Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

When I had the LiveStream up while doing paperwork at my day job on Friday, it seemed that the hit rate was around 1/3 or lower. This led me to start logging the hits and misses on Saturday afternoon.

Yes, this does include shots on the HIGH GOAL taken in Auto. I did not log the hits and misses for Auto separately but my impression is that it was similar to Teleop. The most I saw was 2 shots on the HIGH GOAL in Auto by any one Alliance so the shots in Auto would constitute maybe 15%, or less, of the shots that I logged.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Here are my thoughts after competing at Palmetto.

Real field elements:
Low Bar, Rock Wall, and Cheval de Frise performed about the same as the wood models. The Portcullis was much easier since it is counterbalanced by constant force springs. Rough Terrain and Moat were tougher. Other drive train configurations may have different results.

Real line of sight for drivers:
You were expecting to see? It can get bad depending on what you are trying to do. For the most part we could see what we needed especially with help from our camera.

The tower blocks part of the field if you are playing defense. Your own defenses and audience selection can interfere with the Neutral Zone. Then you have to see around your opponents defenses into the Court Yard.

The plastic dividers between the defenses and on the Batter are hard to see. Saw lots of robots having trouble running in to them.

Real defense:
There was very little until eliminations and was a bit surprised not many wanted to show that skill. If you are going to defend, please show your ability to help breach if nothing other than to get back to the Batter.

Taking real shots at the high and low goal:
This was about the same as our shop, although our camera tracking had difficulty with the glossy tower surface and arena lighting at some angles.

Real damage to robots:
Very real. You know it’s a tough game when you see a bearing on the floor.

Real problems with the game:
The biggest issue is field set up logistics – lots of moving parts. The field reset crew did a wonderful job, it was just crowded.

I do not suggest loading your robots using the classic driver station order. We set up for our low bar auto routine every time. If we were the third robot to enter the field, we had to navigate around our partners and opponents in a narrow neutral zone without stepping on defenses or boulders.

Real Fun Parts:
This is a great game with plenty of strategic depth.

Here are a few miscellaneous thoughts:
G5 - I know those flat platforms with missing defenses look inviting…

Practice parking on the Batter. It’s not a given. An elimination alliance needs to ensure their partners can at least park.

David

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

what i meant was that they are the statistically the hardest to cross, different definition of best...I think I might add up the week one and get a running total to see if it changes

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Last year, fouls subtracted from your team's score, this year they add to your opposing alliance. Scores shall be higher. Honestly, last year a cockroach 'bot (drive system only) should have been able to put two or three totes on a scoring platform (though not on top of each other).

We called this on game reveal day. High goals are quicker (assuming auto-aiming with a camera), and low goals require driving up to a goal and reversing your loader, but there is zero computer assist available for a low goal shot unless your software is way more subtle than we usually have. Now that we realize that the batter separators are transparent, this is even more the case. In any case, your boulder pickup needs to somehow center the boulder within your robot to attempt a low goal shot.

Not unexpected, but perhaps a bit worse than expected. I foresee that in addition to mechanical tightening, we'll be wielding the hot glue gun on many of our electrical connections on Thursday, despite Al's likely advice.

It's taken several years, but I think I've finally pulled my team out of the "don't read the rules" event horizon. Last year, we had two students really familiar with the rules, this year it's around four to six, most of whom are likely drive team members, and the others are certain pit crew members. We actually had a core group of students study general game strategy "underground", that is, independently of mentors over the summer, thinking that the mentors were opposed to such studies. I was one of the few mentors they trusted with this information at the time. Team dynamics can be tricky.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

My observations (from the stands):

Game play was exciting, and teams at all levels found important roles to fill.

Officiating was generally lenient; robots were fairly consistently awarded challenge points when rolling down off the batter as soon as power was cut, teams were not penalized for dropping things like sections of bumper, or even batteries, onto the field. Also, it did not appear that any method of measurement was used (other than eye-balling) to award scaling points.

I was generally surprised at the difficulty of the moat and ramparts, and the ease of the portculis and rough terrain (it was our driver's favorite). It was also a lot more difficult to navigate between the lexan dividers than anticipated, and it often proved painful for robots that hit them dead-on.

In spite of field reset issues, it was a good time, and one of the best FRC games in recent memory.

Congrats to the winning alliance!

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Woo Gus. Don't use hot glue. Use duct seal. It can be reused and removed. I like all your post. Your into this stuff. Try to come to the east coast some time.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

It's on the webpage, but not the app.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

And why was 1369 left to the #1 alliance? They were the best hope to stop that alliance in elims.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Because no one understands how important defense is yet... trust me, it will change.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Next week ;) especially in eliminations.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

My assumption is some of the second picks had auto points available and they would play situational defense. No team played more defense and was more prepared than 1369 - guarantee you that!

I'm interested to see how this game will evolve. The court yard gets very crowded with 3 or 4 robots trying to maneuver through blind spots. Feeder robots may be more useful than a full offensive assault. There are many options.

David

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

I'm interested as well. In the past most FRC games have a meta that has consistent elements with sliders on the qualities of those elements shifting by event and by week. This is the first year that will wildly turn the meta on its head at a certain point at every event and change drastically between events.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

This. I'd be interested to see how a game of attrition would play out from a nimble robot with quick intake that steals balls and half crosses completely crosses the low bar to deposit into courtyard. From what I've seen, it's possible the low goal is the way to go except in higher levels of play.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

This is not a legal strategy, see G40.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Edited the original. Theory is still the same, the robot just has to go the extra foot and a half or so.