Re: Reality of low-bar shooters
 

This question doesn't make much sense. Most breaching bots* will be low bar robots. It is far easier to accept the constraint of a low bar passage than to design manipulators to handle the sally port and draw bridge - even in the plywood versions, much less the reality of polycarbonate.

3946's primary strategic point was being a sapper/breaching robot, so we could get that RP by ourselves even when we draw the short straw on alliance selection. The ability to intake and score high goals was second, because we realized that an alliance can only score on ten defense crossings, and boulders are the only "unlimited" source of offensive points in the game. We expect to have an autonomous high goal in the next week. Due to the vision obstruction of the defenses and the small goals, I expect most successful high-goal shots to either involve computer targeting or to be taken from the batter.

* by this, I mean a robot designed to effect a solo breach without assistance (or at least specific assistance) from its alliance partners to ensure at least 1 RP per match.

Re: Reality of low-bar shooters
 

AGREED. 359 sums it up the best from a strategy pov
Thanks 2502! We'd love to finally play some matches at your side

Re: Reality of low-bar shooters
 

Low goals are still extremely valuable. Most captures I have seen have had at least half of the boulders scored in the low goal. Seeing almost everyone focus on breaching during qualifications is just a matter of it being impossible to get the additional ranking point for a capture without all 3 robots being on mission and reasonably functional.

There are lots of low bar/low goal robots. A particularly good one in my opinion is 5624. They are fast and nimble being able to get under the low bar quickly and navigate around defenders. At the Mount Olive District playoffs, they would score 6 or more boulders in the low goal almost every match. Just because capturing was rare does not mean that being able to capture was rare. Most teams just focused on breaching since it was the most reliable way to score the ranking point.

One of the central strategic components to this game is the interaction between boulder points and defense points. Defense points are easier to get, and you have to get them (and breaches) if you want to do well in quals. But defense points are capped, so to go on, you need boulder points. The balance between easy defense points and uncapped boulder points is the key to understanding Stronghold

Re: Reality of low-bar shooters
 

Our shooter sucked... (Balls continually stuck, and burnt 4 775pros)
Our NavX failed to tell us telemetry... All Autonomous turns found bot doing donuts.
Our climber sucked...
Our vision sucked....
Never made a high goal...

Still ranked 2nd at Waterford mainly due to understanding the game, and plying to win, along with posting the highest auto

Think we are sitting around doing nothing this week. . .
Think Hot is. . . (they didn't move in auto)
Think Bees are. . . (they didn't move in 3 matches)

Our performance at Waterford, will probably not even be picked for eliminations by week 4, in Marysville.

The only conclusion you should draw from week 1, is that it's over...

Re: Reality of low-bar shooters
 

We built a low bar capable robot with an extremely robust drivetrain and a shooter designed for the low goal. We competed in Week 1 at GTR Central.

Our shooter did not perform to our satisfaction but we discovered we were very good at doing breaching, we were capable of breaching most defense configurations on our own.

Our best matches were with two alliance members both capable of doing low/high goal shots - 4 boulders each for the capture and we took care of the breaching.

Some of the best robots at the event were low bar, low goal capable robots who had worked to optimize their cycle time. We didn't see a lot of high goal shooters because they took so long to line up their shot, and they were vulnerable to defense.

Of course, that was week 1...

Re: Reality of low-bar shooters
 

It sounds like you are looking for an explanation for why capturing the tower was so rare. Several reasons:
- You need to walk before you can run. Even if you have designed a robot to be a fast defense crosser and a low goal scorer, until you play the game, you don't know how quickly you can do low goal cycles. The smart thing to do is start by establishing your breaching skills first, then add in scoring on the tower.
- Despite best laid plans, probably half the robots at a given event have trouble executing a drivetrain capable of quickly traversing most of the defenses. That's just the reality of FRC. When we do our kickoff weekend planning, we consider three classes of robots. Class A bots are alliance captains. Class B bots are pretty good. And the rest are class C bots, which struggle to accomplish the basic tasks of the game.
- This year, it takes at least 2 class B bots to breach. That combination, or better isn't that rare. To capture, you need at least a class A, a class B, and a class C bot, plus a smart strategy which is well executed. Statistically, this combination is hard to come by in the qualification rounds.
- At their first event, most teams are learning to walk. Out of our 19 matches in our first event, we failed to breach only in our first match and in one other, where a robot broke down in front of the last defense, with one crossing left. We also captured 3 times in the elimination matches. We now know when it's appropriate to make an attempt to capture, and what is needed from our alliance partners to do so. We're looking forward to playing our next event, where there will be other teams who have also learned these lessons. I expect there will be many more captures at that event than at the first.

I should also mention that at our first event we were essentially a low bar capable box on wheels with the ability to carry balls and score them in the low goal. Despite this we were the #1 alliance captain, and won the event. This was due to a great drivetrain, hours of driver practice using our practice bot, a terrific scouting team, a terrific pit crew, and well thought out match strategy.

Over focusing on the abilities of your robot starts you down a path to under-performance. I continually preach the mantra "It's far better to have a good robot quickly, rather than the perfect robot right before bagging." When we opened our bag, we were able to proceed directly to inspection and right into practice matches, before more than half the robots at our event had even passed inspection. That alone is a huge advantage.