|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Ultimate Ascent kicked off with a bang in week one, and with a number of FRC stars set to compete in week two, the scores may continue to climb. Generally, defense was sparse and unfocused before the eliminations last weekend, but teams may have learned their lessons. Seeing 610 and 1986 run all over their opponents when uncontested during much of qualifications may wake teams up to the importance of defense. The best way to stop powerhouse teams in the eliminations is to keep them away from being the #1 seed. But with a very attainable scoring objective, the lure of offense may be too much for many teams to handle. While the initial difficulty of design was steep, effective scoring seems much more achievable in 2013 than in many other years.
The preseason darlings didn't fare quite as well in week one as the more "conventional" designs. Full court shooters found success, but the ones who translated it into the elimination rounds did so because they were flexible and were able to play a more traditional scheme as well. 70 and 610 hit long range bombs when they could, but much of their alliances' real damage came from pyramid range. Only 840 managed to use the corner shot as their primary scoring method and take home gold, and that required a full alliance effort to set up (and some of the most memorable ref decisions in a while during the semis). 30 point hangers were a real crowd pleaser, but only a few were quick and consistent. Given that virtually every team could hang for 10, the 20 point disparity in hanging points was often easily overcome by shooting (a 3-for-3 autonomous in the high goal means only one shot in tele-op is needed). Don't write these strategies off yet, but these teams are going to have to go through some growing pains as they find their place on alliances. 3123 and 910 demonstrated that full court shooters can have a place in a support role. 61 and 1559 showed that with proper shooting support and some good defense, quick climbing robots can play a very valuable role on a balanced alliance. Strategies will likely continue to vary significantly from event to event and alliance to alliance during week two. Ground loading was the name of the game in Hatboro, while not a single robot in the finals at GSR had that skill. The one consistent factor will be autonomous scoring. Winning alliances will absolutely need to have two, if not three, bots consistently scoring in autonomous. If the third bot can't score in auton, they better bring something else very valuable to the table. When high powered alliances clash, it may come down to who can score more discs from the ground in the first fifteen. While focused defense can slow scoring rates, defense often contributes to traffic and ends up slowing both alliances. Parity is high during tele-op, leaving autonomous as the critical time to gain a lead. The bullets:
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Team 175, Buzz, was in the finals at GSR, and they had a ground intake. They rarely used it, though.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Glad to see (a) Looking Forward back, the writing this year is really good and the predictions excellent as always. Good luck teams in week 2!
Also, how do you know 1114 doesn't have a ground pickup that we just haven't seen yet? |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Looking Forward just knows.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
For once, I may have my doubts
![]() I guess we'll find out soon enough! |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Quote:
![]() |
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
3123 was an effective full court shooter for 2590's alliance at Hatboro-Horsham, especially in the quarter finals before they switched to a more defensive role in the semis and finals.
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
I saw them testing it on the practice field before eliminations, and it didn't seem to be picking up very well if at all. Anyway, they definitely never used it in eliminations so it was as if they didn't have a floor pickup.
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Quote:
I think the ultimate alliance remains that of a full court shooter and a robot with floor pickup. Every shot missed by the full court shooter is another piece of ammo for the robot with floor pickup. |
|
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Quote:
Waterford is going to be very exciting. |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Something tells me that they didn't overlook this. We'll find out tomorrow what calls they made.
|
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Quote:
My sources say their robot is being worked on heavily as we speak... I wonder if there is a connection. |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Quote:
|
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent
Elite teams forgoing floor pickup is this year's "really??" design decisions. I think it says something about how challenging this game is when many elite teams chose not to build the "do everything" robots they usually build.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|