|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Offence vs. Defence.
My team is really debating on focusing on either defense or offense?
Is your team focusing on one or another? Or both? Are you focusing on going over the bumps/under the tunnel? Or staying in your section of the field? Pros/cons for offense vs defense? Last edited by Robotbug : 13-01-2010 at 22:23. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
"From a certain perspective, defense and offense encompass nearly identical tactics."
--Kavier Harkonnen -Address to Salusan Military this is from an amazing book: The Butlerian Jihad (part of the Dune series) Last edited by hotapay42 : 14-01-2010 at 00:32. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
As noted above some actions are both offensive and defensive. In the middle, by moving the balls to your offensive zone, you are fueling an offense, but also denying them to the opponent, thus said action is both. Also, the act of pinning can be used for both (stopping someone from pushing a ball in or keeping them out of the way of a shot).
As for offense/defense in general? It depends on your thinking. Obviously if your alliance can't score, you can't win, which would suggest offense. However, on the flipside, if the opposing alliance can't score, it can't win, suggesting defense. The one thing that I'll say is that a lot of the time, defense gets overlooked. It has no really measurable characteristics. Sure you can count how many blocks it makes, but how much value does an action like pinning add? Because you're looking for the absence of opposing scoring it's hard to quantify defense. Offense is much easier to measure since it is just "how many points can they score." This will probably get more attention from teams, but likewise, many teams will be doing it, and to stand out, you will have to be quite good (although this is true in any case). As an example, in the 2008 game, Overdrive, I was wondering the entire Championship (and even before that) why some teams didn't play just to "harrass" (play defense) because they couldn't hurdle. I think it was certain penalties to be avoided, but in the end, it could make a huge difference (if you're familiar with the game, if I were to punch your trackball back over the line after you crossed, you had to go around once and take it back around before you could get points for it again). Almost every alliance picked based on points scored, which ignored that there were only two game pieces for each alliance to score with. At the end when I was getting on the bus, a group was walking by talking about how they should have picked a lap bot that could run and annoy the other team. Defense is great, but often doesn't get the attention it deserves (although by the nature of this game, it very well might). |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
My team chose offense, for two reasons:
1. A robot can do at least acceptable defense no matter what (exept maybe if it had an omni drive, which ours does not), but a robot that is built for defense won't be able to play offense very well. 2. Defense is bad. Due to the scoring system in this competition, the higher scoring a match is, the more points all 6 teams get. It is much better to help your own alliance get more points than to work at reducing the score of the other alliance. When it comes to over the bump versus under the tower, I reccomend reading this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?p=898655 Last edited by quinxorin : 13-01-2010 at 22:35. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
If you are defence, try preparing for defense and midfield so if you get paired with another defense robot, then you can be flexible. For this reason you should be able to go over the humps as this gives you even more flexibility.
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Quote:
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Everyone thought playing defense in Rack n' Roll was a silly notion. Once robots started playing defense, it became clear that it was the only key to win.
My suggestion: Play offense, but always defend. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Defense wins championships. Unless the year is 2005, 2008, or 2009.
I think the best offensive strategies in this game, and the best offensive robots, will play a strategy one might label as "defensive". There are key points in the game where defense is needed to augment offense, and if you don't succeed at them, you won't succeed on the field. This game is going to play out a LOT like Rack n' Roll, with a few less dual lifters. My two cents. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Depends on what you're defending. Opponents' goals? Opponents' robots? Opponents' possessed balls? Opponents' passed/shot balls?
Adaptability will be king in this game. If your robot has design(s) that are adaptable to many uses, success will follow. At any rate, "offense" and "defense" are much too vague to be employed as strategies. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Quote:
Chris, IIRC, defense was still a contributing factor in 2008. I don't remember seeing 148 do much (on Einstein) besides knock the trackball away from the opposing alliance. If somebody on 148 would like to correct me, but my memory has it that they didn't do much lap running during teleoperated mode, but rather did things like put the trackball back across the line |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Quote:
|
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Quote:
|
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
Quote:
Quote:
The second statement is far more important to this whole thread. Neither offense or defense wins matches and tournaments... Strategy wins matches and tournaments! ![]() |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
In the Qualification Rounds ...
Thus, a team who's offensive capability is mediocre compared to its defensive capability should focus solely on offense during qualifications and save the defense for eliminations. Ergo designing explicitly for defense implies that you expect your robot's capabilities will be attractive enough to a high-ranked team to be picked; the reality is that those alliance selections are quite unpredictable, especially early in the build season. Edit -- that does not mean robots should stay away from mid-field defense during quals, since your 'bot jockeys for position in order to feed balls from one side to the other... in elims mid-field will be key since it is only there that balls return back to your offense after being scored. During quals it will simply be more important to keep the flow of balls moving than it will be to push the other robots around. Last edited by JesseK : 14-01-2010 at 12:01. |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offence vs. Defence.
I think whether on offense or defense pushing power will be big this year, it should be a very physical game, much like Rack and Roll was. If you can outpush your opponents you can score and keep them from scoring. A lot of teams are talking about mechanum wheels - we used them in 2008, they are great for manuverability but you can get pushed around very easily.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Green and pink painted robot (a good defence?) | Sean Raia | General Forum | 30 | 06-01-2009 08:53 |