Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

I totally agree with the idea of regulating cheesecake; adding a gigantic mechanism (from what I heard, upwards of 70lbs) to a robot, regardless of that robot's previous weight, is extreme and should be disallowed. However, regulating the parts used for cheesecake is hard; mechanisms would be easier. If during partial inspection, a sticker with a team number was placed on every functional mechanism (defined by the inspectors, but generally things that have benefit to an alliance. For example, having a sensor or camera on the robot wouldn't count as a mechanism, but having an elevator pulley or ramp would). Then, the inspectors can see for eliminations which objects have a sticker with a different team number or no sticker at all. Inspectors would then be able to regulate the number of cheesecaked mechanisms and/or the weight of them. Additionally, they could also regulate the number of mechanisms that have been removed from the original robot (as they should/would be able to know how many stickers they gave).

Just an idea, and completely my own opinion. I would personally have a hard time taking apart my robot to the same extent as some others, but along with Alex, I do think it added another element to the game. Did it make Recycle Rush better? That's a debate for another day.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

They made the call before they were selected onto an alliance.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

I am speaking from limited but enlightening experience about cheese caking when I say that a limit to the weight or size dimensions of the cheese would be a thoughtful idea. This year I have witnessed and read about two similar incidents concerning an alliance's ability to make it to the playoffs in a regional/district/division and actually win the whole shabang. 2383 (The Ningineers) came up with a "Noodle Net" that they put on team 5469 (Flare). The idea was creative and the purpose was to block or prevent "litter" from getting tangled in the drive trains of that alliance as well as to reduce the points scored for the litter. During the Bayou semifinals the alliance consisting of 2383, 179, and 5469 the net's tethering rope became tangled up in 2383's drive train, preventing them from scoring their maximum amount of points. Note: 5469 did not move the entire playoffs! So it became a 2vs3, and the cheese cake was effective in some ways but led to that alliance's demise.
I will only be able to restate the pros and cons of the
4 harpoon cheese cake idea. But it did hurt 148's alliance, regardless of the can burglaring properties it had, I feel like 1114 and 148 should have used their own automonous can burglars to retrieve the same amount of cans. I feel like if that had been accomplished than the third member of the alliance would have been able to contribute more toward the teams progression in the finals on Einstein, and potentially have won. So for all the ingenuis cheese cakers out their beware of the potential hurt it could bring your team or alliance.......

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

You should read about 900 and the robot build they did to work with 1114, 148 and 1923.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...&highlight=900

Also another side note, 148 cannot be a fast canburgular. They are forced to stay in the staging zone because of Robin.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

That's a really good question. I believe (yesterday was a blur to be honest) in almost every match robin came within 1-1.5 stacks of using all the HP station bins. However another big reason that we did not try to human load is that Batman deposits it's stacks on the near scoring platform, behind which we parked. by the time we knew whether or not we could use some totes that robin wouldn't we we were fairly blocked in. The addition of Catwoman (148's can burglar) made us a bit wider about 32ish inches which made it very hard to maneuver behind those stacks and put a high risk of knocking over a stack. Therefore the strategic choice was made to not have us attempt stacks after a few attempts, especially since without our ramp, we can't guarantee the totes to land flat on the ground.

On a sidenote if anyone is interested I will write up a full account of the modification process that we underwent after alliance selections similarly to what Marshall wrote about team 900.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

I would love one. I only got over to your pit for about 30 seconds because of what we were doing and for you guys it had to have been done insanely quick. I would love to know the details.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

Although 148 is limited by their robin, the possibility for them to add modifications to their strategy is numerous.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

We kind of like our strategy the way it is.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

I believe the intention of the harpoon mechanism was to keep the alliance in the finals from taking the cans and not use them on either side, the speed on those harpoons would have been insane and no one would have been able to take the cans, so even if they cant use them, neither can the other alliance and it becomes a stack off. Also 1114's canburgling mechanism was inconsistent at the speeds necessary to win the can wars on Einstein and this mechanism would have removed that inconsistency and atleast kept the other side from getting any of the cans.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

I know 1114 and 148 And both are exemples of GP i can easy prove this citing 148 position after have they robot disable in the regional final this year or 1114 for the same great example after the eistein mess in 2012, legal cheasecake is not the problem because is legal, and if it is in the rules the teams need to use it for achieve their objectives, 4613 also build a canbuglar if was necessary, and i also saw 1114 and 148 building those cheasecakes during the entire competition and it is a achieve to be proud of.

but about the rule that aloud it and this years game that turn it necessary at this level... i disagre

About the experience in being cheasecaked, is problaly the same as being chose by a power house alliance. I hoped was me being cheasecaked by these guys :)



also i want to congratulate 1114 148 1923 and 900 for being curie champions!

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

I would like to correct you on some points you made about our playoff strategy since it may have been misunderstood. 5469 was cheescaked to be a can grabber in playoffs and was extremely successful at doing so towards the end of our playoff run. We brought out the noodle blocker in Semis and only used it in Semis 2 & 3 after seeing the ineffectiveness of it, we removed it for semis 5.

We would never pick a team to be an immobile dud on the field. Telling a team to not move is not only extremely rude and kinda "bully-ish", but also not intelligent for strategy. We picked 5469 since they were light weight which is what we needed for the noodle blocker, and also showed some experience in the landfill. Lastly, we never got caught in the tether of the noodle blocker as we never ventured on that side of the field, we got caught in the tether of our ramp in semis 3 and then after replacing the rope with an identical rope, we got caught again in semis 5. Since then we have learned a lot and created a much more resilient tether and only had to replace it once at champs after a minor entanglement that we had quickly escaped.

Sorry if my message sounds harsh, I just don't want misunderstandings

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

When I was in high school, my team's strategy was to pick 1 element of the game and do it better than anyone else, and in that way we could be an attractive pick for the #1 alliance that could do everything else well but needed our complimentary capability.

Some years it worked better than others - especially when we picked the correct element of the game. Other years we struck out because we bit off more than we could chew, or because we picked the wrong strategy. Regardless, we always had unique robots that played the game.

If the current metagame continues, the best way to follow that strategy would be to let the #1 alliance "fill in the blank" with what they need, which means having a blank canvas for them to work.

In my humble opinion, a drive train should not be an attractive option as a 2nd or 3rd pick for elimination.
I don't blame the elite teams for this... it's a logical conclusion to competition. I don't think there are any rule fixes for this either; I think the solution is that the GDC needs to design games that critical elements cannot be achieved solely with a bolt-on solution, and in that way simple drive trains cannot be cheesecaked into championships.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

As you can probably tell, we had a lot of cheesecake debate in 4613 during the championships!

I see both sides of the debate. If it is legal and helps teams to win, they have a responsibility to use it, within the bounds of GP.

Also if teams learn from the experience of being cheesecaked, as it seems many did, then that's great too.

But in my view (clearly not that of all my team-mates, which is a fine thing), it becomes an issue when teams are selected as cheesecakeable alliance partners above great teams who have played well through the qualifiers. This takes opportunities to play in finals away from teams who have genuinely done their best to build a robot to play the game, and I don't think is "right". Like I say - this argument is against the rules allowing this process, NOT against those who used it to their advantage this year. 1114/148 did what they needed to to win, and good on them.

It was also impressive to see such things built in 3 days, and we were very interested in how they went if/when they made it to the field. Though I think allowing what appeared to be a weapon (albeit non-lethal) on the FRC field is a dangerous precedent to set.

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

I personally think FRC should get rid of or severely limit cheese-caking. Our team executed "cheese-caking" to a great benefit this year but I don't like the long term implications. Do we want teams to purposely bring bare drivetrains to competition so that they're more attractive picks? Do we want to essentially punish the teams that actually built something that can't as easily be hacked down to a "blank slate"?

Re: The cheesecake runaway
 

That is not the real question. One of the major things to consider in this game is match flow. There is a lot of movement on the field with a lot of points at stake. The initial intent of picking 1923 was their potential (and willingness) to be cheesecaked while retaining their stacking ability. Robin is able to empty the player station but that means pushing Batman's tasks to a pace that mistakes can be more easily made. Four stacks is a much more comfortable pace for us and we got into a rhythm where we consistently did that in the playoffs. We wanted 1923 to grab the cans, release, then head back to the HP to stack the totes we didn't get to. However (like Libby had pointed out) stacking the totes from the HP was not as reliable for them without their ramp. Instead, we came to the agreement that they would spend more time positioning the cans then move the auton totes out of the way. This aided in match flow and unlocked more points for the alliance than a single uncapped 6 stack would earn us.

This will be a little off topic but speaking of match flow... 1923 seemed to be a master at it (or at least caught on insanely quick). During the process of removing the cans and moving the auton stack, they would spend a lot of time around the near scoring platform. They did an absolutely fantastic job of tip-toeing around the stacks. I remember a couple times yelling that we were coming with a stack and *poof* they would disappear. This is even more impressive when you consider that they were dealing with a brand new system on their robot.