Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent

[Jared Russell]

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.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Jared341

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.

3173 was also an excellent full court shooter; they actually kinda disprove LF's point that they should be in supporting roles: 3173 was the primary scorer for their alliance at FLR. However, as with any full court shooter, they were completely shut down when a tall defender (3003) ambled along.

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.

[Joon Park]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

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.

I agree. But then this begs the question, what is the role of the third robot in that ultimate alliance? Traditional FRC game strategy would suggest it is a defender/climber. Will it be different this year?

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by Joon Park

I agree. But then this begs the question, what is the role of the third robot in that ultimate alliance? Traditional FRC game strategy would suggest it is a defender/climber. Will it be different this year?

Based on watching CVR, I think an anti-defensive robot might be even more useful than a defensive robot depending on the composition and strategy of the opposing alliance.

[Aidan S.]

Originally Posted by bduddy

Based on watching CVR, I think an anti-defensive robot might be even more useful than a defensive robot depending on the composition and strategy of the opposing alliance.

I absolutely agree with this statement. If the alliance is choosing to base their offensive strategy off of a full court shooter, an anti-defensive robot is a critical component of this type of strategy. Every full court shooter I've witnessed shoots relativey level shots that slowly ascend to the goal across the field. They all require a significant path to be cleared for their shots to rise to a height where an 84'' (or even 60'') robot can't interfere with the disc in flight, so an anti-defensive robot to keep the opposing alliance's blocker away and constantly keep a path clear is extremely important.

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by bduddy

Based on watching CVR, I think an anti-defensive robot might be even more useful than a defensive robot depending on the composition and strategy of the opposing alliance.

Generally, wouldn't a bot suitable for either role be good at the other? You'd want a strong drive train as a primary attribute (after autonomous scoring, of course). You'd want to take the blocker off for anti-defense, of course.

[jamierose]

Originally Posted by Jaxom

Generally, wouldn't a bot suitable for either role be good at the other? You'd want a strong drive train as a primary attribute (after autonomous scoring, of course). You'd want to take the blocker off for anti-defense, of course.

Perhaps a strong drivetrain is even more important than autonomous scoring. Having autonomous scoring but a weak drive train is practically the same as having a climb; a robot gets a few guaranteed points in a match but doesn't do much else.