Wall 'o Boxes
 

Although at first, I thought the wall of boxes would decide the winner for 90% of the matches, I'm beginning to change my mind. Even though a team can acquire 30+ boxes on their side, there's still a 5'3" neutral zone to consider, and any robot with a working drive train could "neutralize" the boxes while the opponent tries to stack (or attack the stack while the opponent defends the boxes). There is also the possibility of stealing boxes (assuming there is no problem crossing the ramp).

However, I've noticed several threads from scrimmages suggesting that stacking was generally unsuccessful. Thus I begin to wonder if the total number of boxes on an alliance's side had a major impact on the result of the matches. My impression from the other threads is that it was very difficult to perform any task with 3 other robots on the field...

So, I suppose the real purpose to this thread is what does everyone else see in this mess? To me, it seems like moving boxes after autonomous mode is more important that getting them in the beginning.

Greg
Team 891

at media day here in alabama, there were 5 or 6 teams there, and every match was won in the first 15 seconds, so i am still saying that is the case.

Were the matches won because some robots were more complete than others? Or was it because teams were able to keep their bins in scoring position?

Greg
Team 891

from what people are saying, the main wall will be the winner.

i hope that is not the case, as my team and many others have focused on stacking.

with stacking it is POSSIBLE for a team to win with 1/4 the amount of bins.

being a koth bot may be very successful, but stacking is just crazy and fun :P

i believe that the most successful teams will consist of one stacker and one koth bot.

anyway

It really depends on who your opponents are...

If you hit the wall onto your side first and then you are able to hold the ramp, not allowing anything through. You will most likely win. However, you will not win if your opponents are stackers with the capability of dumping several boxes at a time over the bar. Then they simply push the boxes into their scoring zone and you lose.

If you do knock the stack onto your side it is important to push the boxes down the ramp so they will be in scoring position. The only benifet for leaving them on the ramp is to make it more difficult for a robot to come up at you.

Lets pretend your opponents are two tanks. Even if you have the stack in your scoring zone you better start stacking or you won't win. Your opponents will be able to dominate the ramp and get their 50 points. Granted, with a multiplier of 2 you will win. But what if one tank comes down and manhandles your stacking robots. Your opponent would end the match with 25 and you will have many bins in scoring position and hopefully win.

The more you run the numbers the more you see that the final alliances will comprise of a tank and a stacker. A very exciting game indeed. See everyone next week in Manchester!

EDIT______________

This is the first year where I think we might see rookies come up big in the finals.

Yes, the stack does seem like it will win games.

However, in the videos I've seen, that is because the team who did not get the stack to their side did not have any good stackers... With a good stacker, you should be able to win with a small percentage of the boxes. It really just depends.

Are you saying every stacker in every scrimage in the country is a "bad" stacker? You say it takes a "good" stacker to effectively do it, yet, from what I've heard... NO ONE stacked a box on top of another, at any of the scrimages...

How can this be?
Are there NO good stacking bots?

/me can't wait for BAE NH to see how this game really plays out.

Furthermore, if there are robots that can move bins in great quantity, they stand a very good chance of tipping the balance of the game.

Stacking, while it can be an important aspect of victory, isn't necessary. I wish we would've seen this element of strategy early on, but we're taking steps to rectify our oversight. I hope other people are doing the same.

What i said was I have not yet seen a good stacker in the scrimmage videos that I have seen... read that carefully and don't make any assumptions.

Fact is, not so many teams went to scrimmages and most that did had not all complete robots. I expect things to be much better as the regionals progress. A stackers' game is still a wild card in this year's game.

We actually did stack one box on another two at the UTC scrimmage, but only once. We almost got three on top of the two, but the top two toppled as we were stacking them.

We can usually do a lot better than that, but we couldn't actually get our robot to turn at the scrimmage.

How much ramming and abuse did the stacking robots take during the scrimages while trying to stack?

(Also, are any of the scrimage videos posted on the net?)

Greg

About moving boxes quickly, our robot is a launching bot (and yes, it does launch) but we don"t launch very far. Our current plan is to drag boxes behind us and go halfway under the bar, then launch the boxes over the bar into our scoring sone. We can also stack boxes (only 2 high, but multipliers are useful). Also, as I saw in a couple of scrimmages, the king of the hill bots can be repetatively rammed until a bit of their bot touches the mesh, so they"re worthless, but they still prevent people from moving boxes over the ramp. I think the most useful robots will be the ones that can get boxes over the bar somehow and can stack a bit and protect their stacks.

If you hit the wall and knock 29 boxes into your zone you have 2 advantages. 29 extra boxes and control of the ramp. The opposing team has to 1) remove boxes from your zone 2) get boxes into there zone 3) secure the ramp. The team who hit the wall first just has to defend. The opping team literally has to fight an uphill battle.

Saying that teams didn't stack well because bots were incomplete and drivers hadn't practiced yet is just copping out. The teams who ramp-domed and knocked down the walls first had the same amount of time to build/practice. This year stacking was more complex than ever, maybe to hard.


I'm going to base the following figuring alliances constructed for finals which include a ramp-dom and 2 low-riding stackers, (random bots in qualifying doesn't matter in the end)...

Scenario 1: Blue RampDom, Stacker vs. Red RampDom, Stacker

Auto: Blue rampdom hits the wall knocks it down lowers wings.
Blue stacker clears human player boxes.
Red rampdom is to slow to hit the wall.
Red stacker clears human player
Human: Blue ramp-dom fends of red ramp-dom. Red ramp-dom fights for hill or clears boxes. Red stacker try to move boxes over bar then stack. Blue stacker holds red stacker at the alley.
End: Blue gets 25 + any missed boxes.
Red gets little to none.

Scenario 2: Blue RampDom, Stacker vs. Red 2 stackers(there
rampdom was useless against blues last match).
Auto: Blue rampdom hits the wall knocks it down lowers wings.
Blue stackers clears human player boxes.
Red stacker heads to wall.
Red stacker clears human player.
Human: Blue rampdom holds ramp. Red stackers then clear the boxes out of blue zone and try to move them over the bar onto there side. Then they go under the bar and try to stack those boxes on there side. Blue stacker holds red stacker at the alley. A red bot could try to dislodge the ramp-dom but chances are they'd just waste there time.
End: Blue gets 25 + any missed boxes.
Red gets little to none.

In either scenario the team that loses the wall has a distinct disadvantage. They have to much to do in to little time. With the reports of how slow/difficult it is to stack i'd say theres little hope.

I see a few things missing from this thread:

1) The neutral zone (i know this was mentioned but not enough). Who cares about the ramp if you can go under the bar? Expecially stackers that go under the bar. Make your stack (probably 6 high will end up being a good stack). Try and defend that stack. If you lose it and dont have enough time to build another one, start getting nasty. Go under the bar and push opponent bins into the neut zone. Knock their stacks down.

My problem is with the destructive attitude of king of the hill bots. A game with no stacks is a low scoreing match. This is the first time something like this has been in a FIRST game since i've been involved. Last year there was no easy way to destroy a high scoreing game nearly as fast as there is this year.

2) The wall doesnt go only one way. We are talking about robots acting autonomous. They have problems correcting for mistakes (if any ability to at all) are clumsy, and generally not effective. I don't see a robot going up the ramp and preventing all robots from getting by with bins. I suspect the bins to go pretty much 50/50 every match.

3) A tank bot is not neccissarily more powerful then a stacking robot. You catorize stackers as weak... almost all FIRST robots are friction limited. Stackers can gain a 10 - 20 lb weight advnatage easy; possibly upwards of 40lbs. Assuming your talking about robots with tracks, they do worry me (wheeled robots can't gain a sufficient advantage over other wheeled robots).

I know this doesn't describe all tracked robots, but in general they tend to be slower and less manuverable then wheeled ones. They have an advantage only on the carpet, no advantage on the HDPE.

4) I dont see how you can expect to hold the HDPE. You have less traction then robots coming up the mesh AND your being acted on at an unfavorable angle. Think about it.

Just my thoughts
Greg

In #3 you mentioned how everything is dominated by friction, and it is unfair to characterize a type of robot as weaker.
Then, in #4 you went on to say how a robot on the HDPE has less traction than one on the mesh... It's just like you said above. A robot that gets a 1.2 coeff on the HDPE will beat a robot that gets a 1.0 coeff on the mesh... the mesh is easier to get a good "grip" on, but there are plenty of teams that have taken the time to "grip" the HDPE just as well, or better.

I think it will be harder than most people realize to "unseat" robots from the top of the ramp. Or at least the ones that have designed to stay up there. Even if you can dislodge a robot from the top, that doesn't necessarily mean you can get on top yourself.

I can't wait to see some of the epic battles for the HDPE.
FIRST truly has made a game that is more audience friendly. Falling boxes, loud noise, robots colliding.

Just $.02

Keep in mind the previous comment comes from the team leader of 229. Who's bot at this point has a set of wings that deflect a bot trying to push it. They have video of just the wing and a bot drives right up it until it gets hung up at the top. Its simply beautiful. After you see the video you'll understand why he said it will be hard to unseat rampdoms, at least his.

GregT: I don't see how its an unfavorable angle, As the bot comes up the ramp at a 14degree angle it can't push completely laterally whcih means some energy goes into an upward force. How a stacker is going to gain 40 lbs from carrying crates is beyond me, unless they hold 8 of them in a nice stack. But those 40lbs would be a few feet in the air, raising there CG. A slight bump from the rampdom would send it tumbling down the ramp. As for your generaliztions about tankdrives some of it is true but then there are teams like 45 that have tank drives that will excede the majority of wheel drives out there. As for matches without stacks, from all I've heard about scrimmages the tallest stack is a 4 human stack. Finally it seems people are under the assumption HDPE is slippery but there a materials that have VERY high COF on it, some 2 to 3 times the numbers John gave.

The mesh has texture, the HDPE does not. You can't grip the HDPE, the most you can hope to do is increase your normal force with a suction cup (and I don't think the HDPE will be in good enough shape to allow this to work as well as some teams think it will).

sevisehda: I said upwards of 40 lbs, I agree that its unlikely someone will be able to carry 8 stacked bins. I do think the angle helps the robot going up the ramp, its hard to tell though. Regradless, most robots will be able to push most other robots off the top of the ramp. I doubt any robot can withstand the force of 2 other robots trying to push it off the HDPE. Only time will tell.

Greg

You can't grip the HDPE, but you can still get increased traction with the right tread material. Using the right type of wheels can dramatically increase your traction.

HDPE DOES have traction!
Did you guys do ANY experimentation? We have materials that get better coefficient of friction on HDPE than on Carpet!
Neoprene for example... it is capable of getting a mu of upwards of 3 on the HDPE. Now imagine, a robot that puts 400+ lbs of normal force on a coeff of 3. (let me do the math for you) it will take 1200lbs of linear force to move them! You call that "easy to push"?

Can your robot push with that much force? Even with 100 bins you can't do that...

There will be numerous robots that can stick to the ramp, and withstand an attack from multiple other robots.

I think your assumptions about the game... AND about the laws of physics are flawed. I think this game will surprise you, in BIG ways.

By grip I ment traction. Yes, if you use a suction cup to pull down and put that much force on your wheels, you will be very hard to move (unless you have un-anchored arms and torque comes into play).

From the robots that I've seen thus-far, it seems like many teams try to hit all of the boxes during the autonomous mode. I was just wondering... do you guys always try to get all of the boxes? What happens if two of these bots are alliance partners? Do you guys control each "wing" independently, or do you expect only one bot to go for the wall?

It also seems like this tactic is self-defeating during the qualifying rounds. In one situation, a koth bot would get 29 bins on their side, and end up with a 2 stack, while the opponents have a 2 stack with their human player boxes, which would give the winning alliance 114 (2*35+25 + 2*[2*6]) QPs.

Yet, in another situation, the koth bot would only take 17 boxes, leaving 12 for the other alliance. If koth bot's alliance gets a 2 stack and allows the opposing alliance to get a 3 stack, the winning alliance would get 173 (2*23+25 + 2*[3*17]) QP's. I mean, all stacks being equal, each box is worth twice as much in the losing alliance's scoring zone for the winning alliance. Why the need for a massacre?

Greg

Thank goodness - someone who has actually started to THINK about how to play the game!!!

Teams - particularly rookie teams that may not have run into this type of play in prior years - need to get used to the idea that what matters in this game is the QP score and not the "game score." Folks need to understand that decimating an opposing alliance is a BAD IDEA. Yes, you may win the match. But your QP score will be lower than a team that lets the opposing alliance get a good score (just not quite so good that they win!).

Yes, you can wipe out a high-scoring game quickly (this isn't the first time this has happened, but that is for a different discussion). But (and we have been through this discussion before, back at the beginning of the season) when teams really start to think about how the game is played they should understand that although they CAN do something, this is a game where they don't WANT to do it.

Strategy is particularly important in this game. Standard tactics focused on driving your opponent into the ground will be used by the simpletons that haven't taken the time to really think through the game and how to maximize their scores. Veteran teams should hopefully know better, and help explain this to any of their alliance partners that don't "get it."

-dave

--------------------------------------

Y = AX^2 + B.... ehhh, whatever

This is exactly why my team decided to go with a stacking strategy. Lowering scores does not help anyone, its a good way to win a lot of matches and still have a low standing. You want high stacks, because high stacks mean more points for everyone (expecially the winner); my team views stack destruction as a last option.

It seems to me that many teams are more focused on winning matches then the competition.

I personally doubt KOTH bots will be able to do what they set out to. Saying "We will knock the bins down into our zone, and stop robots from getting to their side of the field and we will do all this in autonomous mode" is a very ambitious claim. I still stick to my prediction that very few bots will be able outpush 2 other robots on the HDPE. The only teams I see doing this are suction-cup teams... and only if they use the suction cup to pull down adding more weight onto their wheels (and only then if the HDPE stays in good condition through the competition).

Dave: You guys made a great game. Its similar to last year in the rate at which the course of the match can change, but will appear much more dramatic. Tug of wars are great, but they are nowhere near as exciteing as teetering stacks. This will be a very dynamic game and a very fun one to watch.

As for this being the first time to wipe out a high score... your right - things could change just as quickly in 2002, but this year entire matches worth of work can be destroyed much more easily (I can't think of any robots last year that took balls out of the goals).

Good luck to everyone!
Greg

Well, see. . . I think that's just the thing; Winning matches is winning the Competition. If you can win matches by decimating every opponent you run into, qualifying points are totally irrelevant. Sure, you're bringing the curve down for everyone, but as long as you're on top, that doesn't make any difference.

Last season, I think, put teams into a very bad mindset. It has something to do with scoring, I would imagine. In 1999, scoring was accomplished by manipulating alliance-specific objects into position. In 2000, while there was a battle for the balls at the start, once they were in the goals, there wasn't much that could be done to remove them. It wasn't impossible, of course, as is evident by looking at the teams that wound up in the upper echelon of the National event, but that just shows the seed of what has become an important part of the 2002 and 2003 game.

In these games, all too often, brute strength is rewarded over ingenuity. The games are balanced too heavily toward giving points to having something in some specific position.

I believe that, in some regionals, stackers will manage to survive. If they can get a multiplier that does something beside give them victory. . . that is, if they can get a majority of bins and make a stack . . . that will greatly help their seeding. But, I don't expect it to happen often. When they're up against a king-of-the-hill robot that's faster to the punch and stronger, though, there's not much hope for a good stacker.

Of course, if I thought a king of the hill robot were the key to winning this game, my team would've built one. Clearly, we didn't. There are other elements of strategy and design that involve the bins that aren't being given due thought. It's those "under the radar" designs that are going to make things interesting and turn the tables of the competition.

Ingenuity in engineering in these competitions hasn't died yet. It's getting close, though.

when our team first started coming up with ideas we leaning towards a king of the hill bot, and we thought we had a really good idea because what we would use stuck to the sample piece of the platform that they gave us really really well. we ended up deciding on a stacker bot, it can do other things though. im glad we decided on this becuase before we shipped we got a chance to go drive on a field, out of curiosity i took a piece of the material we were gonna use and put it on the platform, slid like no other.

did the teams that decided to go for king of the hill test out their traction devices/suction-cups when the HDPE was DIRTY?

because the results for us were far different than when the HDPE was nice and clean, the platform will be clean for the first couple of matches but after a couple with robots running around on it and people stepping on it(dirty shoes) dirt will build up and some robots that thought they were sweet could now be almost usless

Defense of shutout strategy:
Nooone can argue that its best to have a high scoring round. How close would you want the match to be though. Lets start with a 25 point lead incase somthing happens on the ramp, either your not on it totally or the opposing team gets on. With 45 crates, counting which are where will be hard especailly because of the blindspot caused by the ramp and whoever is on top of it. So add in nother 10 point alloowance. So to be safe you should have at least a 35 point difference. The closer your target scores the bigger the risk your taking. If you win by 100 to nothing both times in the finals you win. In finals why take the chance of losing because you wanted close scores when you could shut them out twice and win?

Defense of the ramp-dom:
In my above scenarios its possible for the rampdom/stacker pair to allow/help the opposing alliance to move boxes into the scoring zone if they wanted to boost there score. The point is that if a rampdom hits the wall and secures the ramp he can control the tempo of the match, he can greatly effect how boxes/bots move from 1 side to another. With a stacker friend they have nearly absolute control of what the match will look like.

This is what I thought last year. Then at nationals I found I was unhappy with matches that resulted in < 100 pts. Thats what it took to stay on top, not winning: winning BIG. The layout of elims this year promotes this even more. If you set out to crush the opposition and they get "lucky" once, your done.

Your explanation would work if everyone set out with that mindset, but not everyone wants to crush the other team and win with minimal QP's.

Of course these are just my opinions and I'll probably be proven wrong, but until then I'm going to stick to them!

Greg

I hope that you are right, honestly. It'd be interesting to watch.

Unfortunately, I don't think there's as great a variety of robots and strategies as there needs to be to keep the game all too exciting. Rather than set out at the beginning thinking, "How can we beat teams that perch themselves atop the ramp?" it seems as if most teams thought, "We'll just be the team that perches atop the ramp."

It means that, really, if you didn't build the best ramp dominating robot at your regional, or in the country, you'll eventually be beaten. There's little else you can do. At least it seems as if some teams considered that, adding stackers or other modules to their designs.

Last season, some team's ditched their ball collectors almost immediately upon experiencing the game (254 comes to mind). I wonder how many teams may ditch their stackers this season. I know that already, we are planning to do that to some extent. But, we aren't designed to be a viable king of the hill robot, so it required some creative thinking as to what else we could do. ...and that's what I was hoping we'd see more of.... clever strategies beyong stacking or knocking over the wall or defending the top of the ramp. Y'know, just cool, efficient ways of screwing over everyone who thought they'd take the easy way out ;)

I wrote that poorly. What I meant to say, I think, is that any team that's relying on getting on top of the ramp first, and stackers in particular, aren't going to do well. If you can manage to get the bins to your scoring zone, you're in good shape. But, to me, it seems like everyone's putting all their eggs in one basket with their design and strategy. You either get to the bins first or you don't. There's very few teams that have shown anything that can reliably tip the balance of the game after that wall has come down.

I hope that the teams who have chosen to keep their robots hidden are doing so precisely because they have such designs. If our robot were designed to reliably control the score regardless of where the majority of bins land, I'd not have shown it. In fact, maybe we didn't ;).

I do believe teams can excel in more than one role, but not likely at the same time. Again, I just think that too many teams decide to let the matches be decided in the first 15 or 30 seconds - without really considering whether or not it needed to be.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by M. Krass

I believe that, in some regionals, stackers will manage to survive. If they can get a multiplier that does something beside give them victory. . . that is, if they can get a majority of bins and make a stack . . . that will greatly help their seeding. But, I don't expect it to happen often. When they're up against a king-of-the-hill robot that's faster to the punch and stronger, though, there's not much hope for a good stacker.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I think that its a big mistake to assume that a stacker is intrinsically slower than a KoH bot. Actually, it seems to me that it would be exactly the opposite.

Take us for example. We knew that we wanted to focus on stacking,so we wouldn't need massive amounts of pushing power. Gearing up our 4 motor drive did cut into our available torque, but now we have an unbelieveable amount of speed and agility. Robots like ours aren't going to win any direct shoving matches, but - unless an opponent you can go 13 ft/sec - we'll probably hit the wall first. Besides, the most efficient way to get onto the ramp is not to bully the other guy off, but to go around him.

(Another dangerous assumption to make is that a team that can play multiple roles will accel none of them)

The moral of the story is that a bot shouldn't be judged by what role it plays in the game. Each team will behave differently under different circumstances no matter what their intended purpose is.

Thanks for the clarification.

However, you obviously didn't attend the UTC Scrimmage. In 3 out of the 4 finals rounds that led to victory, teams 571 and 173 failed to get to the ramp first (mainly due to not yet having autonomous mode programmed in). We won because we were able to a)move large numbers of the opponents bins into the no-acore zone and b)outmanuever the opponents on the ramp.

I will agree with you that this would not be a likely outcome when facing a robot like 68 or 179, but it shows that losing the initial battle for the wall is not necessarily the end-all. (although its always nice to get there first).

Before I begin I'll make the consession that not many stackers have posted video or pics in match conditions. Saying that if you consider the difficulty stacking its very hard this year. more so then ever before. In previous years you could place balls in a relatively large goal. This year you have a large akward object to place on a small goal and this goal gets smaller as you go higher. I highly doubt there will be many stacks of more than 6 in the finals. Stacking is slow and can easily be destroyed by an enemy bot or a wrong move by a driver.


I am sure that the technokats ramp-dom will beat nearly all bots to the top of the ramp and will have more pushing power than nearly all the bots as well. Also by the definition of rampdom the only way to cross the field is under the bar.

Even though I think the best aliance is a fast rampdom and lowriding stacker and am sure such an alliance will eventually win. I am even more sure whoever hits the wall first will win 95% of the time.

All of my comments are for finals with constructed alliances. Trying to guess what will happen in qualifying is impossible because of the random pairings of bots, what would happen if 4 rampdoms fought.

No, I didn't attend the scrimmage (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express? ;) )...I saw the video, though.

The one thing I am definitely reserving judgement on is the autonomous mode. I don't think the programming was in a state to be judged at that scrimmage.

Believe me, I don't think that king of the hill robots can't be beat. In fact, I'm banking on most of them getting creamed. But, overall, I'm just disappointed with the way the game's been playing out.

Rather than "descore" the opponent's bins, why not take them with you? By pushing them out of scoring position, you can manage to control the score, but all destructive forms of scoring lower the matches net QPs. The real winners are going to be the people that can keep the scores close, but do so by adding to their score while they're lowering the opponent's score.

That's my feeling, anyway. Or, it'll be a complete wasteland and bins will mean nothing at all.

We probably agree about more than you think. After all, our robots aren't too dissimilar.

This year will be the same as last year

Last year good ball bots could grab a goal and drive around picking up balls and the powerful bots couldn't get the balls or goals away from them. And thier strategies were very effective. Case in point, Teams 45, 233, 111.

Last year bad teams could pick up some balls kinda grab goals and sometimes have them stolen away by sneaky goal bandits (wildstang 2001 video reference).

This year will be no different, good robots will stack, bad ones will not, good robots will hold onto thier stacks, bad ones will not.

The only difference is that the percent of good stackers will be lower.

Also, yes King of the Hill bots will get push and trashed and beat up. My team built a KOH bot and I know that it can be beaten.

I commend everyone who has come up with an original design and not just decided to push boxes. Hooray for stacking!

Haha, yeah, they are kinda the same - with the small exception that yours is made out of aluminum and therefore doesn't look quite as jury-rigged.

Believe me, I would have loved to be able to move bins en masse to the other side of the field, but doing that - unless you have a robot the can push some outrageously large number of bins at once - simply takes too much time to be truly effective. Trying to engineer a close match is fine if your ahead, but if you're trying to play catchup because you weren't quite fast enough to the wall then simply winning the round will be the top thing on your mind.

Another problem with relocating the bins to your side of the field is that it is a tactic easily intercepted. If you can't move them over the bar in large numbers (something that I expect very few teams will be able to do), then it is quite easy for an opponent to ram you coming from the opposite direction (assuming that you have expanded your profile in order to push more bins).

But hey, just 11 more days and all our questions will be (for the most part) answered.

Two mentalities... strategy and mentality
 

Every year, the best strategy and method to play the game is not always clear at first. This year is no exception.

This thread has been very interesting, and it all really is about deciding a way to play the game based on strategy.

This is smart, but there is another reason that teams pick the way they "play". For lack of a better word, it is also the sort of "mentality" that a team wants to play the game that depicts their robot design.

For instance, team 47 usually comes up with a very smooth-running robot which is targeted at scoring points offensively (collecting balls in 02, scoring and descoring balls in 00, manipulating the puck in 99, etc.). Their mentality has mainly been to pick the thing that is difficult to do in the game and they do it.

Every year, there is usually an "offensive" and a "defensive" way to play the game. This year, stacking seems to be the "offensive" way to score, while playing king of the hill akin to playing "defense".

For us... we waiver back and forth with the mentality for how we play the game. 99 was defense, 00 was offense, 02 was offense, 03 is defense... from what I can remember, no one really wanted to stack from our team this year... maybe it was simply because we played offense last year. I'm not sure if this is true... but from my experience, it is really fun to play defense really well. I just hope that things work out like we planned.

Andy B.

I agree with the last pervious posts, in that a KOTH bot will be successful if it can do what it sets out to. My problem is when they start claiming they will prevent other robots from getting on their side in auto mode :)

My suggestion to KOTH bots is to play the match like normal then take the hill at the end. I would try to controll traffic accross the field during the match unless you are in a terrible losing position. This is, as i'm sure you all thought of (and probably what made that strategy so attractive to you), you can get 50 points from the top of the ramp, more then all the bins are without stacking.

Wait, I just told you what you already knew :) I can be very productive some times.

I think maybe the bar hasn't been discussed enough. A stacker robot that can go under the bar could "easily" take a stack from the winning KOTH team (HP stack of 4 probably) and drop it over the bar. Go under the bar, push those bins into scoreing position-- BOOM, instant 8 pt change in the game. Only the stacker team will probably have at least a stack of 4; so its really a 20 pt change.

I also see the bar limiting KOTH teams from having both robots on top of the ramp at the end of a match--- As both of them attempt to get on the HDPE to score 50 points, the sneaky stacker dashes under the bar and starts lowering their score. Oh no! So now to prevent this, only one KOTH bots can be on the ramp. Thats 25 points, or the equivlant of putting one bin on another with half of the bins in play.

KOTH bots really do depend on accomplishing a lot in auto mode. They NEED to

1) Get to the wall first
2) Knock most of the bins onto their side.
3) Anchor and let no robots past

Which I see being very difficult when there are 2 robots trying to stop that.

And then there's the issue of the KOTH's partner. What's he to do? Who will push bins into the scoreing zone? I know there will be at least 1 opponent robot still trying to push them up and over the ramp, probably destroying your score as well. So I see the following thing happen in a KOTH match:

1) KOTH knocks wall down and anchors.
2) Opponents push all of KOTH's bins out of scoreing position.
3) KOTH partner pushes all of Opponents bins out of scoreing position.

4) Score = 25 - 0 or 50 - 0. Wow, wasn't that productive? :)

This assumes no robots go under the bar, and the KOTH acts as a wall (which I don't think it will do). This means I DONT THINK THE KOTH WILL BE PREVENTING TRAFFIC OVER THE RAMP (I put that in caps so the next 3 posts don't quote me and tell me that I'm wrong because of the perviously mentioned sentance ;) ).

Wow that really didnt make much sense did it? Ramble ramble ramble...

Greg

There is such a negative feeling in here toward rampdoms. True they do very little directly during the match. They prevent alot of things from happening though. For the most part they prevent bots and bins from going over the ramp. Unless they have a trick up there sleave most bin-huggers can't get over/under the bar while they have bins so they need to get over the ramp well they can't very well do that with a rampdom on it. Its easy just to push crates over the ramp but thats impossible with a rampdom on it as well. So teams have to move crates only by getting them over the bar. There are a few non-lowriding stackers that willbe effectively trapped by the rampdoms, these will most likely be weeded out by the finals. Now if it was 2 stackers on a rampdom then the 2 stackers would win. However the rampdoms alliance partner can play a very easy game. They can selectively allow how many crates move over the bar and what the stack looks like on the opping side. If the plan is to control the score the a rampdom is a very useful tool.

As for dethrowing a rampdom I highly doubt the well built ones will get pushed off. I won't repeat the arguements for why you can't dethrown a good rampdom because thats been beaten to death about 50 times.

Before anyone tears me apart I'll concede that a bot that can carry a stack of 6 over the bar, WITHOUT letting go then placeing and gaurding that stack until the end could counter a rampdom. That relies on the rampdom alliance member not clearing out the human player bins though.

The rampdom isn't the endall answer but its a very powerful tool that paired with a fast/strong lowriding stacker will eventually win.

If we can get 6 consecutive 25-0 matches. I'd consider that productive, yes. I do believe we'd get chosen for the finals as well...

Remember folks: RAGE picked Beatty last year.

I'd have to agree with that. In both Cleveland and Chicago, my team was ranked about 25th, but we had demonstrated solid performance (albiet low scores) and got picked both times. Consistency is what wins. If you can show that you consistently win matches, you will get picked for the finals.

Here, I think, is where I fundamentally disagree.

I can't see how a single robot (save 68) can effectively patrol and defend both alleys on the playing field. ...especially when it's 2 vs. 1. Each alley, as you're aware, is 6' wide and 9.5' deep, never mind that they're separated from one another by a 12' wide ramp. Quickly moving back and forth between them doesn't seem plausible.

What, exactly, can they do that selectively controls the score? Unless they share a similar capability to move bins over the bar en masse, nullifying the efforts of at least one of the opponent's robots, they won't do much. Sure, they can possibly do a decent job of keeping the bins in the alleyway, out of scoring position - until they're overwhelmed (or buried, as the case may be).

If they dare risk crossing beneath the barrier onto their scoring side, they leave an alleyway wide open, and there's the potential to move many, many bins into scoring position at that time. Similarly, one robot on the opposing side could give that robot trouble, getting in its way, effectively leaving both alleyways open to the trafficking of bins.

See, it's like the ramp dominating robot is the U.S. government, sitting up their all tough and pretending to be in control. Their partner is the U.S. Border Patrol, trying to stop the movement of the bad stuff into the country, but, there's just way too much territory. ;)

How relevant all of that is, though, I'm not sure. I haven't seen a single team that claims its robot can successfully move bins over the bar on these forums. I know of at least two, however, via private conversation. But, in all cases, they seem to require the bins be stacked, and as we've already seen, stacking bins seems likes it's going to be a tedious and time consuming task. Making several stacks of 4, 5, or 6, depositing them over the bar, pushing them into scoring position and keeping them there seems as equally daunting as trying to stop it from happening.

Most stackers could drop a stack over the bar. Problem is it has to be a stack to do that :)

In response to the winnin 25 - 0 all the time would be ok, that depends on if you want to be picked or be picking. I would rather be picking.

Whats a winning allience going to be? A ramp dom / lowrider stacker probably. But things get interesting when more robots can get under the bar. If a rampdom is against 2 lowrider stackers, what will they do? They will have to activly bully them, as a team of 2 stackers can probably move 15 bins accross the bar in addition to their 8 HP bins. Stack 5, go push the rampdoms bins out of scoreing position and they win.

A KOTH robot is a valid strategy, but I still think good stackers will be less plentiful, hopefully making them more valueable :)

Greg

Greg

I want to see what people feel about this...

A lot of robots, particularly ramp dominators are adding skirts to their robots with the intention of lifting an oncoming robot. This could lead to a robot flipping over on the ramp.

Lets say this type of robot is sitting on the platform. Our robot is looking for a spot on the ramp. We aim our arm at your highest point and drive into you at full speed hoping to dislodge you. You may flip you might not. What do you think, legal or not?

I'm not going to say that koth robots can't stop the flow of traffic on the ramp, at least for a short while, but how do make sure the bins are where you want them? Unless teams can reach over, or even go over, the ramp wall and knock the bins over in the first few seconds, you've still gotta beat your opponents to the top. Unless you've got an insane gear ratio, many teams can potentially get to the top at about the same time. Then there's autonomous mode. From our experience, either robots will accuratly go up the ramp relatively slowly via line tracking, or inaccuratly speed up the ramp with dead reckoning, which can be foilied by cleverly placing HP bins in their path. Any bot can also be delayed by a limbo bot pushing them in autonomous mode by going under the bar.

The funny thing about this year is its like a glorified rock-paper-scissors game. Each tactic can be counteracted by another.

Greg

I think if robot A has a skirt and is stationary, and robot B goes to push them, and ends up flipping over, it'd be B's fault.

However, I think if a robot pushed the highpoint of another robot to tip it over, it may or may not be considered a legal move. I think that really depends on the opinion of the refs and situation.

Greg

You think so? I guess it's possible for some. . . but, it seems to me that a lot of the stacking robots where designed using one of two philosophies.

First, there are the short robots that stack by lifting only the height of one bin. They move stacks atop single bins. This short amount of travel won't allow them the reach to lift an entire stack over the bar. Of course, they may be able to get most of the stack to fall over, sacrificing the bottom box or two as nothing more than "boosters".

Second, there are robots that protect their stacks inside some part of the robot. Often, these robots stretch up from the floor, and if the robot can't pass partially beneath the bar, they can't deposit stacks on the other side at all.

Claw stackers would be the notable exception, I think. They could pretty easily toss a stack over the bar. However, lifting and maneuvering a stack with these robots seems next to impossible.

It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Your right. At first I thought the "claw" stakers were insane... now I'm starting to see why they did it :)

My team falls into the category of bots that can drop all but 1 booster bins over the bar... we may be able to drop that one over, I'm not sure we checked.