[quote=The other Gabe;1485536]a few problems with this, at least for me. the first is that your entire alliance has issues with downed containers (which was the main reason I chose 4911 over 2471; I've seen them handle the cans better overall than Mean Machine). While they had a great robot, the main reason CPR advanced so far into playoffs was their brilliant scouting, allowing them to create a super solid alliance in one of the strongest divisions; keep in mind that 492 technically placed higher, qualifying for Einstein (even if they never played a match on there), and that was because they were on the best team in their division. Also CPR would have neither the time nor the ability to go from the Landfill (I have gone to every event they have, and they have never done landfill). for your alliance, I feel like the Skunks would make more sense (assuming you want all 4 containers, if not, 955)
[quote=Dunngeon] "I agree with your first pick, although 4488 performs much better on the right feeder for obvious reasons."
I was visualizing the feeder stations from the step, not behind the alliance wall, sorry for the confusion
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dunngeon
"948 will provide the auto, but little else the alliance needs. This third bot would preferably be able to play with tipped over cans, and create 2 of their own capped stacks. 948 doesn't do tipped over bins and rarely (ever?) did 2 full stacks."
I was relying on 4911 to right containers in the way my team did for CPR and 255 did for 4488, eliminating that issue. also, having been the lead scout for my team, I watched every match on Curie, and seem to remember them doing 2 capped 5 stacks in tele during elims, and 1+ during Quals (since they did co-op instead)... I have some evidence here (although my team unfortunately stole all their containers, so only one stack is capped) http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2015cur_sf1m1 these appear to be 6 stacks, too, which makes my argument for them even better  Skunks are a good pick too, though
(sorry, havent figured out multi-quoting) |
The Other Gabe - I'm not sure who you are, but I think I love you (the 'brilliant scouting' remark).
We work VERY hard on our scouting and felt elated with our PNW District Championship and Curie Finalist Division alliance selections in 2015. Everything that people have commented about the merits of the different robots mentioned are things our scouting team considered. Rather than discuss specific robots, I will say our strategy involved picking very reliable teams that addressed what we lacked (example- sideways can up righting ability). In 2015, ranking was determined by averages. Reliability was critically important. We advanced past teams with greater upsides (and downsides) at World's because of our reliability, or other teams' lack thereof.
Now, with Stronghold in 2016, we may consider a different strategy. Since we are back to the win-loss format, picking a 3rd bot that is high risk-high reward may be something we will consider more strongly. Having a kamikaze defensive bot may be worth our while.
Given our choices, we were pleased with our alliance selection at 2016 Week 1 Auburn Mountainview. We chose 3393 as our first pick because they were fantastic at breaching, had fast, smart driving, and were the best low scoring robot at the competition. Their skill at doing everything they chose to do exquisitely well put them ahead of other high goal scoring robots we could have chosen. For our third bot, it would have made sense to pick a crazy-fierce defensive bot, but none of the bots remaining met our criteria for autonomous crossing, smart defense, lack of fouls, and being able to still be powered throughout a whole match. We might have been able to overlook some fouls, but the lack of autonomous and staying powered throughout the match was a deal breaker. We chose instead 3223, a skilled bot with smart driving. They did a nice job on defense, crossed in autonomous, and were capable of helping us on breaching if we needed it.
We survived the fiercest defensive bot, 2907, in quarterfinals, partly due to 2907 committing fouls (although in terms of risk/reward, they were effective at limiting our shooting). Our survival through quarterfinals was a major accomplishment. No other alliance had to face the type of defense we experienced in eliminations. Then, in semis, we faced Skunks (1983) alliance. We lost the first semifinal match by 3 points. They, of course, went on to win the whole thing. They were simply better than we were. Their victorious qualification match in which they were the only robot of the alliance who showed up on the field was probably the most impressive thing I have ever seen.
To win in Auburn Mountainview, we needed to have completed more features on our robot (autonomous shooting, scaling, vision recognition tele-op shooting). However, these are in process and we hope to have some of them ready for Glacier Peak and all of them ready for Mt. Vernon. I am thrilled with the 39 District Points we received our first week of competition in the historically toughest district in PNW. We plan to just get better and better and I think we realistically have plans to make that happen.
Good luck to everyone in Stronghold!