Chief Delphi - [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2005

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- Technical Discussion (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=22)

- - [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2005 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108878)

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brandon Holley (Post 1188796)

From a manipulator standpoint, the 217/229 giant cross is as simple and reliable as it got, IMO (or another post with stabilizer bar, just loved how big 217s was).

The giant cross is one of my all time favorite manipulators for how simple and effective it was! I loved watching 121 and 1305 make scoring look so easy with such a simple mechanism.

1305's robot is one I will never forget and goes down as one of my all time favorite robots. Their 2005 record was 33-8 with two regional wins (Waterloo and Greater Toronto).

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2005

I agree that a MCC robot would need to be able to score tetras, however I feel that a single jointed arm is probably overly complicated and that auto loading is in no way necessary for MCC. 1097 comes to mind with what I believe was a human loaded, pneumatically actuated arm.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by BJC (Post 1188772)

Then I change my vote to Trapizoid with wheels.

Even without being able to activly tip people, I would pick one of these around the back half of the draft over most tetra-placing robots that would still around to be a third pick.

Outside of lower tier regionals, it still really wouldn't be worth it. Even second round picks could still place 2-3 tetras a match at many regionals. Given that penalties for hitting a robot in a loading zone were 30 points (and various other penalties as well), the risk of having a defensive bot was outstandingly large. There were very few regionals where defense was a large part of the game (pretty much only New England events). Scoring was the way to go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colin (Post 1189079)

I'd like to see an arm with less than a single joint. :rolleyes: