Quote:
Originally Posted by Cody Carey
To design your robot for one or the other is a mistake.Offensive robots will do OK, and defensive robots will do OK, but flexible robots will win.
|
Replace "robot" with "alliance" in the above statement, and you'd be right on the money. Remember, this is a team game. One robot does not an alliance, and therefore an event winner, make. It's the mix of complementary robot abilities and driver skill that dictates how well an alliance performs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri
This proves that the best defense is an amazing offense. For further proof, ask the Colts. 
|
Ask the Colts what they thought when they were giving up 163,000 rushing yards a game and losing to teams like the Texans during the regular season..... Only when they remembered how to play DEFENSE (including the New England game) and became a more functionally-complete TEAM did their season turn around.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri
This year's game is a bit different though.
|
A bit? This year, the game almost plays defense for you. Unlike in 2006.....
- Scoring objects are non-renewable.
- Scoring locations are limited to 24 possible positions at match start and diminish in number as the match goes on.
- Unlike a fixed round target with a know location providing a clear line of sight for any driver, the 2007 scoring apparatus is very dynamic, and 62.5% of the scoring legs are either obstructed from driver view or perpendicular to the driver's line of sight, requiring additional positioning time to complete the score, save for those (few?) teams able to perfect some sensor-aided hanging method.
- Accumulated scores in the form of rows can directly and substantially be reduced by the opposition by placing these little black objects called spoilers.
- Provided they can even be created in the first place, big rows will immediately become the center of attention for the creating alliance - they could become the Sterilite tote stacks of 2007, only this year, physical space is your enemy instead of gravity. A horizontal row of 6 wraps around 75% of the rack. Have fun guarding that type of real estate. A 2 wide by 3 high array is easier to create and defend, but it's only worth 28 points. It's safe to say the row building alliance will devote at least one robot to protect any high-point creation. I can think of numerous ways to mess with the minds of anyone successful in creating any big ringer formation. Will our alliance attack your formation with 2 spoilers at once? Will we periodically feign interest in your construct, gladly accept the presence of your now stationary and unproductive array-guarding robot and go to work build up our own ringer score with a 3 on 2 advantage? Near the end of the match, will our best and fastest offensive robot sit there patiently with a spoiler between you and your home base, torturing you to make a decision as our superior defensive/ramp bot sets up for the bonus and our powerful offensive hybrid continues to score on the other side? Knowing the spoiler bot has the quicks to make it onto the ramp with little time to spare, will you hold your ground, frustrated that we can make a 60 point run faster than you can, or will you wuss out and run home to mommy early, allowing us to decimate your scoring array with our spoiler? Oh the painful choices.... I see many big-row alliances becoming the victims of their own creation MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA.......
Sorry, I get carried away sometimes.
One powerful ramp/defender. One fast, efficient offensive elite. One 2-way hybrid (ramps are optional, strong drivetrain is not). I see that balanced alliance attack bringing the most strategic options to the table, and I see that type of alliance having the most success this year.