Who is going over the bump? (A Pillar really)

[ThirteenOfTwo]

Originally Posted by wilhitern1

You left out in your analysis, how often is the bridge blocked and for how long. Think about all teams following your logic. How much bridge crossing is happening? It is just too dangerous for two bots to attempt to cross one bridge at once. Could it be done? yes, but not safely and quickly...

Ooh, you're right.

I suppose we should conclude that our answer to that question was "never".

1) Not very much bridge crossing is happening.*
2) Opponents are not stupid enough to block your bridge and risk a technical foul.
3) Even if they block your bridge, the Coopertition bridge is open and blocking you there is a technical foul under the blockading rule.
4) That leaves two allies who can block your bridge at a time.
5) One of those allies will likely be playing defense and will thus cross midfield only once, right at the beginning.
6) That leaves one ally who can block your bridge at a time.
7) If both of you cross the bridge at the same time, neither of you is scoring.
8) If neither of you is scoring, you are losing.
9) You should never be crossing the bridge at the same time as your partner.

*This could be a flawed assumption, in which case the bump is much more important than we think. However, all of our simulations and logic back this up.

Originally Posted by BrendanB

On day one our team did a little simulation of the game and from that we found that most of the moves our team members made were going across the field to get a ball from the human player in a competitive match (several scores from each alliance). With that being said we played around with whether or not going over the bump was necessary. Additionally, what if one of our robots got stuck on either bridge or takes much longer than us to cross then we are now stuck in rush hour traffic at the tolls, and in a game with so few balls what if for some reason we there are several ball in our opponents zone constantly?

This sounds like sketchy logic. Did your simulating players try bouncing the ball from the inbounder station? What about dedicating one robot on the other side of the field to play defense AND to return scored balls?

Originally Posted by BrendanB

Additionally, what if one of our robots got stuck on either bridge or takes much longer than us to cross then we are now stuck in rush hour traffic at the tolls

In your simulations, did you ever come across a situation where more than one robot needed to use a bridge at a time? "We'd be screwed if our partner breaks down loses some validity because if your partner breaks down on the bridge (thus rendering it unbalanceable) it's probably already over.

Originally Posted by BrendanB

and in a game with so few balls what if for some reason we there are several ball in our opponents zone constantly?

The flaw here is "for some reason". Think about the reasons this would happen.

Q1) Why do they have a lot of balls?
A1) There are two possibilities.

P1) They are receiving a lot of balls.
P2) They are not scoring any balls.

C1) If P2 is true, they are losing.

Q2) From where are they receiving these balls?
A2) There are several possibilities.

P3) They are receiving them from their feeder station faster than they can score them.
P4) They are receiving them from the ground on your side of the field faster than they can score them.
P5) Some combination of P3 and P4

C2) If P3 is true, you are scoring at a faster rate than they are and therefore winning.
C3) If P4 is true, your aim is bad and their defensive robot is amazing at stealing rebounds.
C4) If P5 is true, the result is likely a combination of C2 and C3.

O1) If P4 is true, stop that defensive robot! (Or, alternately, build a robot that is accurate.)
O2) If P5 is true, stop that defensive robot! (Or, alternately, build a robot that is accurate.) (Or, if P3 > P4, don't worry!)

C4) If they have a lot of balls on their side of the field, either you are winning or one robot is responsible for their success or your alliance is so wildly inaccurate that you have no hope of winning anyways.