Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

From what I looked at in the game I think I found two roles on the field the GDC intended to have...
But with three robots that means roles overlap and that doesn't make sense all things considered.
Two scoring platforms
Two feeder stations
Two mid piles
Am I just crazier then I thought? Does this not add up to anyone else?
Am I wrong? (Am I wrong), For thinking out the box from where I stay?

P.S I just really quoted a pop song lyrics...

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Is one robot going to stack all 70 or so totes you're able to stack, while the other caps a maximum of 7 stacks?

There are 30 totes behind the feeder station, 28 totes in the landfill, and 12 on the step. Three robots at the highest levels will have difficulty scoring all of them, and then there are 7 containers you are able to grab.

And that doesn't even touch upon litter.

I can see all sorts of different alliances with different robots serving different roles being viable in Recycle Rush.

So what roles do you see? Cause I'm pretty firmly stuck with a robot that creates a lot of stacks or a robot that tops with multipliers. This field gets cramped fast and having roles that overlap are innefficient. I'm thinking maybe a robot that only moves resources around... not even sure if that's viable.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Comparing this thought to previous years (2013 for example) you either scored disks, climbed, or were some combination of the two. There were enough disks too rarely run out and enough room on the pyramid to allow for all three to climb. This year there are enough game pieces (and enough variety) and enough space on the scoring platforms that you can have three robots playing the same role.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Robots that are effective at picking up and scoring totes from the landfill (up to height xxx),
Robots that are effective at picking up and scoring totes from the feeder station (up to height xxx),
robots that are effective at picking up and scoring containers from the ground,
robots that are effective at picking up totes from the step and landfill and scoring them (up to height xxx),
robots that are effective at picking up both containers and totes from the ground,
robots that are effective at picking up containers from anywhere,
robots that are effective at picking up containers from the ground and totes from the feeder station,
ETC.

There are quite a few different roles, and different types of these robots work together better with each other.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

I bet there will be (at least) two classes of stackers: ones that can make small stacks very quickly, and ones that can make small stacks into big stacks, perhaps at a slower rate. Feel free to sub-divide these into 'from human station' or 'from landfill' or whatever.

Take any of the Ri3D robots, for example, and pair them with a team that can make stacks of 3 totes really quickly. The 'pick and place one tote/stack' sort of design common to Ri3D could make stacks of 6 with one or two (careful) maneuver(s) while the second robot cranks out stacks of 3 totes wherever they can manage to place them. A third robot caps these stacks with cans, maybe with litter.

This might be my ideal alliance...

Pardon the typos cause I'm mobile right now but this is how I see it.
Recycle rush is a PvE based game where interaction between teams isn't as big of a factor as interaction within teams. This is due to it being based around resource management. The asymetrical field design ensures there are absolutely optimal areas for each scoring platform. There is the driver station scoring platform with a close driver station andd a far driver station. The obvious ideal is the close driver station. There is also the step scoring platform. Where you have two resource piles one closer one farther again optimal areas availiable. The sacrifice for running three stackers is that you don't really have an area to create stacks without causing traffic jams. So yeah you could triple up on stackers but then you restrict movement incase you get noodled. So yeah there is enough space on the platforms I don't believe there is enough driving space to support that. 2013 on the other hand is pvp you don't play tetris the same way you play chess

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

2 human player stackers and a landfill stacker. I think there is plenty of room for 3 stackers, as long as they can also cap their own stacks.

Re: Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

The distribution of bins to cap with is auto to land fill. With only one robot working landfill wouldn't the run the risk of the other teams taking step bins. Unless you don't move bins during auto then its an even split but at that point the four bins would be better be utilized by two robots. Then one using four.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Unless the one robot gets them first...

If it rushes bin it doesn't have a stack scoring side it has stack staging side and a bin on nothing is worth nothing.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to saying.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

How and where a team creates stacks will vary but seeing as the totes will come from one of three locations (2 feeder stations and the landfill) there should not be much need for moving between those locations and interfering with your alliance. Even if a team shuttles one tote at a time from the feeder station to the scoring platform you should be able to set up a prematch strategy with your alliance to designate what routes each robot will be taking. As far as only having half the field to work with it is now 3 robots on half a field instead of 6 on a full field with the added bonus that the robots on your side of the field aren't intentionally trying to slow you down.

If you go for the bin first without having a stack you either need to put it down and wait for a stack or move to the staging platform and hope there is a stack there. Both options waste time. In a management match you want the cycles tight, unnecesary movement is wasting time wasted time is lost score.
Got the comment its kinda like cooking
"Yo I opened the cookie dough!"
"Dude were in the sick ward of a hospital and we don't have an oven..."

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Unless your robot is designed to efficiently move bins and fill them with litter. Then by the time a stack or two is ready, you'll be ready with a couple noodle filled bins.

I can see that but having a robot built for bins and noodles is low scoring due to the fact that you need to put it on one tote. A noodle and a bin on nothing is worth nothing and I dunno if it counts as unproccessed litter now that I think about it...

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

I guarantee you there will be at least one robot that has a failed tote manipulator and must rely on capping stacks. yes this puts pressure on the other two robots on the alliance to be able move totes but chances are pretty good that at least 1 of the 3 robots on an alliance can create stacks. That is part of the challenge of FRC, how do you design your robot to succeed without relying too much on your partners? To succeed in qualifications you usually need to be able to do everything in case your partners don't show up for a match. But once you reach eliminations you tend to get picked on your skill in one particular area.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

One more thing to consider this year is the fact that ranking isn't defined by the W-L-T system like we are normally use to it is about scoring the most points or keeping your opponents from scoring points. If you can get the 4 recycle containers off of the middle step onto your teams side you prevent them from scoring those points and limiting their potential max score and hopefully lowering their match score average. I don't think this is necessarily the best strategy but just some food for thought. Also the longer you wait to grab the stuff on the step the less likely it is to be there when you want to use it.

I agree completely I just find it hard to believe the only areas I came up with for scoring are stacking and capping.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Or you design the robot to build a stack under a container. No need to put it down.

Yeah the counterplay for this year is so bizzare. Denyijng potential is kind of cool but not really the most engaging thing or even helpful except at high levels where bins will be used. But the noodles? No offense and maximum respect to GDC but the risk reward of noodles seems a little off balance...

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

2014 had a pretty good variety but catching was rare
2013 was disks and climbing
2012 was baskets and balancing
2011 was tubes and minibots

This year we have totes, bins and noodles that are worth different amounts in different arrangements. If the GDC had given us another way to score (different game piece or end game) then the game would get too complicated.

I feel like they accidentally created endgame with pool noodles to be completely honest the time taken for driving landfill vs putting noodles in bins. Need to do the maths though.

Anyway what I am hearing is there is stacking and capping. Correct me if I'm wrong of course

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

A noodle in a bin is worth the same 6 in the landfill or 3 stacked totes. Depending on an alliances capabilities it might make more sense to move 6 noodles into the landfill or stack 3 totes. But a noodle in a bin on top of a stack is the most effective use of the noodle.

That's assuming all actions take equal amounts of time.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Well like I said it depends on an alliances capabilities but looking strictly at the points awarded to number of game pieces used the noodle in the bin is the best way to go. Especially since the highest level of play will see noodles in stacked bins. However if there is 5 seconds left in the match and you have no chance of getting in a noodle in a bin, by all means get the noodle on the other side of the field or get it in the landfill.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

It all adds up for me. There are so many ways to build a robot this year, and some variety in how to get game pieces. We are planning to be able to do the "hard stuff", on our own, to maximize our alliance score. Assuming that our alliance partners will likely need both feeder stations for at least some of our matches, we plan to mainly get totes from the landfill, and make medium stacks with them. Then be able to cap our stacks, and stacks that our partners make, as well. The scoring platforms are relatively long, hopefully we'll not run out of room on them for stacks, but even if we do, it's a nice problem to have, it means you're racking up the points.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Seems to me this is the most understated strategy. There is no need to raise to over 6' if you start building a STACK by bottom stacking with a CONTAINER already on the first TOTE. The practicality of this strategy may change in competition, but it seems that most of the Ri3D didn't have too much trouble.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

I totally agree but I think this will only be preferable during qualifications when you might need to complete an entire stack by yourself. Once you have a set alliance in elims I think it will be quicker for 1-2 robots to only focus on stacking totes and have the third robot worry about lifting bins.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

While all of the Ri3D teams built stacks using this method, it might be important to note that none of them did it very quickly. Teams rarely win FIRST events because they can complete actions that nobody else can; they win because they do things faster than others.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Looking at this from an eliminations standpoint, only two robots should need the feeder station at any given time with maybe one overlap. If you have one robot stacking stacks of three or four on the ramp, one robot collecting recycle containers and placing them on the three high stacks, and one robot stacking a three high with a container onto another three high. Your quickest stacker does the stacks of three, your best manipulator does the final stacking, and the last robot does as many containers as you can. Three unique roles. Although they are lifting just the same for the totes, it is different enough to that at any median level regional atleast two of the roles wouldn't be interchangable, of course this would change at champs, but for the most part there are three independent roles, and that's with ignoring the noodles.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

One thing that makes this game interesting is that you are going to have to approach the game a little differently each match, depending on the capabilities of your allies. The real trick is for alliances to figure out how to maximize points and not overlapping abilities.

It will be important to figure out which robot/s can quickly stack totes and bins at the feeder station so that the third can claim the recycling containers on the step. Or, better, if a single robot is able to make three stacks at the feeder station (with recycling containers, of course!), it would make sense to send both of the other two to the step immediately - even if they are able to, as individual bots, stack more quickly from the feeder.

How many points should the alliance try to score during autonomous? It might be worthwhile for an alliance to forfeit some autonomous points so as to get a jump on the recycling bins on the step... This might depend not just on your alliance, but on the capabilities of the opposing alliance..

Is the other alliance capable of participating in coopertition? If so, will it be worth the effort to do it? Etc.

I just see so many variables that I do not believe that any full strategy can be worked out before truly sitting down and assessing the capabilities of all the robots on the field... I also think we will see a lot of math being done as robots are waiting in line to get onto the field...

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

How are you going to get a litter onto the other side of the field or into the landfill with 5 seconds left in the match?

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Throw it over the alliance wall.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

G33
LITTER may be introduced onto the FIELD only during TELEOP and only in the following ways:
A. through the LITTER CHUTE, or
B. over the ALLIANCE WALL prior to the last twenty (20) seconds of the MATCH.
VIOLATION: FOUL per LITTER.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Good point. I forgot about the last 20 seconds.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

As did I xD
However getting a piece of litter into the landfill with 5 seconds remaining is slightly more legal.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

I believe that the strongest alliances will have two robots that can stack 6 totes tall. Of those two, one will get totes from the feeder station while the other collects from the field. The third robot will get as many recycling bins from the center as it can, fill them with litter, and then top off the already made stacks.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

The top of a stack of 6 totes on the scoring platform is just over 6'2" off the floor. The top of the manipulator is only allowed to reach 6'6" tall. Do you really think that we'll see robots that can securely grip a recycling bin using no more than the bottom 3" of it and then put it on top of these stacks without tipping?

It's physically possible, but seems unlikely to me, and the failure modes are bad. I think bottom-stacking* is the only way we're likely to see max height stacks with bins on top.

*EDIT: or stacking a stack-with-bin on top of a stack-without-bin.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

I'm pretty sure at this point that making it into eliminations will be done independent of alliance partners. The robots that have the highest average score (the "winners") will be those that can score totes and bins both, independently, and quickly. The winners of eliminations will be the team that gets the bins from the step the quickest.

This is a very challenging game. Well played, GDC.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

Kevin Sheridam is some troll trying to be like Kevin Sheridan.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

In reverse.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

That totally fooled me. Thanks for pointing that out.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

we have a mechanism that will securely grip a container in the last 4 inches and is not likely to let go.
We will see but the wooden prototype worked well, the aluminum one should work better.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

No one here is talking about a robot that can stack totes and deliver stacks to the scoring zone at the same time. The rules allow such a robot this year.

Re: Stacking vs Capping vs ???
 

We have a rookie team this year & do not have the typical rookie defense option in this game, so we decided that the recycle containers were not our goal, but stacking & moving totes totes or removing litter would be our best bet. I have seen some interesting mechanisms on social media & look forward to seeing what others come up with!

Utility is great at all levels. You willing to share any details? I haven't even considered moving litter around