A Horrible Idea

[generalbrando]

I had a horrible idea for a strategy and I haven't seen the idea fully discussed anywhere, so I wanted to put it on here and hope that most everyone would agree that this would be a horrible thing to do!

I think on the Q+A board on FIRST's site someone asked if we can block the view of the drivers. And there's a discussion now about blocking the ball chutes. I could imagine a robot being able to do both. It would essentially stop the other team from being able to compete!

You're all going to say "but you get the losers score!" I know, but the score doesn't matter in the finals! (If you win it doesn't anyway) If you go into the finals as a top seed and you pick a bot that can disable the other alliance and then let you do whatever you want, then you would win.

I know this bot would be hard to design and I'm sure that it would receive some damange. But don't say it can't be done! Even if it's just not feasible - pretend it is for the fun of the discussion. :)

[Jessica Boucher]

Though it does sound really cool for a finals robot, I wouldn't want to bet my entire season on being picked.

Building a robot to be picked is very nervewracking - just ask the majority of teams in 2001 (not yourself, though, since youre from Hammond and they dominated in 01 :-P). It's a lot of emotions to go through during alliance selection, a lot of selling your team to other people and being in the right place at the right time.

So, I'd rather be seeding well than selling myself. But it's still a cool idea. Gold star for creative thinking! :)

[Mr. Ivey]

Voice of expirence here, don't try and control the game. Team 384, my team, tried this in 2001 with Sparky v3.0, it won many design awards, but failed in competition. So don't try and control the game, you will get burned. with big arms, comes leverage that can be used against you. Do one thing and do that one thing well. Just if you try to cover the drivers, you will get burned, and throw in control over the corrals, you have arms to bend, torque, and destroy. Just heed the warning.
Ivey

[Joe Matt]

Voice of expirence here, don't try and control the game. Team 384, my team, tried this in 2001 with Sparky v3.0, it won many design awards, but failed in competition. So don't try and control the game, you will get burned. with big arms, comes leverage that can be used against you. Do one thing and do that one thing well. Just if you try to cover the drivers, you will get burned, and throw in control over the corrals, you have arms to bend, torque, and destroy. Just heed the warning.
Ivey
It was 2002 Mark, not 2001. 2001 we played the game, and did it well.

[JVN]

So, I'd rather be seeding well than selling myself. But it's still a cool idea. Gold star for creative thinking! :)A full defensive robot can seed 1st in this competition.

All you need to do is go 8-0.

So, the above strategy (if legal) could potentially be a high seed, simply because it wins every match.

The "losers score" stuff only matters if there is ANOTHER robot that is 8 - 0. Wins are everything people.

John

[Jessica Boucher]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the blue alliance bots start on the blue side of the field? I still think Murphy's Law - or another robot - would get in the way. And by losing a match, you fall to the bottom of the double-sort.

I dont know, I still think it's a cool idea, but too risky for me :)

[bigqueue]

Voice of expirence here, don't try and control the game. Team 384, my team, tried this in 2001 with Sparky v3.0, it won many design awards, but failed in competition. So don't try and control the game, you will get burned. with big arms, comes leverage that can be used against you. Do one thing and do that one thing well. Just if you try to cover the drivers, you will get burned, and throw in control over the corrals, you have arms to bend, torque, and destroy. Just heed the warning.
Ivey


But then again, if you are going to "control the game", you had better really do it and not think you will.

I am thinking of a robot two years ago called "BEAST" that basically fell down, extended two huge arms and "inched" its way forward, collecting all three goals, muscling them to the scoring zone.

It was slow, but it was very powerful. It was "out-played" in several matches, but I would say that 80% of the matches I watched, it did its job with great consistancy.

If I recall, it was on the winning alliance, and it ended up playing in every match of the finals except the last one (or two) because it had been damaged in a prior game.

Like I said....if you want to dominate, you had better to it well....and it is possible.

-Quentin

:yikes:

[generalbrando]

I agree it's risky and I don't want to try it or even see anyone try it! Good point though - if you win all of the qualifying matches, you'll more than likely seed.

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Building a robot to be picked is very nervewracking - just ask the majority of teams in 2001 (not yourself, though, since youre from Hammond and they dominated in 01 :-P). It's a lot of emotions to go through during alliance selection, a lot of selling your team to other people and being in the right place at the right time.

Building a robot to be picked IS very nervewracking. You bring up 2001 and Hammond not having to worry about that...but look at 2002. Hammond couldn't score that many points, but they could prevent other teams from scoring. Therefore, we didn't seed very high but people noticed what we could do. In effect our bot was built to be picked but like someone pointed out, you better know you can do it and not just think you can.

Perhaps the best offense is a good defense...

[Jessica Boucher]

Yes, but part of the reason why Hammond was looked at was because they're Hammond...and everyone expects something good out of last year's National Champs. That's nothing against your team - in my book it's more of a compliment....a community of 800 teams looks to your team as one that consistently knows what to do to win. There have been conversations about this before, how there are some teams that are known all over that don't need to sell themselves as much. Hammond is one of them.

Also, he only mentioned 2001 in his signature - and since I don't know him well and he has other teams (without dates) listed in his signature, it makes an outsider assume that he wasn't on the team in 2002.

So to rephrase, it may be something good for a more popular team, but I think it's really risky for a team that isn't as well known.

[Mr. Ivey]

I am thinking of a robot two years ago called "BEAST" that basically fell down, extended two huge arms and "inched" its way forward, collecting all three goals, muscling them to the scoring zone.

It was slow, but it was very powerful. It was "out-played" in several matches, but I would say that 80% of the matches I watched, it did its job with great consistancy.

-Quentin


Yes, that's what Moe, and Sparky 3 both did as well. And they could push the 3 goals that year. But in the end at the final matches, both bots started falling apart on the field... But honestly look at the physics, of it, your arms could be used against you when trying to cover the corrals. It's just not the most sound idea. Also yes you can try to control the field, it's not impossible, but improbable of it working. Just look at the physics.
Ivey

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Good point.

Reputation will always help when it comes down to being picked. But I believe that if you have a machine that can do something that will catch the attention of teams on top, it will be a little less nervewracking ;)

[Joe Matt]

Yes, that's what Moe, and Sparky 3 both did as well. And they could push the 3 goals that year. But in the end at the final matches, both bots started falling apart on the field... But honestly look at the physics, of it, your arms could be used against you when trying to cover the corrals. It's just not the most sound idea. Also yes you can try to control the field, it's not impossible, but improbable of it working. Just look at the physics.
Ivey
Geeze, Mark do your research before hand!

The robot talking about was Beaty, 71. They won the 2002 Nats with that bot, so it can be done, but don't count on it working very well.

[animater31405]

Ok. If you can make a robot like that your probably a person just like me I was thinking if you can always spank your opponents severely in every match then you ARE more than likely going to get picked as an alliance partner. you just have to play so that it will actually work. I don't think it's a horrible idea.

[bigqueue]

Yes, that's what Moe, and Sparky 3 both did as well. And they could push the 3 goals that year. But in the end at the final matches, both bots started falling apart on the field... But honestly look at the physics, of it, your arms could be used against you when trying to cover the corrals. It's just not the most sound idea. Also yes you can try to control the field, it's not impossible, but improbable of it working. Just look at the physics.
Ivey

Perhaps it "could" be used against it....but the robot I am talking about in fact dominated the games it played in and in fact was on the team that won the nationals.

It was truely a fantastic thing to watch. (I think you are talking about another robot???)

[bigqueue]

Ok. If you can make a robot like that your probably a person just like me I was thinking if you can always spank your opponents severely in every match then you ARE more than likely going to get picked as an alliance partner. you just have to play so that it will actually work. I don't think it's a horrible idea.


The bottom line in any of this is whatever you decide you want to do, you need to do it well. I think it's probably better to do one thing exceptionally well, rather than trying to fdo everything so-so.

Now, having said that, I know there are many positive things to say about the "jack of all trades"....but if you dont happen to be in the top 8, and are the master of none......it will be hard to get noticed.

I also agree with what some other said here about reputation.....but that is a totally different thing all together. (worthy of it's own discussion thread)

[KenWittlief]

I think the first time you used it, it would work

but after that element of surprize was gone

let me back up a little - there has always been the concept of 'attacking' and 'incidental contact' in FIRST. If you are trying to score or achieve a positional advantage and another bot is in your way, or going to be in your way, then its OK to push, shove, ram that bot to get it out of your way, or to prevent it from blocking you

but you cant just go around ramming opponents bots just to ram them

bumping each other (incidental contact) while playing is ok, attacking is not.

So after the other teams know what you are going to do:

a. you would have to get past their bot in auton mode somehow and
b. once play started, since you have that 'curtain of doom' on your machine you would be fair game to be slammed, rammed, attacked, bashed... for the entire duration of the match by the opponent to prevent you from deploying your curtain

if you plan to do this, bring some salt - after the 2nd round your bot will be a pretzel! :c)

[animater31405]

My thing is, because of rule 7.3.6(or something like that), you should royally spank your opponent in at least one match and get a really high score for yourself. :yikes:

[KenWittlief]

to defeat your curtain-of-doom strateejury all I have to do is keep my most rugged alliance bot against the wall in auton mode - to block my view you have to get past my bot

as soon as you try to deploy the (relatively flimsy) curtain your bot will get a severe beating :c)

[Guyute]

This isn't really a horrible idea...if you think about it. Lets say that at a regional cometition you compete in 17 matches...now if you block the chutes and you win ALL of your matches...the QP points don't matter because your the only team that would be 17-0. Therefore you would be 1st place. Now the down fall to this would be that your other allience partners wouldn't like to win a shut out because that would hurt their score. The best way to go about making a robot that could do this would have some heavy metal wall that would cover a good percentage of the whole and a long cord that would connect to your robot that is guarding the other human player chute. if i can find a scoring spread sheet and prove that your win % will become greater if you do it...then i think doing this is a HUGE key to the game.

[Joe Matt]

This isn't really a horrible idea...if you think about it. Lets say that at a regional cometition you compete in 17 matches...now if you block the chutes and you win ALL of your matches...the QP points don't matter because your the only team that would be 17-0. Therefore you would be 1st place. Now the down fall to this would be that your other allience partners wouldn't like to win a shut out because that would hurt their score. The best way to go about making a robot that could do this would have some heavy metal wall that would cover a good percentage of the whole and a long cord that would connect to your robot that is guarding the other human player chute. if i can find a scoring spread sheet and prove that your win % will become greater if you do it...then i think doing this is a HUGE key to the game.
Theoretically, yes, but practically, no. The chances of you blocking a 6 foot area totally without interference is little to none. We thought we could push all the goals into our area in 2002 and win every match. It didn't work. Faster, smaller, robots could come and screw everything up.

You build to play the game, not to control it. We've learned the hard way, don't become a victim.

[sevisehda]

Blocking the ball chute is acceptable, however blocking the opponents view has always been against some rule. Even if FIRST neglected to add the "do not block oppenents view" this year, they could very well add it during an update.

If the "curtain of doom" made it into a round I think it would quickly turn into the "tattered rags of doom".

[Guyute]

sevisehda -Blocking the ball chute is acceptable, however blocking the opponents view has always been against some rule. Even if FIRST neglected to add the "do not block oppenents view" this year, they could very well add it during an update.


covering up the chutes isn't block their view. and you don't have to cover the full 6' if you have a pole or somthing that divides the chute in 1/2 or covers up a good % of the chute a ball won't be able to get thru.

[bigqueue]

covering up the chutes isn't block their view. and you don't have to cover the full 6' if you have a pole or somthing that divides the chute in 1/2 or covers up a good % of the chute a ball won't be able to get thru.


How about just capping their goal and jamming the big ball way down into it.....no points below the cap.....score = 0.

Sounds to me like that would be legal....no?

:yikes:

[KenWittlief]

note to self: add CKD button to operator interface incase driver looses visual contact with bot to put it into a 'special auton mode'!

(Crush Kill Destroy)

[animater31405]

How about just capping their goal and jamming the big ball way down into it.....no points below the cap.....score = 0.

Sounds to me like that would be legal....no?

:yikes:
Sounds like a good idea to me! :D

[T967]

If someone decides to block views or human players chutes... so be it. It's a part of the game and shouldn't be shot down as too bad or too good. Just come up with a way to stop a bot from doing it if your really worried about it.

[animater31405]

Have fun with that! That's the point!

[Munkaboo]

I hope they don't let us block the player views... I am too tempted to do it, too. It would be a last resort type of thing, of course.

[animater31405]

I don't think it would really matter that much.

[Aignam]

If you dedicated a resourceful team to the task, I'm positive that this robot could easily be made. All that is needed is a strong, fast, robust drivetrain and a quick deployment method. The wings could be made of PVC and the curtain of some light, opaque material.

This robot, however, would not be in the spirit of FIRST and gracious professionalism, so any resourceful team would find a more feasible design.

[RoboCoder]

blocking the shutes - possibly a workable strategy

blocking the views of those behing the drivers station - several things I see wrong with it.

1) you'd get on a LOT of people's bad sodes for it, your opponents and possibly your alliance partners for keeping the scores so low.

2) Gracious professionalism people? Sure you want to win, but if you have to impair the other team's view to do it, then that doesnt seem to be graciously professional at all

3) every year some one comes up with the idea to block the other team's views. While in the past its been the drivers and not the human players (for obvious reasons), the rationale is the same. team member that cant see = against the intent of the rules/game. I think FIRST was trying to avoid putting in rules like that in hopes that most teams would have the insight to realize that you could try to do that any year, blocking the opponents view, and not really be creative or playing the game. It just seems to go against what FIRST stands for IMHO (just my opinion, if you have a different one you're welcome to state it, but dont trounce on me! :ahh: )

4) You'll be going up against a variety of teams. Theres a decent chance that at LEAST several of the teams in the top 8 were teams you used that strategy against, and they probably wont choose you.


I dunno, I just think its not a very good idea, kinda mean, not a terribly great chance of success, violates the purpose of the game (in my opinion), and would get your team on the bad side of far too many people (other important teams, judges, etc). Do what you wish, and stick with what you feel your best strategy is, but as for me, I dont plan on using this strategy.

(BTW is anyone actually seriously considering using this strategy or are we just having a hypothetical debate?)

[Beth Sweet]

[QUOTE=RoboCoder]blocking the shutes - possibly a workable strategy

2) Gracious professionalism people? Sure you want to win, but if you have to impair the other team's view to do it, then that doesnt seem to be graciously professional at all
QUOTE]

Thank you, this was exactly what I was thinking. I don't know if anyone else heard I believe it was Dean, at kickoff say that there would be a lot about this year's game that would depend on courtesy etc. and I think that this is probably what they were talking about. I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thought of this.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

that be one mad fly idear d00d... u could have like a 20 foot long foldable lexan shield..so they can see what they want to shoot at, but they cant...its like a tease

[generalbrando]

RoboCoder - I think you summed up my view for the most part in that it would be horrible for the other teams and I don't see it as being a real strategy for anyone since it's not very professional at all. I really threw this out here because I was hoping no one was thinking of doing this and I wanted to sorta make sure :). If someone really wants to try this and they don't outlaw it - I can't stop you, but you'll have a lot of angry people glaring at you!

[RoboCoder]

heh heh glad to hear that general brando. I figured since you called it a horrible idea that you werent planning on using it, but I wasnt sure if anyone was actually planning on using it, since several people have really gone into the feasibility of the strategy. Its always a good thing to see teams act on gracious professionalism - I know I try to whenever possible, and I always like hearing stories of great stuff happening because of it :D

For anyone who is actually considering it - dont forget to consider both the on and off-field consequences. I know I've heard of judges not giving an award to a certain team for actious that less clearly go against gracious professionalism. Really, its not the point of the competition anyways, not the nature of the beast if you get my drift. So, in an effort NOT to sound like a broken record (I know that repeating the same things enough times is not necessisarily a good way to reinforce your point), I'll wrap up. Keep up with coming up with creative strategies, just make sure you consider all possible consequences, in PR, game wins/points, and most of all gracious professionalism.