Quote:
Originally Posted by asid61
Well, "swerve is never necessary" is like "moving is never necessary". You can sit still for a whole match with blinking lights and compete with that. Great. However, it's probably advantageous to move a little bit at least.
|
Of course I disagree with the idea that swerve is as essential as moving itself. However, I'm going to guess you mean that in a rhetorical sense- that both are broad generalizations. There many factors that decide the success of a robot, and trying to categorize success based on the drivetrain is pointless.
Many of the swerves that came out of 2014 are some of the best ever made, and therefore swerve gained a lot of popularity (and rightfully so, looking at you 2451). Why did we see a lot of good swerve? Because 2014 was a great game for it, and some teams have been developing a swerve for years, waiting for the opportunity to use it. Did a swerve drive win champs? No. Why? Because other robots defeated the swerve bots.
The fact is, there is no "best drivetrain." These broad generalizations like "ALWAYS USE TANK" and "SWERVE IS BETTER THAN TANK" are invalid because they attribute the success of a robot to one small aspect of the robot. Sure, the drivetrain is important, but its significance is nothing compared to everything else that goes into making a successful robot. The success of a robot is determined by every component, every design, every man-hour, every line of code, and every strategic discussion contributed to it; all of these factors are what make a robot successful, not just the drivetrain.
To respond more directly to OP, there's a lot of of post-2014 swerve hype, but it all comes down to what happens this weekend.