatic implications of designing for the low bar, and the actual strategic value of it to the average team.

I think that there are a lot of FRC game tasks, or even just general robot characteristics, which teams do not attempt or prioritize every year simply because somebody told them "trying to do everything is bad, simple is good" rather than out of a tangible, well thought out reason that it's going to be difficult for the team to pull off, or because of a valid trade-off which improves performance elsewhere. Shifters, for example. I have a hard time seeing how choosing one bulletproof, battle-proven COTs gearbox over another bulletproof, battle-proven COTs gearbox makes a robot appreciably simpler, or quicker to put together. Last year, the classic case was canburglers. The vast majority of FIRST teams dismissed this task as "too hard," only to have teams that didn't see it this way rapidly retrofit their robots to steal cans during lunch. This year, I expect to see teams fail to meet their potential in this way in regards to scaling. It's an easy task to dismiss, but also an easy thing to add after the fact (look at the WCP MCC, for example). The common thread is, it can be achieved through an "auxiliary" mechanism, something that can just be slapped on top of a robot without affecting the rest of it that much. And it's pretty close to a "binary" task; unlike something like shooting where there will be a huge spectrum of performance with gains to be made by optimization at every level, you either scale or you don't, and there isn't much to be gained by spending a huge amount of time optimizing how quickly you can do it. I would argue that some of the defenses also fall under the category of tasks more teams will avoid based on philosophy than sound engineering analysis.

The low bar is not one of these tasks. It is the opposite of these tasks.

The ability to do the low bar is immensely integral to a robot's design. It affects every single element of it, and disqualifies a number of otherwise viable designs and approaches.

The low bar takes practically every archetypical design from the previous game to which you could effectively say "build team XYZ's robot from that year," Rebound Rumble, and throws them out the window.

The low bar will make your electronics team cry.

The low bar has a direct and dramatic impact on the effectiveness of every single subsystem of your robot. Instead of releasing boulders from four feet up, you're either releasing them from one foot, or adding in systems you didn't need without the low bar to make up the difference. Same with hanging, your reach distance changed dramatically.

The low bar also has its advantages. It's one more defense that you're guaranteed to be able to breach, taking the number of other defenses to design for down from 8 to 6, and possibly eliminating some of the ones which require dedicated mechanisms to achieve. It's also the most direct path to/from the secret passage, probably the fastest defense to cross, and provides you with an optimal cycle time.

I'm worried, however, that a lot of teams are overestimating the degree to which they'll be able to take advantage of this.

By doing the low bar, you have made being an accurate high goal shooter quite a bit harder. You have also made your shots easier to defend if you stick to a low release point. Teams doing the low bar are betting on being able to make up the difference through an increased cycle rate. The number of extra shots a team can expect to miss by building for the low bar is hard to estimate, but likely not trivial, and I would argue that for many teams and the rate at which we've seen that defenses like the rock wall and rough terrain can be crossed, it may be more effective to cycle over these with a taller robot. They are also betting on consistently being effective enough to take priority over their alliance partners in use of the low bar. If as many teams want to use it as people say there will be, there's going to be a traffic jam through the thing.

By doing the low bar, many teams are completely neglecting the possibility of scaling. These teams are demanding an extra two high goal boulders a match from their low bar cross, minimum.

For teams that have chosen to neglect the high goal, the picture is even more stark. A team would need to run five extra cycles per match to make up the difference from a scale, a task which becomes dramatically easier if you allow your robot to be tall. I would bet that most teams won't even average five a match, let alone five extra cycles due purely to low bar efficiency gains.

Many teams are designing to be "breaching specialists," crossing all 9 defense styles. This gives them an extra five points per match (and no change in RP), when compared to crossing 8. Scaling, or even a single high goal shot, does the same or better.

And that's all neglecting alliance partners. The low bar is weird, in that it can be reasonably expected that both the best and worst teams in FRC will be able to do it. For the best teams, the advantage in cycle time is clear, and it's integral to their strategies. For the teams that struggle to put a kitbot on the field, taking away an effective way to score points that you're given from the start would be a poor idea. For a team in the middle, it's a reasonable assumption that their partners will be able to take care of it, and may be actively hogging it for their own cycles.

I also think Dr. Joe is right. But teams should consider, which will be the more effective robots? The ones which were designed for five weeks to do the low bar, and then hastily had a few tall bits added? Or the ones which were designed from the beginning to take full advantage of their height?

Unless you expect to be able to take full advantage of the low bar's efficiency gains, it may be in many team's best interests to walk away from the extreme design tradeoffs that the low bar forces.

I would nominate this opinion from the original thread. It was before Karthik's response, but I think sums up the various reasons that poll is interesting to people attempting to guess what the Meta game will evolve into.

New Lightning

08-02-2016, 19:36

The thing to fear with 90% attempting for the low bar, is that a lack of diversity in robot design will lead to a finite amount of strategies and possible alliances that can be made in order to be effective.

safiq10

08-02-2016, 20:09

Karthik is afraid of how many under the bar robots will have shooters that will be mutombo'ed.

http://i.imgur.com/oIyI9Rz.jpg

cadandcookies

08-02-2016, 20:24

Karthik is scared teams are going to overestimate how much they don't suck.

While I'd hesitate to say this is definitely why Karthik in particular was terrified of the results of that poll, I can definitely say this is why I was terrified of them.

On average, robotics teams really aren't particularly good at building robots* (or, perhaps more accurately, robots that can compete effectively). As someone who loves to see teams succeed both on and off the field, I looked at the results of that (and the other, similar polls about functionality) and wondered how many of the teams that said they were trying to score in the high goal, climb the mountain, and go under the low goal would even be capable of one of those things. That 90% of teams said they want to go under the low bar, and that in other polls, 64% of respondents said they would do both low bar and hang (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142965), about 80% of respondents claimed they were doing 4/5 defenses (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142327), and 70% of respondents have claimed that they are planning on doing either high goal or both high and low goal (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2568) indicates that there are a whole bunch of teams that are likely biting off FAR more than they can effectively chew. Obviously I hope I'm wrong, but this indicates to me that there are going to be a lot of mediocre or ineffective robots this year (though one could argue that's the case every year, it's just more of a shame when it's such a fantastic game that supports a ton of valid niches for robots).

So, basically it boils down to that shooting, crossing defenses, and climbing are already tough, and the indication that 90% of teams are compounding the difficulty of whatever else they're trying to do with trying to do is, well, terrifying.

*I know this is an extremely strong and possibly offensive statement, but it's true pretty much across the board-- GOFIRST (my college robotics org/team) just competed in two robotics competitions on one weekend where more than half of the participants were either completely ineffective or somewhere between bad and mediocre at the tasks, including us, and we're a group of people that each have 5+ years of robotics experience. Robots are just hard, however you cut it.

Procolsaurus

08-02-2016, 20:37

Karthik was thinking about the wiring.

AdamStockton

08-02-2016, 20:45

I think that the one strategic component that sparked Karthik's concerning response to this poll is the "trade-off".

A team's strategy that involves going under the low bar places a significant design and size constraint on the team's robot. The team essentially needs to design and build a robot that is ~15" tall or less in order to meet their objective of going under the low bar. This is a significant challenge, even for some of the best teams in FRC.

Most teams will end up making significant trade-offs and compromises when it comes to their robots functionality in order to accomplish their goal of going under the low bar. Where some of those teams could have had an excellent shooter, climber, or other defense manipulator(s), they might have had to reduce the effectiveness or eliminated the capability in order to go for the low bar.

A robot that can breach the outer works by itself (regardless of what defenses are on the field) would require the capability of crossing maximum of 8 different defenses. Being able to go under the low bar only reduces that requirement to 7 defenses (including the low bar).

I think that Karthik is terrified that most teams that choose to go under the low bar will have made so many design trade-offs that they won't be able to do much of anything else on the field. A team might have been better off with a robot that can shoot and/or climb rather than one that can only go under the low bar.

Teams that are designing for the low bar might actually end up lowering the bar for themselves in the process.

Anteprefix

08-02-2016, 20:46

He could be worried that if an entire alliance is relying on the low bar for fast cycling, a single tortuga blocking the low bar would ruin the alliance's game plan.

MaGiC_PiKaChU

08-02-2016, 21:11

Karthik is Achondroplasiaphobe. He's afraid of midgets. 90% of the robots going under the low bar will drive him insane at events

[/thread]

IronicDeadBird

08-02-2016, 21:18

90% of robots are going to have a low profile on a field that already has hard lines of sight and bad visibility for drivers.
Don't worry though the refs will see everything better due to better LOS and positioning so when you ask.
"Why are we getting a foul?"
The answer could easily be...
"Cause we are caught in the secret passage and making contact with a robot we can't see due to poor lines of sight."
or
"Cause you are making contact with a robot traversing a defense and you shouldn't be doing that."
What about the spy?
The one spy who will obviously not be invested first and foremost in just watching his or her own team, and even with good awareness communication from station to spybox involves two people who have eyes on the field suddenly deciding they want to look somewhere besides where everything is going on for second hand information from someone who may not even be looking at what you need to know.
90% of robots are planning on using the same point for transportation. Remember those movie scenes where 90% of people are stuck in a disaster and everyone goes "Now would be a very good time to take the quickest way out of town nobody else will be doing that right now". Oh also some people will be taking that one exit because in some instances they cannot physically take any other street due to defensive counter picks, it is the same as before except its one of the movies where everyone on an island is facing a disaster and they all converge on the one bridge to make a run for it.
Its a major bottleneck on scoring that could easily destroy teams score cycle times, which can easily be blockaded. If 90% of teams can only go under the low bar then in a majority of matches you could park a robot on each side of the low bar and your opponent couldn't move you out of the way because no robot is going to be designed to pull a robot away from a defense.
Actually no... My guess is maybe just maybe.
Maybe Karthik just hates limbo.

Caleb Sykes

08-02-2016, 21:25

I don't know about Karthik, but I'm afraid that teams will be making 15.5" tall robots that can't really get under at all unless they go agonizingly slowly.

We are not designing to just get under the low bar, we are designing to get under the low bar at near to our maximum speed.

Shrub

08-02-2016, 21:39

matthewdenny

08-02-2016, 21:53

Statistically, spiders seem most likely.

Billfred

08-02-2016, 22:05

What do YOU think Karthik is terrified of?

I think Karthik is terrified of teams that made sacrifices to attempt the low bar realizing--at their events--that they can't clear the low bar. At that point, it is very difficult if not flat impossible to recoup the capabilities you sacrificed to attempt the low bar. Just as teams that slapped on passive hook hangers in 2013 realized weight distribution was critical, or tall robots in 2012 realized they couldn't use a dingus to help balancing, the low bar is a serious set of limitations that should be regarded accordingly.

Alternate take: Karthik is terrified of having to emcee this year because even his formidable ups may not be enough for a Portcullis/Drawbridge combo, and ramparts and rough terrains may have a Libby Kamen-esque effect (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23LibbyKamenRuinedMyJordans&src=typd) on Jordans.

(I drink Diet Dew, thanks.)

Woolly

08-02-2016, 22:21

One of the reasons the low bar is popular is because it's in a consistent position, which means that a lot of teams will end up programming just for running under the low bar in auto and then at least trying to shoot a goal. Not only that, but due to the nature of the other defenses, the low bar has the least chance of causing an alignment issues for a shot in autonomous.

Unfortunately not all 3 robots can start there, so successful autonomous shots will be rare compared to previous years. Maybe something like 1 successful shot for every 4-6 matches at some events.
However, we may see some robots that can do 2-3 ball autos under the low bar using the balls that their alliance robots start with. That's a little bit more feasible than multi-ball auto routines that run to the center line for ammo, though for regional play it may prove to be just as effective in securing a point differential coming out of auto.

mrnoble

08-02-2016, 22:38

This game has so much potential for fun and interesting things to happen. What will it be like if, for 9/10 matches on Friday, all six teams on the field are trying to get through the only defense they thought they needed to build for? And what if two of them were built 1" too tall? Have we ever had a game where six robots do nothing most of the time?

cmwilson13

08-02-2016, 22:40

Mitchell1714

08-02-2016, 22:40

Karthik is terrified 1114 will be the only team at Waterloo not to go under the low bar.

EricH

08-02-2016, 22:44

Karthik is afraid...

Because if what might be considered the top half of FRC teams (those who interact with other teams via CD, share information, etc), are 90% going under the low bar...

You can bet that the "bottom half" isn't going to be far behind. BUT, they don't necessarily know about the fact that being 16" tall is going to hurt you, and so there will be about 75% of the field jammed in the Neutral Zone/Secret Passages unable to move farther due to lousy planning on drivetrains, making it hard for teams who DID account for those little nuisances to get through.

That's what Karthik is afraid of: Severe congestion in the Neutral Zone, slowing down the whole game.

BTW, as I recall, I can think of one team that most definitely isn't planning to go under the low bar.

mrnoble

08-02-2016, 22:44

yes 2011 had lots of very low scoring games

But robots were still moving, and trying, right? I think this might be worse

Richard Wallace

08-02-2016, 22:49

He's terrified that the low bar will be the scene of nasty tortugas in a significant number of qualifying matches. This will tend to randomize seedings.

PayneTrain

08-02-2016, 23:12

I think the low bar is the MOST unique and intriguing game element in my 8 years of competing and I'm excited to see how it plays off in different places and different times of the competition season. This is a very unique game in that core movement of a robot is directly contributing points at a nigh-even pace as other challenges in the game and that alone should have provided not necessarily a shift in a team's strategic design, but the perspective they take to the game.

I would say that one of the championship-winning viable strategies involves doing as much as you can with the low bar constraint. I think there is a very slim sliver of teams that can/should/will successfully package their robot with the low bar constraint and compete at a powerhouse level, which I think is obvious.

90% is definitely not a terrifying number (as someone who embellishes for effect wrt honing strategic design in FRC with students, it feels like what he said was slight hyperbole) it certainly gives me pause. Remember, this is a game where your core movement is directly contributing points to your final score! This is giving teams an opportunity for teams that can't really surpass a Tier 0 function of core movement, right?

You'd hope so. This game features many "pinch points", both literal and in terms of the meta of Stronghold. The meta pinch points will show up in congestion of RPs in qualifications. One robot can in theory, get 1 RP by itself with a well executed strategy. It is literally impossible to get 2+ RPs by yourself without getting a win. I want to believe the RP system this year will actually be awesome, but I worry that the pinch point with capturing is going to tick off some teams in qualifications and give you a level of randomization of lesser but still nontrivial levels of 2012.

You get another point of congestion where you have elimination alliances of 3 low bar robots. Quite simply, unless the other 21 robots in the bracket are low bar robots, you're potentially at quite the disadvantage. Imagine a scenario with a 3.5 foot tall, impeccable high goal shooting robot you are playing against. There are some ways to solve that problem, but they involve tradeoffs you tried to skirt around at kickoff...

The elephant in the room is the literal pinch point. Team Icarus flew too close to the sun and locks themselves in the low bar during a match. That's probably the most terrifying thing.

I probably didn't actually guess right, but that's most of what I have gathered. If it's really that terrifying and no one has said exactly why yet, I imagine Karthik has a captive audience here.

JesseK

08-02-2016, 23:22

I bet it was a metaphor.

Karthik was "terrified" of what CD can degenerate into so early in the season with such a loaded and unscientific poll.

Ryan Dognaux

08-02-2016, 23:35

Did we choose to make a low bar capable robot? Yes. Like many others who came to this conclusion, we figured having 1 defense that was always the same was too valuable to pass up when combined with our goal of shooting in the high goal multiple times in a match.

However, we also highly prioritized defense crossing. So far it seems like we will be able to do category A, B and D defenses simply by using our drive train & intake mechanism, along with some creative geometry. The category C defenses may take an additional mechanism, but the great thing about the low bar this year is that we have a ton of weight to play with. Like 30 pounds of additional weight.

Tons of people mentioned blocked shots - why anyone is trying to shoot from 1/3 of a field away is beyond me. We're going to drive right up on the batter and shoot with our robot against the castle. It's 2014's corner shot all over again and we're taking it. I'd rather us fight your spy bot for position and win that battle than hope we sink a miracle shot through a tiny goal opening.

I'm scared every year that we'll be that team that completely blows it for an alliance, but more often than not it's not our team doing awful. I'm optimistic that our low bar, high goal shooting / hanging strategy will be successful. I'm fearful that we'll get paired with a robot that had good intentions but can do nothing effectively because they tried to package everything in a small amount of space. My guess is Karthik is too.

hectorcastillo

08-02-2016, 23:35

Karthik is terrified because he thought there was 16in of clearance this whole time.

staplemonx

08-02-2016, 23:36

This https://youtu.be/9Fj4nDOAigg is what scares the great white northern robot builder eh.

Hosers https://youtu.be/X-ZvAVcBIrQ its because he is a genius eh.

PayneTrain

08-02-2016, 23:39

I bet it was a metaphor.

Karthik was "terrified" of what CD can degenerate into so early in the season with such a loaded and unscientific poll.

Ha. Probably.

MrJohnston

08-02-2016, 23:41

I fail to believe that Karthik is "terrified" of anything relating to FRC... Nay, I believe, being a good Canadian, he had just watched the Maple Leafs (who are currently looking like a borderline playoff team) lose a game in which a potential tying goal bounced off the post (a.k.a. "poll") late in the third period. He chased the tough loss down with a few Antigravity Lagers before hoping onto Chief Delphi.... Then, in a mildly inebriated state, he confused his two loves: Hockey and Robots and made a post that had nothing to do with the thread.

DesignComp

08-02-2016, 23:46

Karthik is afraid of the day he can't agasabapathy.

evanperryg

08-02-2016, 23:46

Taking a strategic design standpoint, my assumption would be that he's astounded by the fact that so many teams, even high-level teams, are willing to sacrifice tons of space in the name of scoring 10 easy points that could be easily scored by lower-level alliance partner. Teams with high-level abilities ought to focus on the hard tasks (cough cough shooting) while low level teams complete simpler tasks reliably (low bar).

From a match strategy standpoint, I think the concern about low bar meta is, as Kevin Sevcik explained quite nicely, 3 teams relying on the low bar to traverse between the primary gamepiece entry point and the goal scoring point just screams "choke point." Cyclers will have to be well coordinated in their movement to make effective cycles. Good alliances will realize that having a courtyard defender is less effective than having a defender to simply block off the low bar, especially against alliances that rely on the low bar to complete cycles effectively.

So, from this, it'd be easy to feel that low bar meta is going to be extremely problematic for those teams that subscribe to it. However, it will have some huge benefits for the best low bar meta teams. When in a situation where there is no defender blocking the low bar, these robots have a massive advantage in their ability to complete fast cycles. Short robots will also be more likely to have a low center of gravity, meaning they can cross defenses with less risk of falling. The few low bar teams who have consistent high-elevation shooters will be ridiculously strong against poorly coordinated alliances.

Personally, I see scaling as being a cover for the biggest red herring of the season- the low bar. Everyone will be able to do it, yet the sacrifices you must make for the few points you gain will cause many teams to struggle significantly. It's low risk, with equally low reward, but the sacrifices that must be made could create disaster.

DohertyBilly

09-02-2016, 00:14

Maybe it's not even about the pile ups that are bound to happen. With so many ways to score this year, there are many more ways to be a strong robot than being a quick low bar shooter. Robots with high shooters are harder to block, and they have less vertical distance to reach, which may allow for a much more effective shooter than you could fit on a low robot. If such a high percentage of teams have a low bar design, there may be too many of one robot archetype. This year of all years, that would be a real shame.

ratdude747

09-02-2016, 05:02

*Note- I only read the first page, these are my personal thoughts. Also, as I am not currently affiliated with a team, I am probably not a good candidate to send MTN Dew to*

I see it as a couple of simple yet deep factors.

First, the issue is that out of five classes of defenses (9 total), that 90% of teams voted to focus on the one that is the most limiting in terms of resultant design constraints (more on that below) indicates that at least, perhaps, 65% of teams didn't weigh design choices well. I will say this here and say it again, the low bar IS the tunnel from 2010. So, I'll make a call to my experience as a student that year to illustrate. Many of the best robots that year were unable to fit in the tunnel. Robots like say 1114, 148/217, 177, 111, etc. come to mind. Significantly fewer of the best could. Of those, the only three that come to mind are 1625, 294, and (Indiana bias showing :D ) 1501. However, in the actual field of robots that year, based on my memories of scouting matches, most robots (just over half?) overall did fit in the tunnel, to include the robots built by both teams I have student experience with (and both robots I did eventually work on at one point or another). The point here is that while a robot could both fit in the tunnel and perform well, it wasn't the case most of the time; that is, most good robots skipped the tunnel and hopped bumps instead. This year, like 2010, the bar/tunnel isn't the only way to cross the field (nor is it required to BREACH, as only 4 of the 5 defenses need DAMAGED).

The other factor here is the limitations presented by making a bot slim enough to fit under the bar (or in 2010, through the tunnel). First, I'll mention another famous bot from 2010 that couldn't fully fit under the tunnel, 469. The redirector design they made was, obviously, a disqualifier to using the tunnel to cross the field. In fact, they didn't even need to cross the field! Sure, with a few exceptions (say 51 and to a lesser degree 1024), nobody else chose that strategy, but to say "must use tunnel" would have pretty much precluded such an innovative strategy. Even if one didn't opt for such a "game breaking" strategy, there still were major issues faced by opting for a slim design. Kickers had to be very compact. Hanging mechanisms, something obviously not required that year for success (although it did tend to separate the absolute best from the pretty good), were in most cases impossible, although the "vertical pole" hanger could be made to fit (1625 comes to mind here). Even harder was making a robot that could also cross bumps AND go through the tunnel. My team at the time, 1747, tried and succeeded at that, but nothing more. Our kicker had issues (oh the poor AM gearboxes we trashed trying to make that work :D) and our ball suction devices never took off (although the roller never had a fair chance as it was destroyed in the pits due to a kicker cable failure). Those could have worked had we figured things out sooner, and sure, some teams are so good they can make almost any design work (especially with a good drive team). However, the packaging constraints were indeed quite tight; as a result our winch for an attempt at a hanger never did work (the rube goldburg gearbox had binding issues and couldn't even lift a bucket of scrap steel) and the means of making the hook reach never took off (pun intended?). This year is even worse, as there are so many different ways to score and function (it's like FLL in that way). Trying to get those to work in a slim bot was bad. Trying to have a shooter and feeder (which is almost guaranteed to be bulkier than a 2010 kicker), a hanger (which is subject to more strict rules this year, the result of which is likely added bulk), and one or more mechanisms to deal with the other defenses. An average team would be hard pressed to make all of that fit in a slim bot, with a good drivetrain (for the low defenses), and make them work well. However, eliminate the slim limitation and those become that much easier to work well; one can design mechanisms to work well out of the box, rather than fit a tiny space and be tweaked to sorta work well (if the stars line up and the groundhog misses his shadow, that is). The point here is that in terms of "Karthik points", the tradeoff of fitting under the bar is a net loss of points, and as that goes contrary to Karthik's teachings, he would indeed be terrified to see so many Chief Delphi aware teams (presumably) get it wrong.

Also, I'll sum this up to a final point: It seems many teams didn't remember 2010. Those who forget history are destined to repeat it.

Collin Fultz

09-02-2016, 07:52

Karthik is clearly thinking with his MC hat on. He's terrified that with so many low bots, he's bound to trip over one as he moves from the Red side of the field to the Blue.

Wait...what?

Karthik is afraid of the day he can't agasabapathy.

Winner. Shut it down.

Taylor

09-02-2016, 08:19

You're forgetting that Karthik was born in Ohio. You know, the state that's round on the ends and hi in the middle? Which is great for defeating the Portcullis, but not very helpful with the low bar.

The part that terrifies me is the combination of the perceived narrow positions around the batter and the low height of robots. If teams build an army of narrow, short robots, we'll see lots of tortugaing, but not on the Outerworks.
Hopefully teams will remember the lessons of 2010 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhzVK20i5uo) and not get stuffed in the low goals.

pfreivald

09-02-2016, 09:10

Where did the term "Tortuga" come from (in this context)?

orangemoore

09-02-2016, 09:15

Where did the term "Tortuga" come from (in this context)?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=141775&highlight=Tortuga

This is the first place I saw it.

Sperkowsky

09-02-2016, 10:59

My team originally decided on a tall high goal shooter. After a day of CAD we realized it was easier for us to build a low goal shooter aw we could combine an intake with a shooter. We successfully finished a high goal/low goal shooter week 3 and we have been able to spend time tweaking it to perfection and building a climber. We have also done stuff like improve our drive train.

For context we used to be a low resource team. This year we changed a lot and I would consider us a middle of the road team now but, this is crazy for us. In 2013 we had a drive train with a net in 2014 we had a drive train and in 2015 we had a non working stacker. The task of low bar while making nice sub systems is very accessible.

Chris Endres

09-02-2016, 11:22

I think Karthik is mad that being able to go under the low bar wouldn't mean your in the cool kids club, rather, the cool kids club would only be limitted to tall robots. It's like thinking you're cool when you have Jordan's, but really the cool kids are the ones with light-up Sketchers.

EDIT: I'll take regular Mt. Dew, or Mt. Frost from Aldi (mmmmmm, delicious)

Andrew Schreiber

09-02-2016, 13:10

Also, seeing this thread in my control panel keeps making me laugh.

AdamHeard

09-02-2016, 13:43

Also, seeing this thread in my control panel keeps making me laugh.

This whole thread is awkward.

Anupam Goli

09-02-2016, 13:51

This whole thread is awkward.

This whole thread terrifies Karthik.

marshall

09-02-2016, 13:53

This whole thread terrifies Karthik.

Isn't that what started this? We're going to get Karthik meta-terrified... metafied?

Taylor

09-02-2016, 13:57

I'm so meta, even this acronym.

Abc123454321

09-02-2016, 13:59

Enough time has passed. I think we can have a discussion about this now.

It is going to be a bit meta but I think we can handle it.

Background:

In the thread/poll Low Bar (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142841), 90% of teams said they planned on being able to go under the low bar. To which, the enigmatic Karthik (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/member.php?u=1777)said this "The results of this poll are terrifying. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1532992&postcount=34)"

When a deep strategist like Karthik speaks such things, there are a LOT of folks asking themselves questions

What am I missing that I too am not terrified?
Should I be terrified?
Is this something that only scares folk whose footfalls are routine upon the Carpets of Einstein or do mere mortals have something to fear as well?
Do these robots make me look fat?

As far as I know, Karthik has made no more public statements about his fears.

THIS CANNOT STAND!

What do YOU think Karthik is terrified of?

Tell us what you think in a reply to this thread

Best contributor to the thread (as of Wednesday at Midnight): 12 Cans of Mt. Dew coming your way to support you during the home stretch of the build season.

It is not just one response but the entire contribution from a CD user that is being judged. Of course, Karthik is not eligible**

Cheers,
Dr. Joe J.

*as judged by yours truly. I'm buying the Dew, I'm making the call.

**but he can feel free to help me sort the wheat from the chaff -- I won't turn him away. I still get final call on the winner.
My theory is that teams are trying to be as much self sufficient as possible. By being able to go under the low bar, you have a guaranteed scoring method and don't have to rely on others. This could also be influenced by last year, where heavy dependence on teammates in Recycle Rush, may have costed the match, especially for"can bots". I have seen many teams especially at Dallas who lost this way. One example is 2848( I believe they are the team Im thinking of), who had an excellent "canner" bot. But they were dependent on teammates to stack, and eventually did not do as well as stacker robots.( No offence to this team or any team of the same model, you guys still had an interesting strategy). I think many teams are basing their robot on defence maneuverability, because they have the most control over their destiny.

Monochron

09-02-2016, 14:11

Ginger Power

09-02-2016, 14:35

I'm so meta, even this acronym.

I can't tell if this is a deeply profound thought... or if it's crazy...

IKE

09-02-2016, 15:11

My initial thought was quite similar to Schreiber's, and the difficulty associated with building a short robot to play this game.

I do not know him well, but it seems like he strives for Excellence, and tries to inspire others to use passion to foster excellence.

He previous linked to a professor of his that had an incredibly inspirational (though also potentially slightly depressing) talk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKHTawgyKWQ) about why most of us will fail to have a great career due to not chasing passions and striving to be great at something.

Karthik has also given many talks (http://www.simbotics.org/resources/strategy)about being great at a couple things being better than ok or so-so at a lot of things. Being great at the LOW Bar, and just the LOW BAR is a pretty low bar indeed. Most will need to be proficient with at least one more thing, and being able to do the low bar makes most other tasks significantly more difficult. This ultimately pushes teams into the compromised position of just being OK, or worse, bad at so many other tasks, but having invested enough effort at those tasks that they will flounder going after them. Floundering at several things squashes enthusiasm of which Karthik believes is very important to success.

This was an awful loft of assumptions and memory, so I reviewed his TEDx (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfC3JdkEVgQ)over lunch.

Assumptions verified during this talk:
Importance of passion-check
Better to be awesome at something than mediocre at a broad field (accounting...)- check

Now, I recommend paying close attention to the end of this talk as he quotes Micheal Jordan.

“Limits, like fear, is often an illusion”

Karthik could be creating an illusion that he is terrified just to make sure that everyone checks their assumptions to remember the reasons for going after the LOW BAR. I believe the young-ones consider this a form of benevolent "Trolling". (http://www.buzzfeed.com/thesaccattack/5-reasons-why-internet-trolling-is-a-good-thing-5o2x) Car Nack has a tendency to do this with some of his predictions.

************************************************** **

My belief is he truly is terrified of a field of M (http://www.alumni-osu.org/sacvalleybuckeyes/picts/humor/mediocrity.jpg)ediocrity.

PayneTrain

09-02-2016, 15:29

Isn't that what started this? We're going to get Karthik meta-terrified... metafied?

This thread is just one to two degrees of separation from a potential fanboy speculation thread of the life and times of Karthik Kanagasabapathy.

GMeyer

09-02-2016, 15:31

I think Karthik is concerned about how the matches will be. Although I've seen exceptions (https://youtu.be/7Gt1tazM0ig), the majority of robots that will be capable of going under the low bar will probably be incapable of doing much else, as Joe G. has convincingly argued elsewhere (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1532937&postcount=28).

Therefore, I think Karthik is worried that if the poll is true, the matches will be boring, as most of the robots on the field will be ineffective limbo bots, while the experienced teams will run away with the matches and drive up the scores. :eek:

If this is indeed what concerns Karthik, then I think he can relax. The poll is likely accurate as to the amount of teams that plan to build low bar robots. However, that does not that they actually will. I think the task may just prove too difficult, and many teams will decide to scrap their low bar plans before the end of build season. The rest will either make effective limbo bots or get weeded out in the course of the season.

Doug G

09-02-2016, 15:51

By building a low robot, teams may find themselves limiting other possible functions the robot could do in this game. Our team is going for a low robot and still trying to do everything else, and it is by far the hardest build we've ever done. If only we still had the old perimeter rules (28x38 from 2012).

GMeyer

09-02-2016, 16:11

There's another possible reason I can think of: Karthik may be terrified because he thinks everyone else will be able to go under the low bar. But he has not planned for this, so he's concerned he'll be at a disadvantage. A bit like how people get concerned about whether they are underdressed or overdressed before a party.

Although my previous answer is more plausible, I think this one is a possibility as well.

cait.schroeder

09-02-2016, 16:51

We have a few (more than a few i lied) possibilities here.
1. Karthik is scared of all the idiots that are going to make their robots 15-16 inches and are not going to be able to make it under.
2. He is scared that people making their robot able to go under the low bar are not going to be able to scale or shoot and are going to make the game boring (not a fun choice but a possibility.
3. People are going to have problems fitting everything and attaching bumpers.
4. There are going to be a lot of robots nipping at peoples heels.
5. The game will be boring due to lack of fighting/ defending robots and none getting flipped on their sides and such.
6.The results are terrifying because a lot of teams are overestimating themselves and are going to have a lacking robot and be a disadvantage to other teams.
7. Karthik is joking and freaking us all out.
8. Karthik doubts the abilities of short robots.
9. Karthik knows something we don't.
10. He meant to type terrific (I know he didn't whatever).
11. Karthik is going crazy.
12. Karthik is scared for the 10% that will not go under as they may be less likely candidates for alliances in the late game.
13. Karthik knows there is no reasons for like all the robots to be able to go under the low bar as other teams can do that and it will result in a lack of good shooters.

PS. I know Im crazy but I might add more as I think.

cj3958

09-02-2016, 17:08

12. Karthik is scared for the 10% that will not go under as they may be less likely candidates for alliances in the late game.

I like this one. Karthik is terrified because there wont be ENOUGH limbo bots.

Citrus Dad

09-02-2016, 17:41

Karthik finds it terrifying that such a high proportion of the teams finally recognized an important fundamental function for a game.

nuggetsyl

09-02-2016, 17:47

I agree with Karthik the poll results are scary. Joe J and myself answered a question on camera asked by Andy Baker. I truly thought the low bar was going to be under utilized and my advise was to not under estimated needing a robot for the low bar. IMO this would be a perfect task for teams trying to master just a one task. I have seen several designs so far that have teams shooting and lifting and I just do not see these teams being competitive. Just go back to 2012 and watch how many teams could not make a shot in the hoop and there was a safe zone to shoot from and they were shooting from a higher point making it hard to block. Defense is being over looked in shooting which is going to leave a lot of points on the table. Time will tell who is right and who is not.

SM987

09-02-2016, 20:02

http://i.imgur.com/QGWf5qSl.jpg

He meant to say "The results of this pole are terrifying."

PayneTrain

09-02-2016, 20:06

http://i.imgur.com/QGWf5qSl.jpg

He meant to say "The results of this pole are terrifying."

#teamtether

BethMo

09-02-2016, 20:08

He meant to say "The results of this pole are terrifying."

WINNER!

(At least, it made me laugh the hardest.)

Peyton Yeung

09-02-2016, 20:08

http://i.imgur.com/QGWf5qSl.jpg

He meant to say "The results of this pole are terrifying."

Your robot just gave birth...congratulations.

Captain_Kirch

09-02-2016, 20:42

http://i.imgur.com/QGWf5qSl.jpg

Did we just see a spoiler of your playoffs strategy? :yikes:

cait.schroeder

09-02-2016, 22:01

I like this one. Karthik is terrified because there wont be ENOUGH limbo bots.

Yeah lol. And the numbers are also a little off because of multiple people on teams voting, teams not voting, etc.

anishde

09-02-2016, 23:43

I'm just thoroughly amazed by how one post by one mentor (albeit one of the most respectable in all of FIRST) has set off SIX PAGES of posts in just one day...

Koko Ed

10-02-2016, 04:21

Brian C

10-02-2016, 09:49

Tim Sharp

10-02-2016, 10:22

I think what would terrify Karthik more than anything is having an important match to secure a top seed and being stuck with an undisciplined freelancing team that does not employ any strategy whatsoever. They incur a boatload of penalties every match they have played previously and could care less about the repercussions of their actions.

I think that is always a concern. What's different about this year is the enhanced destructive potential for a team that doesn't act with a sense of informed self interest, especially given the number of teams who plan to negotiate the low bar.

Justin Montois

10-02-2016, 11:48

Karthik is a statistics/numbers junkie.

He was just terrified knowing how much research and spreadsheets he will need to create to cross reference the results of the poll against the number of teams that actually pull it off and all of the computations and permutations therein. :)

Craig

10-02-2016, 12:25

Terrified that the field is going to be chaos with a bunch of short robots trying to navigate blind behind all those defenses?

eedoga

10-02-2016, 13:45

Terrified that the field is going to be chaos with a bunch of short robots trying to navigate blind behind all those defenses?

I was thinking of adding flags on whip antenna's to solve that problem...

JABot67

10-02-2016, 14:25

I have a theory of why Karthik is terrified, and I think other people in this thread have brought it up as well. I went back and tried to find someone to quote, but alas, I got lazy.

It's possible that a member of a good team could be terrified at the thought of so many robots having the same match strategy, especially in autonomous. It is hard to convince teams to try other strategies during matches, and sometimes it rubs teams the wrong way... "We spent the whole season planning our strategy around this!"

Also it might be hard to find 3rd robots for 1114's alliance, if most teams available for the 16th pick of the draft have similar strategies. It may be difficult to work the third robot into the alliance. You could have them play defense and block shots, but not if they're short. A bit of cheesecake may be in order this year.

Scoring 3 boulders in autonomous this year will give you a huge advantage over your opponent. Figuring out how to form an alliance that can actually do this sounds challenging and possibly terrifying.

Okay, last reason we should be terrified: 254 apparently will be tall. I'm scared already. What if they have come up with a 469-esque robot that breaks the game?

EDIT: It's not just the Cheesy Poofs. Some other extremely good teams have decided to avoid the low bar. Perhaps they have won the meta-game this year? I can't wait to watch the competitions and find out what all this means.

JesseK

10-02-2016, 14:41

Okay, last reason we should be terrified: 254 apparently will be tall. I'm scared already. What if they have come up with a 469-esque robot that breaks the game?

Source?

Karthik, I hope you're taking the posts in this thread like the "Andy Baker" thread. We all know you're fearless on the outside :D

JABot67

10-02-2016, 15:21

Source?

The poll results tell you which forum members responded yes or no.

Rangel(kf7fdb)

10-02-2016, 15:38

The poll results tell you which forum members responded yes or no.

Different poll results on other threads also show 254 being screwed thanks to the Rock Wall change. I wouldn't quite factor a poll as a definite source. That being said, I think ignoring the low bar is a legitimate strategy/design. We probably would have done it too had we not had solutions to our strategy that allow us to remain short.

cait.schroeder

10-02-2016, 15:40

So Joe you mentioned that the person's entire contribution to CD is also being judged. What about newcomers like me? I have attempted to contribute as much as possible but who knows. Will experience also be a factor? Hope so im looking forward to sharing 12 cans of Mtn. Dew with the team :cool:

Joe Johnson

10-02-2016, 15:45

To all,
Time is almost up. Remember the deal we shook upon:

Best contributor to the thread as judged by me of midnight (EST implied) tonight gets the Mt. Dew.

"Best contributor" doesn't necessarily mean the person who best gets into the mind of Karthik. Contribute to the thread and I will hear you out.

Speaking of which, I will share my advice for success in the game Apples to Apples: Know your judge. By which I mean to say you are probably not going to get a lot of credit by complaining about how unfair life is as I have been know to make light of the Fairness Cult in many circles of FIRST.

Finally, I've been silent on this thread and in fact, after the first few messages, stopped reading. Not because I was uninterested but because I wanted to be as fair of a judge as I could and so I decided to wait and read it all in one go at midnight.

Even MORE finally, Karthik sent me a PM he's monitoring the thread and that some of the discussion may inform his famously overcrowded seminar at the FIRST Champs.

So... ...put your thoughts out there. People are listening.

Cheers,
Dr. Joe J.

AdamHeard

10-02-2016, 15:56

Different poll results on other threads also show 254 being screwed thanks to the Rock Wall change. I wouldn't quite factor a poll as a definite source. That being said, I think ignoring the low bar is a legitimate strategy/design. We probably would have done it too had we not had solutions to our strategy that allow us to remain short.

254 was pretty screwed by the rock wall change, cost them over a week I heard.

Had to switch from regular swerve to tank tread swerve.

BL0X3R

10-02-2016, 16:21

I think karthik is terrified because too many teams will be willingly sacrificing too much in order to be low-bar compliant. There might be teams that can only build a box on wheels plus a low-quality intake because of the constraints of the low bar.

Now don't get me wrong - a high quality, well driven box on wheels can do OK as a low first or second pick this year, but if an alliance is limited only to breaching then they shouldn't expect to make it to the semifinals. Likewise, an alliance without a shooter may be locked out of the finals completely, depending on the event.

That is what karthik is scared of - the amount of teams that think that a low-bar-traversing box-on-wheels will be good enough because of the value placed on defenses.

GaryVoshol

10-02-2016, 16:23

//image clipped//

He meant to say "The results of this pole are terrifying."

To add insult to injury, I'm sure that's over 15 inches. FOUL!

Rangel(kf7fdb)

10-02-2016, 16:23

254 was pretty screwed by the rock wall change, cost them over a week I heard.

Had to switch from regular swerve to twerk drive.

Fixed that for you. :]

XaulZan11

10-02-2016, 16:32

254 was pretty screwed by the rock wall change, cost them over a week I heard.

Had to switch from regular swerve to tank tread swerve.

Sounds brutal. I hope they will have enough weight for their scissor lift climber...

Alex Chamberlin

10-02-2016, 17:30

My 2 cents:

The scouring potential of a good low bar bot significantly exceeds that of the non low bar bot causing the high ratio of low bar to other. That's why he believes the poll.

He thinks that if 90 % are low bar the best low bar will make runs while the other to sit around feeling useless.

Thats the gloomiest out look but terrifying is not the word I think he would choose.

So... more on the word terrifying.

It sounds like a low bar bot was a counter to some strategy he envisioned or his team worked off of.

Ginger Power

10-02-2016, 17:39

For those who are saying that Karthik may not have accounted for something, or that the high percentage of low bar bots will ruin his strategy... I highly doubt that. I don't know Karthik, but from listening to his speeches I am willing to bet he has a plan for just about everything. He probably knows the meta of the meta-game better than most people understand the basic aspects of the game.

It has been said multiple times, but I firmly believe that Karthik is concerned about other teams and their strategic decisions. It is strategically beneficial for many teams to ignore the low bar, and they're not doing that.

Obviously this is all speculation. I can't wait to hear what Karthik has to say on the matter at Champs.

evanperryg

10-02-2016, 17:48

My 2 cents:

The scouring potential of a good low bar bot significantly exceeds that of the non low bar bot causing the high ratio of low bar to other. He thinks that if 90 % are low bar the best low bar will make runs while the other to sit around feeling useless.

I doubt that a 3 cycler alliance, at least at low to middle levels of play, would be able to cycle fast enough for the low bar ability to become a significant advantage. Keep in mind a strong alliance will need both breach and tower points, so these teams will have to go through the other defenses for most of the match anyway, nullifying much of the low bar cycling strength.

Had to switch from regular swerve to tank tread swerve.
I heard they also had to rework the drop-down mecanums, too.

GeeTwo

10-02-2016, 17:54

254 was pretty screwed by the rock wall change, cost them over a week I heard.

Had to switch from regular swerve to tank tread swerve.

I doubt that a 3 cycler alliance, at least at low to middle levels of play, would be able to cycle fast enough for the low bar ability to become a significant advantage. Keep in mind a strong alliance will need both breach and tower points, so these teams will have to go through the other defenses for most of the match anyway, nullifying much of the low bar cycling strength.

I heard they also had to rework the drop-down mecanums, too.

Nonsense. They just had to add another couple of percent to the duration they ran the four big fans.:p

I don't know about Karthik, but the main thing that would be terrifying to me is if a significant percentage of robots are planning to only cross the outer works at the low bar. This would lead to easy defense, significant traffic jams, and the category C defenses (drawbridge and sally port) being in position 5 most matches.

jweston

10-02-2016, 18:00

My biggest concern is how low bar teams did their cost-benefit analysis. The poll suggests many teams felt there will be a huge speed pay off to going under the low bar. This speed pay off has to be high enough to outweigh the compromises made to effectiveness at goal shooting, breaching, climbing, and blocking.

The special thing these low bar bots bring to the table is the ability to ferry balls into the courtyard quickly, as well as breach the low bar. But points are scored on scoring goals, breaching, and climbing, not ferrying balls.

It gets interesting when you have so many teams making the same types of trade-offs. The more teams doing the low bar, the less of a premium there is to it. In the meantime, they must live with the design compromises made in order to make it under the low bar. This makes it more likely that there will be a premium on bots that can do well with goal shooting, other types of breaching, climbing and blocking.

Getting under the low bar is nice for an alliance to have, but it's not a killer feature. An alliance can score in all ways without a low bar bot. I'm not as sure that an all-low-bar alliance is as likely to be equally effective. There's just too many other aspects of the game that a low bar bot team might have underestimated in value or in difficulty. Time will tell.

evanperryg

10-02-2016, 18:06

I don't know about Karthik, but the main thing that would be terrifying to me is if a significant percentage of robots are planning to only cross the outer works at the low bar. This would lead to easy defense, significant traffic jams, and the category C defenses (drawbridge and sally port) being in position 5 most matches.

This is a really good point. I hadn't even considered the number of teams making dedicated low bar shooters... I think it's time for a new poll.

EDIT: Here's the poll. Results are already a little frightening. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143587)

Chris is me

10-02-2016, 18:21

The special thing these low bar bots bring to the table is the ability to ferry balls into the courtyard quickly, as well as breach the low bar. But points are scored on scoring goals, breaching, and climbing, not ferrying balls.

You're overlooking a very big part of the game, and ultimately what pushed many teams toward a low bar oriented strategy. You need 8 balls scored to capture. If you want to reliably get that ranking point, especially at early events, you will want to do that by ferrying balls into the low goal. The low bar is probably the only reasonable shot of a single robot trying to stuff anywhere close to 8 balls in that goal every match. Trying to get an 8 ball throughput, even spread across the entire alliance, will require going to the secret passage early and often, and there's no faster way to it than the low bar.

If one of the ranking points was not predicated on scoring a high volume of balls I do not think the low bar would have been such a high priority for so many teams. But maybe I'm overestimating the depths of team strategic analysis, and people just decided to try and do everything.

Kingland093

10-02-2016, 19:02

The special thing these low bar bots bring to the table is the ability to ferry balls into the courtyard quickly, as well as breach the low bar. But points are scored on scoring goals, breaching, and climbing, not ferrying balls.

This is what we are trying to do. We always try to go for the supporting role as we just don't have the resources or the capabilities to be an all out offense robot. Unfortunately, I think a lot of teams this year have picked up on that strategy. (i suppose that's good for tall shooter robots who will have a lot of options come alliance selections)

I'm predicting that in the first few weeks of regionals, there will be several winning alliances that cheescaked a tall blocker onto one of the small support robots that will shut down the alliances of small shooters.

BotDesigner

10-02-2016, 19:25

jweston

10-02-2016, 20:04

You're overlooking a very big part of the game, and ultimately what pushed many teams toward a low bar oriented strategy. You need 8 balls scored to capture. If you want to reliably get that ranking point, especially at early events, you will want to do that by ferrying balls into the low goal. The low bar is probably the only reasonable shot of a single robot trying to stuff anywhere close to 8 balls in that goal every match. Trying to get an 8 ball throughput, even spread across the entire alliance, will require going to the secret passage early and often, and there's no faster way to it than the low bar.

I had taken the tower strength into account. There is 15s in auto and 135s in teleop. Let's say you can round trip a shot in 15s, probably faster doing the low bar. If you plan to capture or climb in the last 20s (i.e. you're going for that capture rank point), you can still get 8 shots in between auto and teleop. More shots are better of course, especially if you miss. My concern is if a design compromises the shooting accuracy even if it is low goal, more round trips are required to get the same effectiveness, potentially making the extra speed a wash.

If one of the ranking points was not predicated on scoring a high volume of balls I do not think the low bar would have been such a high priority for so many teams. But maybe I'm overestimating the depths of team strategic analysis, and people just decided to try and do everything.

Winning gets you two rank points. Breaching also gets a ranking point. The low bar gets you up to 10 points, it works as one of the four defenses needed to breach, and it cycles the ball faster. It's a nice piece to something bigger. If reality ends up reflecting this poll, low bar capable bots will be a very plentiful resource.

Of course, if a team can pull off the low bar and excellent shooting and/or a variety of defense breaching, that will be a very effective bot indeed.

tindleroot

10-02-2016, 20:06

My team is building a low bar low goal robot. We also have a 3ft long arm we use for defense manipulation as well as scaling. After seeing the polls about a week ago, we decided to mount a large plastic sheet to the arm for blocking shots. With all the short shooters I have a feeling we will mainly be using the arm for defense.

I don't know why Karthik is terrified, but my team could not be happier about the results of these polls.

Here is a possible reason why Karthik is terrified. Think about the following:

How many points do you think you can score with your strategy?
Could you build a tall robot that scores more points?
Do you have the resources to do so?
If you did, would you choose the low bar robot anyways?

It appears many teams are. Those teams are going to score fewer points than the tall counterparts, and the robots that are relying on passing through the low bar (apparently about 90% of teams are going to for the most part) are going to experience a lot of congestion that will slow down gameplay even more. 4/5 of the field will not be utilized to its full potential in that case (except for perhaps the breach points), which makes for a much more boring game. Not to mention, defense selection is going to be a lot less valuable than we thought.

However, one of the biggest problems is when defense is stronger than offense. If an underdog alliance can shut down a powerhouse alliance from defense, it gets exciting because the playing field is more level. If neither alliance can score boulders due to defensive wall bots (which are easy to make), then the game will also be extremely boring. It's like a game of basketball where neither team can score.

Torvando

10-02-2016, 20:22

I think that Karthik is terrified because he doesn't want to make everyone feel bad when they show up with a low bar bot that unfolds to shoot 100% at 54 inches. :eek:
He also could have thought that it would be a less utilized strategy. Now he is sad that he wont have a unique robot.

swaxman12345

10-02-2016, 22:50

Bees? Bees!

PayneTrain

10-02-2016, 22:58

FYI my final answer is Karthik is mostly terrified of the near certainty that somewhere in the world someone has unironically written Karthik Kanagasabapathy fanficition.

Greg Needel

11-02-2016, 11:27

My theory is that teams are trying to be as much self sufficient as possible. By being able to go under the low bar, you have a guaranteed scoring method and don't have to rely on others. This could also be influenced by last year, where heavy dependence on teammates in Recycle Rush, may have costed the match, especially for"can bots". I have seen many teams especially at Dallas who lost this way. One example is 2848( I believe they are the team Im thinking of), who had an excellent "canner" bot. But they were dependent on teammates to stack, and eventually did not do as well as stacker robots.( No offence to this team or any team of the same model, you guys still had an interesting strategy). I think many teams are basing their robot on defence maneuverability, because they have the most control over their destiny.

Yup. Last year we thought that it would be slower to cap your own stacks, so we decided to split the task. As it turned out lots of teams were able to effectively build and cap stacks. We knew we were not going to seed well with the robot at the regional, but thought that a specialist would come into play at the championship level. While we had a reasonably successful season, we were wrong in our choice. But that's how you learn and grow.

We are taking the approach this year of trying to control our own destiny, but still thinking about how we will fit with other robots on the field.

NShep98

11-02-2016, 12:23

With so many teams attempting (keyword: attempting) the low bar, my concern for them is going to be standing out enough to be a good potential alliance pick. If everyone's doing the low bar, that means you'll have to be able to do a number of other things to avoid blending in with every other low bar robot.

The issue here is whether teams are taking too much risk in trying to do other non-low bar tasks well that they don't do very well at anything, including the low bar.

Jared Russell

11-02-2016, 12:49

Richard Wallace

11-02-2016, 15:06

Wait, maybe we've got the question wrong!

Instead of "What is terrifying Karthik?" maybe we should be asking "Why is Karthik terrifying?"

Could it be his horns (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/24150)?

Bryce2471

11-02-2016, 16:09

If you are going to pick one thing to be good at, why pick the thing that every alliance only benefits from having one of (and that many shooting robots may want to utilize to improve their cycle times)?

If you are going to pick two things to be good at, why make one of them the thing that is most difficult to integrate with most other robot functions?

If you are going to pick three things to be good at, now you have two functions that are difficult to integrate...and now most teams are well on their way to ineffective robots.
This^

I totally agree with that sentiment as it applies to the majority of teams. I think that if you compound this with the idea that some things that will be incredibly important at a high level become nearly impossible to implement on a low robot. (such as the ability to shoot over a defender with a pool noodle, or having an accurate and reliable shooter) Then it starts to look like there are few teams for which the decision to go under the bar is a good one.
(exceptions may include young teams who don't plan on shooting high, those who plan on seeding high but aren't concerned with boulder shooting, and potentially those who could not produce a shooter that can hit from the outer works to begin with)

cait.schroeder

11-02-2016, 16:46

Best contributor to the thread (as of Wednesday at Midnight): 12 Cans of Mt. Dew coming your way to support you during the home stretch of the build season.

It is not just one response but the entire contribution from a CD user that is being judged. Of course, Karthik is not eligible**

Cheers,
Dr. Joe J.

*as judged by yours truly. I'm buying the Dew, I'm making the call.

**but he can feel free to help me sort the wheat from the chaff -- I won't turn him away. I still get final call on the winner.

So Joe, who is the winner?!?

ratdude747

11-02-2016, 17:01

So Joe, who is the winner?!?

He probably hasn't decided and/or is getting a 2nd opinion (maybe from Karthik himself?)

Patience...

GeeTwo

12-02-2016, 00:29

I'm probably too late for the Mountain Dew (don't drink it anyway), but here goes:

The poll results terrify Karthik. If these results were expected, they would not terrify Karthik. Therefore these results were unexpected. This means that the Simbotics strategy committee miscalculated the frequency of strategies being employed by teams. To someone as good at understanding and predicting strategy as Karthik, that in itself could be terrifying.

JesseK

12-02-2016, 13:23

If you are going to pick one thing to be good at, why pick the thing that every alliance only benefits from having one of (and that many shooting robots may want to utilize to improve their cycle times)?

If you are going to pick two things to be good at, why make one of them the thing that is most difficult to integrate with most other robot functions?

If you are going to pick three things to be good at, now you have two functions that are difficult to integrate...and now most teams are well on their way to ineffective robots.

I see what you're saying, but here was our thought process.

Team defenses don't match the real thing, and adding polycarbonate/aluminum sheet only gets it so close to the real thing. It would be an entire tangential fundraising/toolset to get the real defenses built. In our analysis we wanted to be able to ensure the breaching bonus as well as the contribute to the weakening bonus as best as possible. In order to do that, we first determined the rolling drive train properties across the defenses. Then we decided to hedge against the fact that we probably won't solve one of the real defenses even though we've solved it in our shop.

Thus, in order to ensure we could still hit our target of X out of 5 categories of defenses, low bar became a major target. We'll find a partner or two to compliment us for elims.

Then there is the utility for cycling. An entire zone of the field surrounding the low bar becomes obsolete without the ability to go under the bar. It even becomes a liability in the wrong situation. It's definitely a tradeoff though.

Citrus Dad

12-02-2016, 18:41

Foster

12-02-2016, 21:11

Best contributor to the thread (as of Wednesday at Midnight): 12 Cans of Mt. Dew coming your way to support you during the home stretch of the build season.

Did I miss the post? Is Karthik still terrified?

Caleb Sykes

12-02-2016, 22:59

Did I miss the post? Is Karthik still terrified?

There are so many posts in this thread, that while Joe Johnson was reading through them all, he got thirsty and drank all 12 cans of mountain dew himself.

Karthik is likely still terrified.

Joe Johnson

13-02-2016, 11:14

FIRST, Work, & Home have conspired to postpone the judging... ...until now.

I am going to kind of live tweet this thing.

100+ message to get through. Let's see how it goes.

Joe Johnson: Awesome post, as usual. I expect nothing less ;-)
bobjones227: joke
Basel A: lots of shorties means lots of blocked shots = terrifying
Kevin Sevcik: traffic jams + design compromises = terrifying
Chris is me: massive design compromises that are unnecessary in the numbers that the poll indicates.
tindleroot: Low bar means no high goal, hanging, & other defense = game sucking = terrifying
Bryce2471: Complements me and then poses the possibility that 1114 has chosen a Me Too strategy and that is terrifying Karthik. I am going to have to be honest. Starting with complements. Good idea. Thinking 1114 is going to go with anything close to a Me Too strategy. Not your best idea. But good try.
Jon Stratis: Well written. Limbo is hard. Harder still if you want to do X,Y, & Z. For most teams it is biting off more than they can chew. Poor performing robots = Terrifying.
nighterfighter: Poll analysis. Rookie Mis-judging difficulty, Many teams will do a sloppy job of defining requirements so they won't even limbo, teams are overvaluing one feature, teams will just be terrible. Posits theory that I want to be a barista based on scanty evidence. False.
Lidor51: If Everyone can limbo, then it is of no advantage. Better to be a tall robot and be good at that without having to have compromised other features.
rsisk: Canada joke. I've had a Canadian on my team for the last 2 years in which as a team we've probably made 100s of Canadian jokes at his expense. He's a good sport but at this point these jokes are well beyond their best if used by date. I'm tossing them in the trashbin.
Ginger Power: Design tradeoffs = less interesting = Terrifying
efoote868: Got to love the Triple Tortuga reference. And a link to a fish in the face gif. The force is strong in this one...
Jcarbon: Underestatation of task = Learning Too Late = Terrifying. Simple logic and probably very true.
Rangel(kf7fdb): Robots driving over robots may be a thing = funny (and Terrifying)
Andrew Schreiber: "Karthik is scared teams are going to overestimate how much they don't suck." I think you may be on to something there. It is the Elephant in the room but yeah, a lot of teams really don't have a realistic view of their team's capabilities.
pwnageNick: 90% is not high enough = Terrifying -- I like how you're thinking out of the box but I doubt that is the thing that's terrifying.
Keefe2471: Posted quote from Joe G. TLDR: WE decided to Limbo but we are worried that THEY will struggle. ... Scaling in 2016 = Canburglaring in 2015. ... There are better ways to play the game than to limbo. Joe G. has a lot of great things to say but he lost me with Scaling is this year's Canburglaring. One literally ended the game on Einstein in the first second of autonomous and mattered almost not at all for 95% of the matches. Scaling is just one more way to get 10 points by a robot. It matters but it is not in the same class.
New Lightning: Lack of robot diversity => lack of strategy diversity = Terrifying.
safiq10: Mutombo shotblocking meme to emphasis low shooter's dilemna Not a bad effort.
cadandcookies: Also noted Schreiber's Team's overestimate how much they don't suck quote. Expounded upon his personal views that align with this, even to the point of pointing out his own robotics team is not an exception to this rule. Also said a lot of things that others have already said but quite eloquently.
Procolsaurus: Wiring challenge = Terrifying.
AdamStockton: Another nice discusion of tradeoffs ending up with very compromised robots
Anteprefix: Single Tortuga blocking traffic at the low bar. -- again, I like the Tortuga reference. Know your judge...
MaGiC_PiKaChU: Achondroplasiaphobe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achondroplasia) joke? Really?
IronicDeadBird: Makes the good point that short robots are going to be very hard to see from a distance and that it could lead to a lot of unintentional traffic jams, penalties, and other things are going to be as fun to watch as paint dry.
Caleb Sykes: Teams that CAN limbo but take forever to do so = Terrifying
Shrub: Water game joke.
matthewdenny: random spider reference
Billfred: Teams will learn late (e.g. at a competition) that they can't limbo after all and by then they can't put the genie back in the bottle (i.e. recover the capabilities they lost trying to limbo)
Woolly: Good discussion of Auton Implications of 90% limbo robots. Loses me a little discussing 2-3 ball autons but otherwise I'm with her.
pandamonium: deleted
mrnoble: it only takes two stuck robots to completely screw up an entire match if all that teams can do is limbo.
cmwilson13: Don't forget 2011 (Logo Motion? Maybe he means 2010 & Breakaway?)
Mitchell1714: Waterloo has all Limbo Robots BUT 1114 = Terrifying. I think this is unlikely on many counts but IF 1114 doesn't limbo, it may be terrifying but not to Karthik but to everyone ELSE. The same way it was terrifying to see all those stacks last year. Terr-i-fy-ing!
EricH: Complements to the CD crowd (calling us the top half). Good start. Poor Planning on most teams' part => traffic jam for all in the Neutral Zone for all = Terrifying Finishes with a statement that I can only guess was meant to imply that his team is NOT going to limbo.
mrnoble: Concerning cmwilson13's 2011 reference. Stronghold could be worse in some ways.
Richard Wallace: Failed Limbo attempts will lead to tortugas => randomized seedings.
PayneTrain: Stronghold is unique in FRC games in the amount scoring it provides for robot movement alone (I think maybe 2008 - Overdrive was close?). Terrifying = Hyperbole. Brings in the "pinch point" of Ranking given that one team can get 1+ RP on its own but can't get that 2nd 1+ RP without all robots. Points out that Tall Blocker Robots needed to advance in Elims but there won't be enough to go around (1 per Alliance). Closes with One Stuck Robot => Alliance is screwed.
JesseK: It's a metaphor... ...about CD polls.
Ryan Dognaux: Weight is so much less of a factor this year plus you don't need to shoot from far away to score in the high goal. Having team on your alliance that tries to do too much but fails = Terrifying.
hectorcastillo: Karthik miscalculated limbo height = terrifying
staplemonx: link to a video of a "Soft robot" using body flexing to limbo under a pane of class. It is kind of cool but also kind of creepy. AND it takes for ever. It IS Terrifying. Bonus link to a Great White North Video. Too easy.
PayneTrain: ...
MrJohnston: Karthik is confused (and possibly drunk)
DesignComp: Joke referencing Karthik's last name?
evanperryg: Karthik is terrified at the poor thinking skills of teams, chosing to forgo 10 easy points for a traffic jam, especially if a defender is helping gum up the works. BUT "The few low bar teams who have consistent high-elevation shooters will be ridiculously strong against poorly coordinated alliances." I think you are right. Effective ball gathering + Limbo + Effective high release long distance shooting = Top 1 or 2 seed at almost every competition.
DohertyBilly: So many limbo robots means teams are not doing the many other things that they could be doing which is a shame because there are a lot of things worth doing this year = a Real Shame (which is almost terrifying)
ratdude747: Thought message. Compares Low bar to Tunnel in 2010 and in that year, it didn't end well for most teams that designed to get through the Tunnel. Gave a lot of examples of 2010 design tradeoffs that hurt teams then and then made the connection that this year's game is worse.
Collin Fultz: Emcees tripping over low robots = terrifying ;-)
Taylor: Ohio joke plus worry about Tortugad robots on the Batter.
pfreivald: Where did Tortuga come from? What is this some sort of a "Why did the chicken cross the road" reference? Well I'll TELL YOU. That Turtle came from Manchester, NH and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
orangemoore: reference to Triple Tortuga thread.
Sperkowsky: Personal experience shows that perhaps this is all overblown. His team has managed to get a high shooter to limbo and if they can do it anyteam can. From your keyboard to God's ears. That's All I have to say.
Chris Endres: This year's Cool Kids Club may be tall robots and Karthik may find himself on the outside looking in.
Andrew Schreiber: Popularity of thread makes him laugh.
AdamHeard: Awkward is the word for this thread.
Anupam Goli: It is THIS thread that = Terrifying Karthik
marshall: metafied - I like it.
Taylor: I don't get it.
Abc123454321: Limbo is a good choice because it puts your team in charge of its own destiny unlike canburlar specialist robots last year.
Monochron: seconded above comment
Ginger Power: A red head is also confused by Taylor
IKE: Good discussion about striving for excellence and importance of being good at a smaller set of things than so so at a larger set. Finishing with Karthik is trying to help teams by having them think hard about their decisions (maybe this is what I'M doing -- maybe Karthik and I are in league together -- who can disprove it?)
PayneTrain: Fanboy thread alert.
GMeyer: Karthik is worried about a world with haves and have nots where good teams run of the score against bad teams (like basically every FRC game ever ;-) If so, GMeyer says relax. Teams will adjust as the season progresses.
Doug G: Limbo = compromised designs
GMeyer: 1114 might not limbo and he's concerned they'll be the odd man out.
cait.schroeder: Laundry list of good reasons to be terrified. Including the idea that Karthik is loosing his mind. I can't argue with that. Terrifying indeed.
cj3958: argrees with one of Cait's reasons.
Citrus Dad: So many teams getting it RIGHT = Terrifying
nuggetsyl: People are underestimating shooting?
SM987: Poll vs Pole pun. Nice.
PayneTrain: #TeamTether reference. Careful. There are folks with PTSD and this hashtag might be a trigger...
BethMo: vote for SM987
Peyton Yeung: joke
Captain_Kirch: joke
cait.schroeder: self selected polls have data bias problems
anishde: Karthik can generate a lot of chatter (with help from yours truly don't forget)
Koko Ed: Penalties are even more scary than 90% limbo wannabees
Brian C: seconded Ed
Tim Sharp: thirded Ed plus more emphasis
Justin Montois: Karthik is daunted by the stats task ahead of him
Craig: short robot chaos will ensue = terrifying
eedoga: whip antenna's my help with chaos (I don't think so)
JABot67: Limbo is too popular. It will be hard to find 3rd robot for alliance. Cheesy Poofs are going big this year. Scary.
JesseK: who said Poofs are going big?
JABot67: POLL RESULTS ARE PUBLIC (I didn't know that. Sorry if I totally screwed over some teams)
Rangel(kf7fdb): poll results should be taken with grain of salt
cait.schroeder: worried that I will only consider old time CD folk. This is not true. It is THIS THREAD contribution that I am judging not ALL THREADS. Rest assured.
Joe Johnson: Dang, this is taking a LONG TIME to do. Hope someone (anyone) is still reading this thing.
AdamHeard: ironic post about Poofs designing non-robust solutions that small rules changes will defeat. As if!
BL0X3R: Low bar = too much compromise for most (but not all) teams.
GaryVoshol: SM987 reference
Rangel(kf7fdb): Twerk reference (bonus if someone gets a Hanna Montana reference into this thread)
XaulZan11: Dis of scissor lifts. I'm good with that.
Alex Chamberlin: Non lowbar folks will be left out?
Ginger Power: Karthik is the Bill Belichick of FIRST FRC -- couldn't agree more (and I'm not talking the "We'll let the Broncos have the ball first in Overtime Bill" but the "We've got no running backs so we're throwing the ball every down against KC Bill")
evanperryg: 3 Cycler Alliance Analysis plus another joke about what the Poofs will (or rather will NEVER) do.
GeeTwo: It's not the % of low bars but the % of low bars ONLY teams that's scary. True dat.
jweston: Analysis questioning the calculation that are behind low bar if they are based on speed. Wonders if they are planning on scoring balls or just ferrying. If the latter, it is going to be a long long season.
***********************************************
also I am finally to the 100th Post in this Thread. Phew... ...it's all down hill from here...
***********************************************
evanperryg: Good point GeeTwo. New Poll proposed (terrifying)
Chris is me: analysis of weakening towers with a low bar/low goal ferry robot. I don't agree with his conclusions (8 Balls for a team that decided to be build that robot is asking a lot -- not that it won't happen but really. I don't see the type of teams that builds this robot being the type of team that gets the fine details right to be able to cycle fast enough to get 8 balls done in a match) But a good thing to discuss.
Kingland093: His team will build a boulder ferry robot, validating jweston's point. But he predicts that Tall Blocker Cheesecaking will be popular in the early weeks of the season (does anybody have a special name for Tall Cheesecake? It would be great to get that into the FIRST lexicon).
BotDesigner: His team is building a limbo robot with a bad $@#$@#$@# blocker feature. He's happy as a clam about the poll results (thinking he'll have a lot of shorty shooters to defend against)
jweston: rebuttal of Chris is me's points above.
tindleroot: rebuttal of BotDesigner's arguments. Defense vs. Offense arguments.
Torvando: 1114 will be awesome and Karthik is terrified of making others look bad. I only have this to say about that. After looking at last year's robot I don't see how you can say this motivates anyone on 1114 yet alone Karthik, the man.
swaxman12345: whoosh. That's all I heard.
PayneTrain: Kanagasabapathy fanfic is a thing? Count me in ;-)
Greg Needel: Controlling your own destiny is nice. A lesson learned by a team that decided to only one task last year (Cap stacks or Make stacks, not sure which).
*****************************************
Oh HEY. IT IS AFTER MIDNIGHT SO THE CONTEST IS OVER
I will keep reading but the winner is based on what came above, not below
*****************************************
NShep98: Standing out is going to be tough if you do what 90% of other teams do (or try to do). Will teams end up doing all things poorly as a result of this tough challenge? I agree and disagree. I think that any team that can limbo AND do something else of value well (shoot in the high goal with a high release, cross defenses well, play defense well, pick up balls well, ...) will definitely stand out and be drafted very early.
Jared Russell: nevermind
Jared Russell: nevermind
Jared Russell: VERY interesting analysis about making choices. "and now most teams are well on their way to ineffective robots." You speak the truth I fear. Everyone else read this post and remember it for next year. The problem I keep coming back to is that most teams do not see their own weaknesses. They think, "this is what the Poofs will do so MY team has to do that too" or fill in the blank (HOT, Nutrons, Pink, Miss Daisy, ...) You have to know what YOUR TEAM can finish, on time, under budget. If you fail that test, you fail period.
Richard Wallace: Why IS KK terrifying? Good question. I don't think Horns have anything to do with it.
Bryce2471: Jared Russell is brilliant. Who doesn't know that? But I concur.
cait.schroeder: who's the winner? Cait, I'm working on it. I'm working on it. Give me some space girl! ;-)
ratdude747: Joe's getting a 2nd opinion. Probably would have been a good idea, but no. I'm on my own here
GeeTwo: Nice Meta-meta analysis. But I'm not buying it.
JesseK: Jared Russell for President (or maybe VP behind Karthik at the top of the ticket -- they'd get my vote).
Citrus Dad: ?
Foster: hurry up, Dr. Joe. I am pedaling as fast as I can here...
Caleb Sykes: Suggests that I drank the prize while judging. Caleb, you are not wrong as it did take me many a Dew to get to the FINAL post I am judging.

So... ...where does that leave us? I am going to make a clean post to announce the winner. Stay tuned...

Dr. Joe J.

Joe Johnson

13-02-2016, 11:28

There were a LOT of great points made in this thread, TOO MANY to be fair to all the great folks who really put some thought into what they wanted to say.

I want to say that it is my sincere hope that a few more teams really put thought into two particular possible futures:

1) MAYBE your team can have a great season being something other than a Limbo Robot. You may be better off if, by not having to go under the Low Bar, you are able to give your robot other capabilities that you would not be able to have otherwise.

2) IF YOU ARE GOING TO LIMBO ANYWAY, make sure that that is not the ONLY thing you can do. Don't be that robot. Add value to the alliance beyond the low bar.

Now for the moment you've all be reading for.

And the winner is...

Andrew Schreiber. He made a lot of good points but for me he sealed the deal with this quote:

"Karthik is scared teams are going to overestimate how much they don't suck."

It isn't a fair contest, but life isn't fair.

Andrew, it didn't figure into the decision but you've disavowed the Mt. Dew prize (I don't understand some people) saying you'd prefer judge referrals for the Boston District. You shall have them sir.

PM me and we'll work things out.

Well done everyone.

Cheers,
Dr. Joe J.

GaryVoshol

13-02-2016, 11:44

I was tempted to say something about giant balloons being terrifying ...

Joe G.

13-02-2016, 12:00

Keefe2471: Posted quote from Joe G. TLDR: WE decided to Limbo but we are worried that THEY will struggle. ... Scaling in 2016 = Canburglaring in 2015. ... There are better ways to play the game than to limbo. Joe G. has a lot of great things to say but he lost me with Scaling is this year's Canburglaring. One literally ended the game on Einstein in the first second of autonomous and mattered almost not at all for 95% of the matches. Scaling is just one more way to get 10 points by a robot. It matters but it is not in the same class.

Just to clarify: I did not mean to suggest that Scaling is of comparable overall strategic importance to Canburgling. Rather, I wanted to look at the the variety of tasks FRC games have presented, and the degree to which they actually impart hard tradeoffs into the design process and require detailed analysis to determine if the pros of going for a given task outweigh the cons. There were a whole lot of teams in 2015 that justified their decision not to initially incorporate Canburglers into their 2015 robots with logic based very firmly on a purist sense of "we're not going to try to do everything, we have a simple robot, Canburglers are hard," when even a low tier Canburgler (a stick on a Versaplanetary or 3/4" bore piston) achievable by nearly every team and addable to nearly every robot after the fact could literally have become the most attractive robot feature of a good chunk of FRC teams. I think we will see a similar pattern in scaling this year. There have been a lot of rumblings about how hard and not worth it scaling is, but like Canburgling, it can be achieved effectively by small "auxillary" mechanisms, the type that's easy to work into any robot with withholding after seeing a cool implementation in someone else's reveal video. It won't provide the massive gains that Cangurglers did, but it's a potentially worthwhile bonus with very little risk associated with it.

The idea was to contrast this kind of task with the low bar, which dominates the design process with brutal tradeoffs in a way that these tasks just don't, not to imply that Scaling will be the sole deciding factor on Einstein. Scaling was a particularly handy way to illustrate the relative worth of the low bar because so many teams are claiming "Low bar is more important than scaling" through their designs and priorities, and a good scaler should have a much more consistent expected value for thee act of scaling than a shooter.

Also we're definitely worried about struggling as well :p . We think that we've approached the tradeoffs inherit to our strategy in a way that plays to our team's strengths and mitigates some of the chronic problems we expect many low bar machines to experience. Scarcity did play into our decision making process, and we expected low bar machines to be far less common than recent polls have suggested. We're locked in now and it's going reasonably well (I'm feeling quite a bit more confident in our design, and by extension, many other teams' designs, than I was when I made that post), but if we knew then what we know now, we may have still gone down a different path.

IronicDeadBird

13-02-2016, 14:33

And the winner is...
Andrew Schreiber.

Thats a weird way to spell my name...
But yeah dat quote doe.

Ginger Power

17-02-2016, 17:37

I know the competition is over, but I feel the need to share the real reason that Karthik is terrified:

I love the spotlight feature (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LljVL7w30zk):D

Mike Marandola

17-02-2016, 17:47

I know the competition is over, but I feel the need to share the real reason that Karthik is terrified:

I love the spotlight feature (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LljVL7w30zk):D

How have I never seen this?

RonAyyyyyyyy

15-03-2016, 20:40

Plot twist: regardless of the results of the poll, Karthik would find them terrifying

Karthik is always terrified