Quote:
Originally Posted by cmass
Is there any correlation between drive type and success?
- are good mechanums scoring like crazy and repositioning tubes as expected?
- are drop centers having any trouble with fine positioning in the scoring lanes?
Is there any correlation between arm types and success?
- I saw the Alamo final on 16's website, they have a telescoping tower, their partner had a four-bar articulating arm. Both seemed to score at will.
- 33 has a telescoping tower
I am a little surprised that there is not more hoarding of thrown game pieces in the matches I have seen. People seem to be playing the game straight up.
Anyone who thought the game was going to be played end-to-end with few pieces on the ground sure had it wrong.
|
Looking at just Traverse (and a few other key robots), drivetrains can be of use to a robot, but they certainly don't make or break one. Most of the top robots at TC all had a 6wd with either drop center, or omni wheels. The only time mech drive systems were useful were in positioning for the minibot deployment.
Of course, a good crab or swerve drive did help many teams do very well (as always).
For arms, it seems like a telescoping tower is fast, but certainly not the only winning robot out there. I observed many teams with either a single or double jointed arm do really well. In fact, besides 1918, the best scorers at TC were single jointed arms. (2000 comes to mind)
It all comes down to speed of hanging, and not the arm type.
As for hoarding of game pieces, we found that during eliminations, in order to keep our opponents from scoring it was a good idea to have a robot who would herd tubes towards our side of the field. If a robot can do this effectively, the top scores for that alliance will certainly be higher.
Floor loading is also an extremely valuable feature.