Playing a different game on Einstein

[MaxMax161]

I've been watching a lot of match video and thinking about how this year's game play will be different on Einstein and in elims compared to in qualifying matches. It seems that teams in qualifying matches were flooding the field with tubes and it seemed that the better hangers would win, unless someone had a working minibot in which case the game was there's. Robots rarely needed to travel far for their tubes and could score pretty much as fast as they could lift. However in most emils I saw that there was a lot less tubes on the field and robots had a harder job of finding tubes to hang. What do you guys think the game on Einstein is going to look like? Will there be a ton of tubes, a few, or none at all on the field. Will teams be to afraid to make a mistake and give their opponent a tube with a bad throw and come to the feeder station instead? Will teams flood the field and just focus on hanging faster? Something else?

[Brian Ha]

I think the alliances with the minibot power will use a starvation tactic while the alliance with less power will go more with flooding. The alliances with minibots will hang wat they can but really their dependent on their minibots winning. and then there will be alliances where they can do everything and ill bet on them just launching tubes so they can outscore the other team

[Jared Russell]

In more than half of the Einstein matches, I would expect to see:

* All 6 ubertubes hung
* At least 8 total logos (red + blue)
* All four minibots hitting the top before the 8 second mark

And my dark horse prediction that I hope doesn't come true:
* I think someone will deploy a minibot with ~10.3 seconds left on the clock, and whether or not the refs both see and call it will decide the World Champion :)

[Brian Ha]

I think he meant more in tube throwing and starvation but i agree with you very much

[Greg Leighton]

My vision would be this: a systematic combination of accurately throwing tubes and picking up tubes from the feeding lane. I think by the time we get to Einstein you should see great tube throwing human players, especially when it comes to throwing the circle. I think at the very least the circle will be thrown into the alliances safe zone consistantly enough that teams will be able to time this to where they will hang a triangle or square and the circle will coviently be waiting next to them to score. As far as picking tubes up from the lane, you probably wont see a lot of teams going all the way to the far end of the lane to be hand fed, these robots will be too good at floor pickup for that. So you will probably see the human players putting the tubes at the end of those lanes.

That is all assuming you do not have a good defensive bot or feeder bot, which I think you will see both of those on Einstein as well. I would both hate and love to see a wall bot but I think you will see one of those as well :p

[Brian Ha]

There are a couple really cool looking wall bots out there but man they are gonna be a pain in the arse

[Jared Russell]

There are a couple really cool looking wall bots out there but man they are gonna be a pain in the arse

A thought that has been nagging me over the first two weeks of competition:

There will be three robots on the World Champion alliance. 98% of FIRST seems to have designed with tube scoring in mind. Yet every single piece of evidence I have seen and experienced with this game shows that three tube scorers on one alliance is a crowd - you invariably get in each others' way as you try to fill up the rack. And there are likely going to be dozens of robots that will be able to reliably score at least 2 logos by themselves by the time St. Louis rolls around (I have been to two Regionals in person and witnessed perhaps 6-8 teams capable of this already).

Will the winning alliance's third robot simply be another scorer? Will it be a scorer pressed into defense/tube shuttling duty? Or will it be a purpose-built third robot (think 148 from 2008)?

[Swampdude]

I think 2 good tube scorers, 3 ubertubers or 1 bot that can do 2 and another does 1. I definitely see 1 defender on each alliance. There's just not enough room for 3 scorers to work together effectively. Then some wicked fast minibot matches. All 4 minibots hitting the top within a second of each other. visually we won't know who won other than the indicators.
Throwing Vs human load: I still don't get the throw them all out there strategy. Everyone thinks human load is a handycap but I think we proved that untrue. There's a dynamic that happens with us on the field that isn't obvious. Since we do not throw tubes out, our ground loading partner gets a chunk of the other teams tubes along with their own. But there's missing tubes on the floor when we play that I think is statistically playing into our favor. So I think 1 ground loader, 1 human loader and 1 defender is optimal. We also draw attention away from our ground loading partner while traversing the field. I think after the top row is done middle is bonus but minibots are really the only way to win the match after the top rows are filled.

[RMiller]

... And there are likely going to be dozens of robots that will be able to reliably score at least 2 logos by themselves by the time St. Louis rolls around (I have been to two Regionals in person and witnessed perhaps 6-8 teams capable of this already).
...

Out of curiosity, where were these teams getting the tubes from? How well defended were they?

[Jared Russell]

Out of curiosity, where were these teams getting the tubes from? How well defended were they?

Mostly from the floor, but a few teams (1218 in NJ and 179 in FL jump to mind) reliably scored 4+ tubes per match using nothing but human loading.

I have seen plenty of (attempts at) defense, but I have not yet seen a strong scorer get truly shut down. The human loaders tend to be fast and agile enough to squeeze by defense into the zone, while the floor loaders with good human players seldom need to leave the zone to find a tube.

[Greg Leighton]

Yet every single piece of evidence I have seen and experienced with this game shows that three tube scorers on one alliance is a crowd - you invariably get in each others' way as you try to fill up the rack.

Will the winning alliance's third robot simply be another scorer? Will it be a scorer pressed into defense/tube shuttling duty? Or will it be a purpose-built third robot (think 148 from 2008)?

I've been thinking the same thing, I imagine there might be a couple alliances that can figure out the three offensive bot scenario but here is my list of what I think your third alliance partner will consist of (in order of usefulness).

1. Wallbot
2. Feeder bot (aka robot with great pickup and driving ability)
3. Another strong offensive bot
4. An elite minibot robot (this would allow for one of your top two bots to score tubes during the race portion of the match)

Now you very well may see a combination of those things but thats what I perdict.

[Katie_UPS]

4. An elite minibot robot (this would allow for one of your top two bots to score tubes during the race portion of the match)


I really hope alliance captains don't rely on only two minibot-ers this year. It reminds me of '08 when the "ideal" alliance only needed two hurdlers and one lapper. Which was great, until one hurdler broke... and then your alliance loses in semi's even though it was practically guaranteed that you'd get to go to Atlanta.

Not that I was effected by this personally at all.


<3 you 1625, 1730

[RMiller]

Mostly from the floor, but a few teams (1218 in NJ and 179 in FL jump to mind) reliably scored 4+ tubes per match using nothing but human loading.

I have seen plenty of (attempts at) defense, but I have not yet seen a strong scorer get truly shut down. The human loaders tend to be fast and agile enough to squeeze by defense into the zone, while the floor loaders with good human players seldom need to leave the zone to find a tube.

Thanks for the information. The better teams I saw at Lake Superior were all floor loading. A couple were able to get two logos themselves when they had tubes available (even as far as their towers) and had minimal defense.

[Greg Leighton]

I really hope alliance captains don't rely on only two minibot-ers this year. It reminds me of '08 when the "ideal" alliance only needed two hurdlers and one lapper. Which was great, until one hurdler broke... and then your alliance loses in semi's even though it was practically guaranteed that you'd get to go to Atlanta.

Not that I was effected by this personally at all.


<3 you 1625, 1730

I imagine on Einstein all robots on the field will have a minibot, atleast that was my assumption when I posted that comment. The thought I was trying to get across was that when picking for eliminations you may see an alliance persuaded to pick a team based on having an especially good minibot, one that stood out from the rest. I imagine the first two bots will have minibots that work just maybe not as good an elite minibot that the third pick might have.

[MaxMax161]

Hmm unless there was an amazing defense bot that didn't have a minibot and the other two alliance partners had really reliable minibots, which could happen, I think all robots on Einstein alliances are going to have a minibots.

What do you guys think is the best way to counter an alliance with really strong minibots and good hanging (about 3 logos a match) if you're a team with good minibots and really strong hanging (4+ logos a match), and vise versa?

[Lil' Lavery]

None of the alliances on Einstein will have a "minibot specialist." Guaranteed.

[thefro526]

None of the alliances on Einstein will have a "minibot specialist." Guaranteed.

Have we even seen a robot that would fall into the category of "Minibot Specialist"?

I wouldn't doubt that a team may make it to Einstein while filling a role where their primary objective is to win the minibot race, but they'd HAVE to do something else for the first minute and 40 seconds.

[IKE]

Have we even seen a robot that would fall into the category of "Minibot Specialist"?
.

I have seen a couple bots that were able to drive around and deploying a minibot was essentially their only "scoring" capability. It actually did quite well at its event.

In general, this bot either played defense or pushed tube for the first 1 minute or so.

[Lil' Lavery]

Have we even seen a robot that would fall into the category of "Minibot Specialist"?

I wouldn't doubt that a team may make it to Einstein while filling a role where their primary objective is to win the minibot race, but they'd HAVE to do something else for the first minute and 40 seconds.

I'm not talking about a team that doesn't do anything for the first 1:40. Any alliance that relies on a single robot to win minibot races for them match after match won't reach Einstein.

[thefro526]

I have seen a couple bots that were able to drive around and deploying a minibot was essentially their only "scoring" capability. It actually did quite well at its event.

In general, this bot either played defense or pushed tube for the first 1 minute or so.

Ike, do you thing this robot would fair well at the Championship?

I'm not talking about a team that doesn't do anything for the first 1:40. Any alliance that relies on a single robot to win minibot races for them match after match won't reach Einstein.

The only way I could see that happening is if said minibot had some sort of "game breaking" strategy where it could afford to sit at the tower all match. (And after 469 last year, I'm not ruling anything out.)

[MaxMax161]

For the sake of argument lets assume that at least two robots probably three that reach finals in St. Louis will be able to minibot. Do you think their going to camp the pole at 25s-20s, try and rush in at 15s from the other side of the field or hang that one last tube and go for not a first place minibot and deploy after 10s?

[Jared Russell]

I agree that a "minibot specialist" is unlikely, simply because if your minibot is *that* much better than your tube scorers', you're going to be off the board early.

However, I do believe that all three bots are likely to at least have a minibot, lest someone breaks down, gets blocked, or fails to deploy.

In one Florida practice match, our alliance had 3 minibots. One robot went to the left tower and deployed without problems. The second robot went to the right tower, but their bot failed to start climbing. We went over to the right tower and deployed our minibot above the one sitting on the base and climbed successfully.

[Basel A]

Very interesting thread!

A few thoughts:
1. 3 Hanger-bot alliances are already having trouble. it will probably be easiest to have 2 Hanger-bots and one assister (likely a feeder+minibot). That said, a team that can master the collusion of three hanger-bots, even if one is only scoring on lower pegs, may take the Championship by filling the rack top to bottom.
2. What I like about a minibot specialist in St. Louis is that they'll be low ranked, and trained feeders or defenders. That's really underrated. Teams with the "wrong strategy," like us last year with the suspensions, usually make excellent third-round picks. There are feeder-bots, like team 1 this year, who suck in qualifications, but given a good scorer in the zone, they excel. This was shown at Kettering, where they were champs, and they're utlising the same strategy to the same effect this weekend at Detroit.
3. Throwing vs. Loading. I think the best alliances will have smart feeders. This means they only throw the tubes their alliances need, and only throw them to their alliances. Traditionally, even in 2009, human players didn't need to be good, they just needed to be smart, and I believe that will again be key. Also, as alliances seek to fill the rack, which will happen more than once in STL as well as the MSC, they will understand the need to be more careful with tubes they're wary to lose.

[XaulZan11]

Do you think their going to camp the pole at 25s-20s, try and rush in at 15s from the other side of the field or hang that one last tube and go for not a first place minibot and deploy after 10s?

I think deploying and then scoring the last tube will be more likely than scoring then deploying with less than 10 seconds left.

I don't think there will be a minibot specialist (as in a robot picked to only deploy their minibot and can't score tubes), because I doubt there will be a team that has a significantly faster minibot that didn't have time or the ability to build a working arm. I expect the fastest minibots will be on the elite tube scoring robots for the most part.

[Arefin Bari]

Throwing Vs human load: I still don't get the throw them all out there strategy. Everyone thinks human load is a handycap but I think we proved that untrue. There's a dynamic that happens with us on the field that isn't obvious. Since we do not throw tubes out, our ground loading partner gets a chunk of the other teams tubes along with their own. But there's missing tubes on the floor when we play that I think is statistically playing into our favor. So I think 1 ground loader, 1 human loader and 1 defender is optimal. We also draw attention away from our ground loading partner while traversing the field. I think after the top row is done middle is bonus but minibots are really the only way to win the match after the top rows are filled.

Not every team has a driver like Team 179 does. Your driver adapted well to all obstacles on the field (including other robots) and was simply just fast. Also your human player didn't take long time to load the tubes into your claw. There are many teams out there that are relaying upon human loading; but the factor that no one is taking into account is how fast can you load and score.

On to topic, I do feel the same way Dan does. 2 very fast scoring robots + 2 fast minibots with 1 team that can distract the opposing alliance will be the ultimate alliance at the championship. In the 2 minutes that we have a lot of things can go wrong; I believe rather than competing on how many you can score vs. slowing your opponents down play a huge role in your final score.

[Norman J]

Traditionally, even in 2009, human players didn't need to be good, they just needed to be smart, and I believe that will again be key.

I disagree on this point. The HP needs to be good and smart. A human player who is practiced enough to throw all 3 shapes consistently into the scoring area or even within a few feet of it will be incredibly valuable. Each throw he/she makes saves that alliance two trips across the field through defense. He/she has to be good because a bad throw will not only not help at all, but save the other alliance two trips across the field through defense.

[Basel A]

I disagree on this point. The HP needs to be good and smart. A human player who is practiced enough to throw all 3 shapes consistently into the scoring area or even within a few feet of it will be incredibly valuable. Each throw he/she makes saves that alliance two trips across the field through defense. He/she has to be good because a bad throw will not only not help at all, but save the other alliance two trips across the field through defense.

I agree that would be valuable, but I think what is necessary and likely will be a smart human player. They don't necessarily need to get it to the scoring zone, but they need to be accurate and make it past the midfield line. Farther is better, but most important is that it lands closest to an alliance robot.

That said, I will always take a feeder who can throw into the scoring zone every time than one that can very accurately place tubes in the near midfield area. Once inside the scoring zone, for the better robots, it's only a matter of a few seconds to score.

[mwtidd]

I disagree on this point. The HP needs to be good and smart. A human player who is practiced enough to throw all 3 shapes consistently into the scoring area or even within a few feet of it will be incredibly valuable. Each throw he/she makes saves that alliance two trips across the field through defense. He/she has to be good because a bad throw will not only not help at all, but save the other alliance two trips across the field through defense.

A bad throw can also result with the tube in the other team's lane, where you can't grab it.

[Norman J]

I agree that would be valuable, but I think what is necessary and likely will be a smart human player. They don't necessarily need to get it to the scoring zone, but they need to be accurate and make it past the midfield line. Farther is better, but most important is that it lands closest to an alliance robot.

That said, I will always take a feeder who can throw into the scoring zone every time than one that can very accurately place tubes in the near midfield area. Once inside the scoring zone, for the better robots, it's only a matter of a few seconds to score.

I definitely agree that most importantly, a human player has to know where and what to throw. But nearly everyone can figure that out. What will distinguish the good from the excellent are consistency, accuracy and range.

[Hawiian Cadder]

if there are only going to be 2 mini-bots scored and one robot on the feild will be a defense and feeder type robot, then it might make sense to make a 15 lbs minibot in order to give it more grip to push around other robots. 10% increase in weight is a 10% increase in pushing power with the right gearing.

[AlexD744]

Einstein will probably have alliances that consist of 2 top tube scorers that also have the fastest minibots on their alliance. The other robot would probably consist of a robot that can play all facets of the game well, that way, if a failure were to occur in either of the other 2 (i.e. flipped over), they could jump into the tube scoring and at least place a minibot. This third bot might be assigned to scoring some tubes as long as they stay out of the other peoples way (yes this is possible if the drivers are smart and keep in mind that they are the third bot and can only score when the rack is open, our alliance did this in florida and scored about 4 logos this way), it could be assigned to starving the other alliance of tubes (defense), or it might even be to go and get tubes either from the human player or from far areas of the field.

[Grim Tuesday]

Have we even seen a robot that would fall into the category of "Minibot Specialist"?

I wouldn't doubt that a team may make it to Einstein while filling a role where their primary objective is to win the minibot race, but they'd HAVE to do something else for the first minute and 40 seconds.

Defense+minibot. We won't see anyone with no minibot, and just defense. I think that the third robot in an Einstein alliance will be either a ferry robot, or a defense robot. If the "tube starvation" strategy works, then it will be a ferry.

[BGiraud]

Is there really an advantage to choosing a bot that has showed they are good at def rather than the best remaining scoring bot? If mini bots are equal that is. In my experience the decent scoring bots have good enough drivers and solid enough maneuvering ability to easily transition into a def role. The ability to switch back to a scoring role easily outweighs the experience gained playing def in qualifying rounds. Also, typical def bots may not be the best at stealing tubes assuming they might have inferior grabbers.

So I guess the question is, can def bots really play def that much better than a decent scoring bot in that role?

[Daniel_LaFleur]

So I guess the question is, can def bots really play def that much better than a decent scoring bot in that role?

Potentially, yes.

Defensive drivetrains are designed for power and traction while most offensive drivetrains are designed for speed and manuverability. Since the offensive scorer must traverse the 18' between the poles (or have the tubes delivered between that space) that gives the defensive bot team knowlege of where the 'target' will be.

Offensive drive teams may not be completely up on the nuances of defensive penalties and therefore may incur more penalties. This is not any slight on the offensive driveteams, but a matter of what you've practiced, just as defensive driveteams would not be as good a scorer as an offensive driveteam.

The one last advantage of having a (only one) defensive team out there is that the scoring zone can get pretty crowded out there and offensive teams can get in each others way. With 2 powerful tube scorers, it may be wise to choose a third partner that won't play in the scoring zone.

My belief is that you will see on Einstein 2 powerful tube scoring robots, each capable of 2+ logos each, 1 defense bot (capable of starving the tube scorers and locking the scorers in their scoring zone at minibot deployment time) and all 3 having fast minibots with reliable deployers.

[BGiraud]

Defensive drivetrains are designed for power and traction while most offensive drivetrains are designed for speed and manuverability.

I would debate this. While I would agree that some of the speedsters may suffer in a pushing match, MOST other good scoring bots have good drivetrains. That is part of why they are good. Consider those with shifting transmissions. Fast and strong. I actually saw many Mechanum(sp?) drive bots play def quite well and they are maneuverable with minimum traction.

This brings up another question. What makes a better def bot for this game, fast and maneuverable, or powerful with a lot of traction? I say fast and maneuverable. Thoughts?

[Daniel_LaFleur]

I would debate this. While I would agree that some of the speedsters may suffer in a pushing match, MOST other good scoring bots have good drivetrains. That is part of why they are good. Consider those with shifting transmissions. Fast and strong. I actually saw many Mechanum(sp?) drive bots play def quite well and they are maneuverable with minimum traction.

This brings up another question. What makes a better def bot for this game, fast and maneuverable, or powerful with a lot of traction? I say fast and maneuverable. Thoughts?

We played defense at GSR.

Our drivetrain was skid steer, 4 cims, AM supershifters, and pneumatic tires.

No Mechanum/omni could budge us and we were able to push most teams at will. Our shifters allowed us to keep up with (if not outrun) most drivetrains there in high gear while pushing most while in low gear. We placed 11th and were 8th seed captain without ever scoring a tube or minibot. We did this by keeping our opponents (some of the best scorers at BAE) to 12 points or less in 8 of our 10 seeding matches.

So, yes, I do believe that defenders, that play smart defense and have a complete understanding of their strategy and the nuances of defense can be superior defenders compared to an offensive team/bot that tries to play defense.

[Eagleeyedan]

A bad throw can also result with the tube in the other team's lane, where you can't grab it.

I have seen teams do this on purpose actually because they want to block the lane. Some robots can't pick up off the floor so if they block the lane with a tube, they can stop the team from getting tubes. I've even seen some teams do this in autonomus!

[BGiraud]

We played defense at GSR.

So, yes, I do believe that defenders, that play smart defense and have a complete understanding of their strategy and the nuances of defense can be superior defenders compared to an offensive team/bot that tries to play defense.

I am not trying to imply that defenders can't do well and will ultimately play better defense than a scoring bot due to experience. I just feel that the seperation in defending ability is not huge and the ability to ferry tubes and score if needed (uber tubes as well) wins out.

Our robot is 6WD, 1/8" rocker, AndyMark SuperShifters, 6" plaction wheels w/wedgetop tread. It was designed to not lose a pushing match and preferably slip away with our speed. Switch roles to def and we will make a pretty good defender. Just fast enough to catch you and just tough enough to stop you.

Maybe what I am missing here is how difficult it really is to shut down the opposition. Is there a real skill in properly defending or is any adequate defense all that is needed? I guess I need to watch some more tape with this focus in mind.

[Wayne TenBrink]

Einstein alliances will consist of the best group of 3 scoring robots that can be assembled. Each will have reliable autonomous (worth 12 points each) and at least 2 fast reliable minibots with a third one that is reliable as a minimum. Each will be a floor loader. There will be no feeder bots, since all tubes will be thrown at least 2/3 of the way downfield. The two best scorers will do just that. The other will work the far side of the field. Defense will not be about pushing robots. It will be about pushing your opponents tubes into your feeder lanes faster than they can pick them up to score them (starvation) and delaying one minibot deployment. The "defense" bot will be the reserve scorer and minibot. It will be the first time many of them have ever played defense, but their solid chassis' and experienced drivers will have mastered the task before they ever get out of their respective divisions.

[Andrew Lawrence]

I have seen teams do this on purpose actually because they want to block the lane. Some robots can't pick up off the floor so if they block the lane with a tube, they can stop the team from getting tubes. I've even seen some teams do this in autonomus!

Is this legal? If it were, I'd seriously contemplate on having an alliance with a defensive robot who's prime goal in autonomous is to block the feeding lane with an ubertube.

[mwtidd]

Maybe its just me, but I think stopping a minibot is more valuable than scoring one, especially if its the opposing alliance's top minibot.

There are ways to make it very difficult for many teams to deploy a minibot without getting penalties. After looking through the estimated value of the top 25 teams robot and minibots, the robot is almost always as valuable and on the very best teams its significantly more valuable. Now given this could be because there is more point inflation with minibots than with robots, so it may not be quite a true reading. I think the emotional impact of a minibot is clouding people's perception of their actual value. I think if a team invested in stopping the fastest minibot, rather than putting up the fastest minibot, they would be the team to win on Einstein. Stopping the best minibot acts as at least a 30 point shift, assuming all 4 towers would normally be triggered.

*as always my calculations are estimates, and are not to be taken as a fact but rather a reference.