|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
The 469 Breakaway strategy is being called the 'chokehold' strategy. However, they did not win.
|
|
#17
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Quote:
It qualifies as a "chokehold" strategy, for sure. |
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Quote:
(I will always be a HOT fan) |
|
#19
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Quote:
X doesn't count when it involves, "score more balls than the other team". |
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Some call it flawless play and circumstantial, I call it reality.
Either way, yes 469 had an incredible strategy/robot in 2010. Many thought it was inevitable that they would become the World Champs, especially after aligning their powers with 1114. There were probably very few people that thought otherwise (excluding the 67, 177, and 294 alliance) during the finals on Einstein. A chokehold strategy, NO. A strategy that will win matches 99% of the time, YES. |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
I know its not an official event, but at MARC 469 lost in the semifinals. The reason I don't consider 469 a gamebreaker robot or even the best robot since I joined FIRST in 2006 is that it depended on a great robot seeding #1. If that didn't happen (like at MARC), they were in somewhat trouble.
|
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Quote:
|
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Really? That is surprising to hear.
|
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Quote:
"A strategy which, when executed, guarantees victory, independent of any action by your opponents" |
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Quote:
|
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Who's calling it that?
|
|
#27
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
After watching the championships play out, I have 2 words for this year's game breaker - Bomb Squad. No, it didn't guarantee victory, but it changed the game in the elimination rounds. In their regional appearances they were forced to play offense, and did rather well. In Galileo eliminations and on Einstein they did what they were designed to do - starve the opponent and feed the alliance - and they did it better then anyone in the entire field. If you took 25 or 180 and traded them for any of the dozen top teams who demonstrated equal or better speed and accuracy on offense, you may have ended up with the same result because at least you had the same capabilities (realizing 25 and 180 executed exceptionally well in eliminations where many others of equal capability did not). But if you took away 16, who would replace them? They were in a class by themselves.
Usually you save your second pick for defense and load up on offense first. With Bomb Squad their defense fed the offense; if you're twice as good a shooter but only have 1/3 the ammo, pretty soon you're fighting a losing battle. It really didn't matter what high scores other divisions were posting, you can't do it without balls available to score. I would say that if 16 goes to IRI and you have the first pick and don't take them, you might as well start packing up your pit. |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
2012 Game Breaker?
Einstein /endsarcasm |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
i would suggest a 1 wheel shooter with a curved back plate. the best way to do this is to let the motor run at a consistent speed and then fire. you should use a powerful motor(s). 1 cim, or maybe 2?
|
|
#30
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: The Game Breaker
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|