|
Re: Defensive robots
I WOULD argue that a defensive bot is a positive inclusion for an alliance, IF the game was all about getting the win. If this game were 2014 or 2013 style of qualification point acquisition, I'd take a defensive robot in a heartbeat.
The problem is that this game isn't 0-sum. In fact, some matches could be concievably played where the LOOSER makes just as many qualification points than some other match't WINNER.
That's important.
That means that there is a direct, positive incentive for a robot to play offense, although sometimes ineffectively, over defense. Sure, 2 robots on paper might be able to breach by themselves, and only need robot 3 to capture the tower, and, yes, I anticipate that such may certainly be the scenario at eliminations or championships. But, the fact of the matter is, things go wrong. You get stuck due to a bad angle and terrible visibility. Your robot just won't move. The opposing alliance sent a robot just to guard you. Sum it all up, and there's a good chance that at least 1 of the 2 offensive robots you planned on breaching with can't function fully. Should that happen, I'd much rather be able to have that robot that can at least get me that one qual. point for breaching over a defensive bot that only propels us to a 0-QP match.
Even in elims, the amount of points for a breach is s pretty darn big number, and given the high goal is so small, a robot with a strong drive train that can help breach (and maybe have a pool noodle) may be almost all you need.
__________________
Everything that can go wrong WILL go wrong, except the things we expect to go wrong and actually plan for.
Last edited by Green Potato : 17-02-2016 at 07:41.
Reason: additional content
|