View Single Post
  #30   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-05-2016, 22:30
Andrew Schreiber Andrew Schreiber is offline
Data Nerd
FRC #0079
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Misplaced Michigander
Posts: 4,058
Andrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me View Post
You're still shooting too high (literally) and missing the point of this exercise. Robots with less capability than your "pick three of these" specifications have seeded high or been selected high and won events this year. There's zero way a high goal shooter is a needed component of a "minimum competitive concept". You generally need to do far less than you think to be a competitive robot, and the point of this exercise is to figure out what specific tasks you have to do to meet this criteria with little effort or machining.
Yeah, I'm in the boat of GeeTwo is way beyond MCC and into wish listing what his robot did.


Fact - at most early events (by which I mean before week, say, 6?) you could seed high with a favorable schedule and a reliable drivetrain. Don't need to TOUCH a ball. Like, ever. So for me, a MCC (which I usually define as a robot that will play in eliminations) consists of nothing more than a drive base capable of clearing the passive defenses. A portculis/cdf arm pneumatically driven would have been wonderful but not minimum.
__________________




.
Reply With Quote