Going for 3 robots on Ramp?

[Ninja_Bait]

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

You are allowed to extend up to 14 inches beyond the frame perimeter...

That's for outward protrusions. Can you extend downward?

[EricLeifermann]

Originally Posted by Ninja_Bait

That's for outward protrusions. Can you extend downward?

thats a good question for the Q&A

[Ninja_Bait]

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

thats a good question for the Q&A

That is true. I was hoping someone had figured it out, but I also forgot that CD is not the GDC. (Otherwise we'd be better at getting the game hints! )

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by davidthefat

Hopefully if my idea gets through to people, a weight shifting mechanism.

Extremely high complexity resulting in limited value.

Originally Posted by BeltSanderRocks

Don't all the robots have to be supported by the bridge?

To get points? Yes. And balanced.

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

find the rule that says that I can't seem to find it...

[G40] When the final score is assessed per [G37], a Balanced Alliance Bridge, per Section 2.2.5, earn points as follows:

Note that there is no mention (and therefore no score value) for an unbalanced alliance bridge.
The coopertition bridge is a different rule.

[EricLeifermann]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

Extremely high complexity resulting in limited value.

To get points? Yes. And balanced.

Note that there is no mention (and therefore no score value) for an unbalanced alliance bridge.
The coopertition bridge is a different rule.

Maybe he didn't understand what I meant or you didn't but i mean to put a robot on another robot and then get on the bridge and have it balance. As for him I think he wants to know if my idea is against the rules but I don't see where it says that you can't.

[pandamonium]

We do not have a Ramp yet to test balance but what about getting creative. Three robots could fit easier under an angled configuration...

[lefkoc]

quote:Lesson learned: No matter the end game, it's important, and you shouldn't rule it out. - ninja bait


I agree. My team won two regionals last year, partly because of programming and good alliances. But the real reason we won was our minibot, which was lightning fast and easy to deploy. It is important to play the game right, but the endgame is where the match is decided, and especially with a 20 point difference in elims, it is gonna be really important, especially once people get through the first two regionals.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

To get points? Yes. And balanced.

Note that there is no mention (and therefore no score value) for an unbalanced alliance bridge.
The coopertition bridge is a different rule.

(emphasis mine) I see the "must be balanced" rule for the alliance bridge (G40), but where's the "must be supported" rule? It's mentioned in G41 w.r.t. the coopertition bridge if that bridge isn't balanced. No where I can find does "balancing" either type of bridge required any robot to be "fully supported" by said bridge. Did I miss a definition or something somewhere?

[Ninja_Bait]

The intent of G41 is clearly to prevent robots from claiming coopertition points by driving up the bridge halfway but still be half on the carpet. G41 doesn't even prevent another robot from going to the coopertition bridge to aid balancing (obviously, as long as it doesn't break other rules) by supporting the bridge itself. I think aided balancing is a perfectly valid strategy.

[JohnSchneider]

Yeah, I dont know what prevents you from taking the 111 approach in 2001...

Seems ok

[Alex.q]

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

People just need to get their 2007 robots into the design ideas and start thinking about lifting robots with their robots and then balancing...

Originally Posted by animenerdjohn

Yeah, I dont know what prevents you from taking the 111 approach in 2001...

I am not super familiar with 2007, my rookie year was 2009. If I have two ramps, supporting two robots, will I still be able to drive up the bridge, or am I pretty much stationary? Also, on 111 in 2001, robots drove ovr their entire robot. A similar bot this year would seem impos--, sorry, improbable if you wanted to be able to shoot basketballs.

Any hints on how to build these ramps?

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by animenerdjohn

Yeah, I dont know what prevents you from taking the 111 approach in 2001...

Seems ok

The initial portion of your ramp could only extend 14" beyond your frame perimeter. Given the more flexible bumper rules this season, it's definitely possible, but not nearly as easy with the size limitations. Your ramp would either have to be much narrower or much steeper to co-exist with the bumper and extension limits.

[Peyton Yeung]

If a team decides to go like 111 in 2001 does that still count if the bridge is balanced? I thought the rule said that the bridge must fully support all the robots. I think it should be fine but I'd just like to check.

[NUMB3RS]

Originally Posted by Tubatroopa

If a team decides to go like 111 in 2001 does that still count if the bridge is balanced? I thought the rule said that the bridge must fully support all the robots. I think it should be fine but I'd just like to check.

Bridge supports Robot 1.
Robot 1 supports Robot 2.
Bridge supports Robot 2 by transitivity.

Alternatively:

Robot 2
^
Robot 1
^
Bridge


therefore,

Robot 2
^
Bridge

[Aren Siekmeier]

The only mention in the rules of robots being supported by bridges is when the coopertition bridge is NOT balanced. A balanced bridge is balanced and scores points whether or not a robot is fully supported on it, at least with the ambiguous rules we have now. Read the manual, and expect clarification in the Team Update tomorrow.