[Tassemet]

The first thing our team would do is obviously, meet ahead of the kickoff. There a few months in advance, we'd review pictures of teams (ourself and others) tactics, watch youtube videos, watch video on matches we did, and break down in detail the shortcomings and strengths of the bot we built the competetion before (which was usually still assembled). There, we'd also get into our design flaws, and look into why parts broke and how to avoid it in the future.

From there, we'd rebuild/fool around with design concepts and maths and if we had issues our bot from the year previous couldn't do, we'd modify/improve it as best we could, even if only for demonstrations. Also, we'd have a design prebuilt (like a square, saves time when engineering, and we'd work with the square or if that failed just start over) and when kickoff came, we'd breakdown/analyze the kickoff video and start looking into easy and effective solutions to complete the task.

For those who were into it (the code monkies) they'd do a game of "tactical forecasting" where they'd predict "why should we be chosen?", or, "if our bot does this, what are other potential designs other teams might come up with?", and "can we counter other designs somehow?" (graciously of course). The strategy of the game for some is just as exciting as the build.