[philso]

Originally Posted by SteveDeonarine0

One of my member who goes by the name cody says that a tall robot is hetter because you can do more with it

Originally Posted by cait.schroeder

Short robot is able to go under the low bar but seems to be the choice that I would not go with, you have limited room to have all of your electronics, drive train and whatever you are using to achieve missions.

Have a look at this one from 2012. It had more functionality than most tall robots even though it is about 12 inches tall. The limitations are really your imagination, your persistence, your willingness to fail and your willingness to learn from your failures and the failures of others.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQcp6g-BBYQ

Originally Posted by Dumper FTW 435

I disagree with this assumption. Most of the time, you can do just as much with a shorter robot as you can with a taller robot. It is however, a greater design challenge. It means you need to optimize the space used on your robot. I highly recommend you design your robot to as small as you can, while still meeting all the abilities you have deemed important. Sometimes this means a tall robot, but often you'll find that you can get away with a shorter one.

Originally Posted by Demonic_

The design of your robot is mostly up to your team, but there are restrictions on how tall your robot can be before each match as always. My personal idea is to have a relatively short robot to start off, and then extends upward or lowers based on what obstacles are in the way, much like a vintage lowrider.

It seems that every year, the FRC GDC (and Scott Evans, the Game Designer for FLL) develops games where there are strong advantages for robots that are x and strong advantages for robots that are not x, forcing you to make intelligent trade-offs; with x = tall, wide, fast, etc. The world of Engineering is full of trade-offs and this is an Engineering competition.