Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared Russell
If you are going to pick one thing to be good at, why pick the thing that every alliance only benefits from having one of (and that many shooting robots may want to utilize to improve their cycle times)?
If you are going to pick two things to be good at, why make one of them the thing that is most difficult to integrate with most other robot functions?
If you are going to pick three things to be good at, now you have two functions that are difficult to integrate...and now most teams are well on their way to ineffective robots.
|
I see what you're saying, but here was our thought process.
Team defenses don't match the real thing, and adding polycarbonate/aluminum sheet only gets it so close to the real thing. It would be an entire tangential fundraising/toolset to get the real defenses built. In our analysis we wanted to be able to ensure the breaching bonus as well as the contribute to the weakening bonus as best as possible. In order to do that, we first determined the rolling drive train properties across the defenses. Then we decided to hedge against the fact that we probably won't solve one of the real defenses even though we've solved it in our shop.
Thus, in order to ensure we could still hit our target of X out of 5 categories of defenses, low bar became a major target. We'll find a partner or two to compliment us for elims.
Then there is the utility for cycling. An entire zone of the field surrounding the low bar becomes obsolete without the ability to go under the bar. It even becomes a liability in the wrong situation. It's definitely a tradeoff though.