View Single Post
  #32   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 30-08-2013, 00:33
Abhishek R Abhishek R is offline
Registered User
FRC #0624
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 892
Abhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond reputeAbhishek R has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Best Theoretical Alliance

No, I mean auto is important, you definitely have to have the 7 disk, just that the centerline isn't as important because it can be defended relatively easily, so I wouldn't consider it a factor when creating an alliance. That's why I like the alliance 254 - 1114 - 67 because an FCS plus floor pickup with a cycling climber is a wide variety of options that all fit well together the best in my opinion. All the alliances suggested were great alliances, I just feel this one is 1% better.

Yes 67 can be defended, but if you have a robot defending them, you're down to a 2 vs 2.5 since 67 can still cycle, unless the defender is also a fast cycler (i.e 1477) which would make it a 2.5 vs 2.5. If you decide to not dedicate a defender to 67 I think they would just outscore you.

Another idea for variety could be 1114, 118, 469. Basically relies on massive teleop plus 1114's climb.
__________________
2012 - 2015 : 624 CRyptonite
Team Website

Last edited by Abhishek R : 30-08-2013 at 00:46.
Reply With Quote