Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseK
Easy. Others teams tried for the other goals and didn't make it, perhaps mistaking their ability to make a viable scorer. Your team on the other hand, for whatever reason, decided that the point gap is easily closed with a few low goal balls and defense. There were many scores in the first VA qualifier that had combined scores of less than 5. Dumping 4 balls in autonomous would have very easily won 1/2 the matches. This was easily the most surprising aspect of this game.
With the ever-evolving cat and mouse strategies in this game, I fully expect that low goal bots will be contenders to help win the elims in Atlanta. Those bots will need good autonomouses, good defensive capabilities, and smart drivers. I don't believe there will be low-goal powerhouses since defense is difficult to perfect and there's very limited low-goal space. Yet bots who are great at scoring the outer goals have a definite ally with most low-goal designs since most low goal bots can also act as defense, wingman, and a second hopper to a outer-goal powerhouse.
|
Actually until four days before competition we were one of those teams trying to score in the high goals, but having little success, so we made the decision that we could do just as well if not better, as we did, if we just go simple and score in the low goal. So we scrapped our robot threw in some extra hours (all of our study halls and any class we could beg our way out of) and got this done. In the end I couldn't be happier with it.