Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Fuel Vs. Gears (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153173)

TimTheGreat 07-01-2017 23:27

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aventek (Post 1626871)
My team (3019) has decided to go for gears and here is our logic:[indent]For autonomous the gear is a clear winner, even if you shot and made all ten high goal shots in auto that is only 10 points, and if you shot all ten in low goal that is even worse at 3 points.

I don't think you should think about just the points. Think about the kPA too. If you put the gear on during auto, you do get those 60 points, which sounds like a dream because it's so easy. But consider this.

You score 10 points, but also gain 10 kPA. You're 50 points behind what you would be, yet 10 kPA closer to threshold pressure of 40. Now in teleop, you collect a gear, and put it on the peg. Now you get the 40 points because the rotor is on. So we're at 10 kPA and 50 pts (10 pts behind). If you went with the gear, you'd need to shoot 30 balls in to catch up to kPa.

weller2811 07-01-2017 23:32

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wheelerka (Post 1626833)
The thing that I've noticed, (and seems somewhat odd, to be honest) is that if the pre placed gears on the tower are allowed to be moved, in addition to the gear placed on the floor of the air ship (a total of 4 gears), a team would be capable of achieving 2 rotors turning during the teleop period, accounting for 80 points, despite never having actually scored a gear.

This is interesting, as in playoffs it would close the gap of point difference between the value of a RP from gears vs an RP from fuel

all but one gear on the airship cannot be moved, they are held down where they are in the gear train. you can only choose where one of the gears goes

Aventek 07-01-2017 23:39

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TimTheGreat (Post 1626918)
I don't think you should think about just the points. Think about the kPA too. If you put the gear on during auto, you do get those 60 points, which sounds like a dream because it's so easy. But consider this.

You score 10 points, but also gain 10 kPA. You're 50 points behind what you would be, yet 10 kPA closer to threshold pressure of 40. Now in teleop, you collect a gear, and put it on the peg. Now you get the 40 points because the rotor is on. So we're at 10 kPA and 50 pts (10 pts behind). If you went with the gear, you'd need to shoot 30 balls in to catch up to kPa.

That is a very valid point, my main argument there is that you have to have a semi-fast shooter to make all 10 reliably within 15 seconds. Obviously the dream would be to place a gear and instantly get your team 10kPa both during auto. The kPa is pretty valuable considering it would take 3 to 9x more balls to get that amount in teleop. I think shooting for high goal in auto is a good option, i would just like to explore it more and see how difficult it would be with starting position, for example whether you could start in a good spot to fire the 10. Even if the main focus of my teams theoretical bot is gears, a 10kPa lead would be very nice and look much better than pure gears in finals/championships. Thank you for the input!

MAXOFLIFE 07-01-2017 23:45

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TimTheGreat (Post 1626918)
I don't think you should think about just the points. Think about the kPA too. If you put the gear on during auto, you do get those 60 points, which sounds like a dream because it's so easy. But consider this.

You score 10 points, but also gain 10 kPA. You're 50 points behind what you would be, yet 10 kPA closer to threshold pressure of 40. Now in teleop, you collect a gear, and put it on the peg. Now you get the 40 points because the rotor is on. So we're at 10 kPA and 50 pts (10 pts behind). If you went with the gear, you'd need to shoot 30 balls in to catch up to kPa.

Actually, the autonomous gear is worth 60 points. This means that after you place the first gear in teleop, you're still at a 20 point deficit. Now you need to score 60 balls in the top goal to balance the score. While this is doable, it's still a significant inequality. The one rank point earned by reaching 40 kPA is nice, but not as good two rank points from simply winning the match.

wheelerka 07-01-2017 23:45

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by weller2811 (Post 1626921)
all but one gear on the airship cannot be moved, they are held down where they are in the gear train. you can only choose where one of the gears goes

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from my reading of the rules I haven't found anywhere that states that the pre populated gears are fixed to the airship, nor any rules restricting moving them. I would find it interesting if they were not allowed to be moved as they would seem somewhat pointless, except in the regard that they could be taken away as the level of play increases at champs. On the other hand, if there are no rules restricting their movement, i'm sure that's something that will be clarified.

Valkonn 07-01-2017 23:48

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
A robot in playoffs will absolutely have to do both. I foresee an alliance of 3 robots being able to get all 4 rotors spinning nearly every match. The infinite source of points will be the deciding factor.

I think robots will be doing the 50-foot dash for a gear from the feeder station while passively intaking balls. While on the friendly side of the field you can perform both point-scoring actions with efficiency.

The bigger question is what should a team focus if they are the only operational robot on an alliance? If only one robot can shoot/capture rotors, which should they focus? If the enemy alliance is good, the single easy RP from shooting will be a good option. If the enemy alliance is also non-operational or weak, then the story changes. Focusing on only gears during a match is probably the best way to score points if only robot is doing anything. However, scoring 12 gears alone during teleop leaves you with little room for error. You'd have to be scoring one every 11 seconds, dodging defenders and intaking/placing flawlessly.

As such, a single robot probably can't get the RP from turning all 4 rotors. They may win the match through points alone and get the 2 RP making it a risky all-or nothing play. Shooting would still net the safe 1 RP but lower point values put the 2 RP from winning out of the question.

Aventek 07-01-2017 23:53

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Another thing to consider is the mechanical limitations of building a robot intended to collect gears, shoot fuel, pickup, and climb all at once. It would be very difficult to fit all of those systems on to a bot and still have room to fit a funneling system to process the balls. It will definitely be doable by the best funded and most veteran teams, but to the average team it would be a lot more efficient to focus on 2 goals such as gear handling and climbing rather than all 4 listed above.

min-maxed 08-01-2017 00:03

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wheelerka (Post 1626833)
The thing that I've noticed, (and seems somewhat odd, to be honest) is that if the pre placed gears on the tower are allowed to be moved, in addition to the gear placed on the floor of the air ship (a total of 4 gears), a team would be capable of achieving 2 rotors turning during the teleop period, accounting for 80 points, despite never having actually scored a gear.

This is interesting, as in playoffs it would close the gap of point difference between the value of a RP from gears vs an RP from fuel

good find but this will totally be fixed in future rules because as they are now a pilot during auto could just take the prepositioned gears and get the first two rotors spinning for 120 pnts

the two rules that make me believe this are H10 which states gears cant be moved after they complete a gear set and get a rotor spinning, which moving the prepositioned gears would not violate and A05 which states the reserve gear cant be moved in auton, but this doesnt apply to prepostioned gears

engunneer 08-01-2017 00:05

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aventek (Post 1626943)
Another thing to consider is the mechanical limitations of building a robot intended to collect gears, shoot fuel, pickup, and climb all at once. It would be very difficult to fit all of those systems on to a bot and still have room to fit a funneling system to process the balls. It will definitely be doable by the best funded and most veteran teams, but to the average team it would be a lot more efficient to focus on 2 goals such as gear handling and climbing rather than all 4 listed above.

Point of order. It has nothing to do with funding. It has to do with being clever.

NoahTappen 08-01-2017 00:10

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
I voted too prematurely, for the sake of rank points I should've put Fuel.

BotDesigner 08-01-2017 00:27

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by engunneer (Post 1626957)
It has to do with being clever.

And often thus the funding.

Krunklock 08-01-2017 00:38

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Would it be possible for all three robots to shoot their fuel into the HE stack? That would give you 30kPa and you would only need to dump another 30 in to the high energy stack or 90 into the low energy stack to get to 40kPa and get the extra rank point?

isjustaprankbro 08-01-2017 00:39

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
3495 is leaning heavily toward fuel collection as a primary scoring strategy, but we may change. Currently our other option is to prioritize collecting and placing the gears, and in the process of driving, we'll be picking up dropped fuel (since there's gonna be a ton on the floor). Once we place the gear, we unload our storage tank into the high efficiency boiler. Rinse and repeat.

thatnameistaken 08-01-2017 02:02

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wheelerka (Post 1626937)
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from my reading of the rules I haven't found anywhere that states that the pre populated gears are fixed to the airship, nor any rules restricting moving them. I would find it interesting if they were not allowed to be moved as they would seem somewhat pointless, except in the regard that they could be taken away as the level of play increases at champs. On the other hand, if there are no rules restricting their movement, i'm sure that's something that will be clarified.

I'm reading the same as you, but as someone above pointed out, there's no way it stays like this. Scoring gears in auto would become pointless. The first two rotors would be movable with just the pre-populated gears, and the three score-able by the robots wouldn't be enough for the third rotor.

Either way, I'll put this in the Q&A if it's not addressed by the time it opens.

who716 08-01-2017 02:17

Re: Fuel Vs. Gears
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aventek (Post 1626871)
My team (3019) has decided to go for gears and here is our logic:
For autonomous the gear is a clear winner, even if you shot and made all ten high goal shots in auto that is only 10 points, and if you shot all ten in low goal that is even worse at 3 points. Getting a single gear and turning the first rotor on nets you 60 points, vastly outclassing either other option. Of course you could try to get all ten in top goal, and get the gear in auto but to us it seems like having a shooter/pickup mechanism for fuel leaves little room for climbing and gear processing on the robot.
For teleop we made 2 scenarios. The more realistic scenario allots 30 seconds for a gear "cycle" consisting of moving to the pickup bin, getting a gear, and bringing it back. This would allow 4 gears per teleop for a total of 5 gears per match, which nets 2 and 3/4 rotors, effectively 100 points with 140 if one teammate can place one gear(considering you start with one reserve gear,per match R1 needs 1 gear, R2 needs 2, R3 needs 6, and R4 needs 12). Our next, more optimistic scenario would be cutting down that cycle time to around 20 seconds, allowing us to score 5 gears in teleop and 1 in auto for a total of 6 gears/3 rotors at effectively 140 points ourselves, with 35 seconds left to climb for another possible 50 points, netting a total of 190 points.
In my opinion, the fourth rotor is going to be very difficult to achieve- you need a total of 12 gears delivered and it is hard to get 6 with one bot (note: these are very rough numbers we tossed around to get an idea of fuel vs. gears) requiring two bots to be doing gears all match. That means that we would have to devote 2/3 of the alliance power to gears that would only net another 40 points, or 40 points and a RP if the remaining single bot was able to accumulate 40 kPa on it's own (very unlikely).
In the end, our goal is looking like aiming for 6 gears/match and climbing!

Although a lot of what you say makes sense that is one of the things I like the most about first as I see it alittle different.
I see the potential for a very fast shooter to lock up 40kpa in autonomous thus giving then a ranking point within the first 15 secounds. After auto it takes 3 times as long to reach the 40kpa limit tending it rather useless unless in a game that can both alliances can turn all four rotors...
Basically in my opinion hitting the top goal in auto an being able to hit 20+ in 15 secound which should not be hard. Makes get the extra ranking point a ton simpler and quicker
40 high goal is auto equals a ranking point
120 high goals in Telekom is a ranking point
Don't get me started on low goals


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:56.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi