| Jared Russell |
05-05-2014 18:29 |
Re: Successful teams in FRC history
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek R
(Post 1382947)
True, but functionally both 33 and 254 were able to pick up the ball and score it quickly and efficiently. Their robot did not change, though their strategy might have.
|
We were a little bit undecided at first as to what the best way to play the game would be. Our initial attempt at modelling the game (a) severely underestimated how much time it took for balls to be re-entered into play and (b) underestimated the ability of the average robot to acquire an assist, making single robot cycles (with a truss toss) look more appealing. But after about a week into build season it was starting to become clear that assisting was the way to go.
We were able to postpone the conversations about teleop strategy until late in build season because we realized that regardless of your role on the alliance, or whether you are doing 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50 point cycles, it really doesn't make a lot of difference in the robot you want to build. You need to be able to acquire balls (from the ground, from a partner, from a human player) and exit them from your robot (to the ground/low goal, to a partner, to a human player) and truss/score high. You need to be able to play defense, and function in the presence of defense, meaning you can't fumble the ball every time you get hit. The only point of contention was whether catching would really be worth it - even then, designing for loading from the top was advantageous for other reasons. |
