Quote:
Originally Posted by Basel A
Let's say there's 3 potential subsystems, a drivetrain and two scoring mechanisms. The drivetrain and one scoring mechanism are completed. Are you suggesting that they do not work on a second scoring mechanism? I'm of the opinion that it couldn't hurt and if it doesn't work at the competition, as you've suggested is very likely, they can just take it off. Yes, they may sacrifice practice time, but if the addition does work, it could double their point output. A team that expects to win in qualification can't rely on playing defence because they will have matches paired with robots that can't score.
Yes, it is a high-risk situation. But it's also high-reward and it seems most people in this thread support taking the chance.
|
Yes I am suggesting the team use what they know will work. Having a robust robot with well practiced drivers is far better than a half working robot with unpracticed drivers. Robustness is vital. Most teams will mark a team down on their scouting sheet for breaking repeatedly on the field. I'm saying a team doesn't have to expect to do well in the qualification rounds to do well at a regional. Our third pick for eliminations at the 2010 Autodesk Oregon Regional was ranked 55th after the qualification rounds. During eliminations they never scored a point, but they played some monster defense. We couldn't have won the regional without them.