To the contrary, let's say a team decides to forgo the top row completely in lieu of a simpler robot for a December competition. This is a stark reality for many FTC teams. The scoring analysis boils down to how many 'extra' points would going for the top row give if it were designed for instead of adding a weighted ring detector. The analysis would also have to break down how many weighted rings could be scored in the same amount of time it took to own the top row, let for now let's assume a 1:1 tradeoff.
- If the bottom 2 rows are filled/owned and 1 weighted ring exists on the corner peg, then the score is 126 (assumes 1 ring per peg)
- If the bottom 2 rows are filled/owned and 1 top row peg is filled/owned and no weighted rings on the corner peg, the score is 180.
- If the top 2 rows are filled/owned and no weighted rings are in the corner, the score is 135.
An easy argument to make is that for two equally-practiced teams, a team which scores the bottom two rows will be able to score faster than a team that scores the top two rows. Thus the team that scored on the bottom first will have more time to place that last ring on top.
On the surface, this seems like a no-brainer -- go for the top row. Yet there are underlying tradeoffs that may allow the low-peg team to pull ahead in most situations:
- Their lack of adding complexity for the top row gives them more time to pull of a complex autonomous routine, netting them the ability to score their own and their partner's ring (+50).
- The extra practice time with the intention of going for weighted rings allows them to score more rings overall, including more regular rings than a team which goes for the top row and weighted rings (+10-20 points)
- There will be plenty of opportunities (at least one per match per field) for a double-weighted ring score to occur. When it does happen, the team which specializes in weighting will be prepared for it and have practiced it multiple times (+42 points)
- The simple fact that the weighted ring adds an entire other place on the field on which to score (a totally different zone!) means defense will have to guess where to go next. This would be particularly devastating to that top-level team when they're trying place that last ring on top in that VERY predictable spot. (20-40 point differential per match)
- Match to match, if the weighted ring detector fails then in most designs* it isn't catastrophic to run a match without it. A top-tier lift adds complexity versus a mid-tier lift, thus is more prone to failure over the course of an entire season. With a lift failure it would be catastrophic to run a match without the failed system. (probably only 1 match outcome affected over the entire season)
*Get creative! One doesn't NEED gravity to detect the weighted rings, as my students were quick to point out to me.