Predictions Week 2: Strategic Ascent

[JohnSchneider]

Originally Posted by stevend1994

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.

If you look at Einstein alliances in recent history there have always been some "simple" bots on them...or at least robots that don't perform all aspects of the game. 148 in 2008, 4334 last year come to mind immidietly.

Maybe its not "really??" and more of "What do they know".

[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?

[JM_987]

Originally Posted by Looking Forward

987 hasn't lost a regional since 2010 and has been stopped short of the finals only twice since 2005 (both times at SVR).

Did not even realize this until just now..
As opposed to usually driving the bot, I'm excited to watch our new driver take over.

[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.