Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868
Fixed it for you.
Going to quote myself to save some effort
[in response to "mecanum wheels have never made it to eEinstein"]
In my humble opinion, the game this year did not lend itself to a strictly mecanum drivetrain. The field was wide open, the position of your robot mattered (favoring high traction drives), and quickness and speed mattered (in both short distances and cross field - something that benefits multiple speed transmissions).
If next year's game saw upwards of 30% of teams choosing mecanum drivetrains, and still none of those teams make it to Einstein, there might be something to that statement.
Excluding robots based solely on their style of drivetrain isn't too intelligent; one would do better to look at the complete package as well as how the robot's functionality and performance could fit into a prospective alliance.
|
Statistically it doesn't really matter what percentage of teams run a certain drive, it's what percentage of competitive teams are running a certain drive.
I don't really care what n% of teams run, as it's reasonable to state that for whatever reason n% aren't a top team.
However, the decision making process of the proven competitive teams provides much more insight. The top teams, far more than any other, are constantly assessing things for competitiveness. They are also generally the most willing to COMPLETELY contradict historical beliefs (of the public, or their own) because something has value to them.
To me it speaks volumes that more top teams don't run them. I'd wager a fair number of top teams have tested mecanums in private, and chose to not use them. I won't say that we are or aren't a top team, but we tested mecanums (this is the first time it's public knowledge) and were not happy with them versus a fast and well tuned Nwd.