unique strategies that worked....... or didn't

[CTbiker105]

Originally Posted by brennonbrimhall

Take a look at how alliance #8 beat #1 in Archimedes Quarters. They almost put up 400 points without fouls.

This was the only elimination match I missed on Archimedes prior to us getting eliminated. I came back to the stands, saw the score briefly and asked a mentor sitting beside me, "Did they really score 390 points against 2056?" His response was, "Yeah, the ball never really touched the ground. It was very impressive."

I'm surprised there weren't more bots that could preform the role 1918 did.

[Wayne TenBrink]

Originally Posted by CTbiker105

This was the only elimination match I missed on Archimedes prior to us getting eliminated. I came back to the stands, saw the score briefly and asked a mentor sitting beside me, "Did they really score 390 points against 2056?" His response was, "Yeah, the ball never really touched the ground. It was very impressive."

I'm surprised there weren't more bots that could preform the role 1918 did.

There were a few that could park in the corner, catch the ball from the HP, and score without moving (254, 469, 2771 for example - 2771 was the only one that I saw really using it). Perhaps we were best suited for it since we were tall and didn't have any parts hanging out that could be exploited to interfere with the shot. This wasn't something we specifically designed our robot to do, but we realized it was a capability early on. We never had many opportunities to try it during the season, and it never worked as well as it did with 51 and 2485 - they were the key that made it work.

It was a very interesting strategy, but it had its problems. The fact that we lost in the semi's is proof that it isn't a game lock strategy. As Jared Russell pointed out, it takes one robot out of the defense role and it requires clean execution. Our HP was the one feeding our bot, and it really took a toll on his nerves. A few missed shots into the bot cost us cycle time we coudn't afford to lose. The fact that we were parked in the corner instead of playing defense made it harder for 51 & 2485 to get the ball to the forward HP & easier for our opponents to run their cycle.

In hindsight, I think it would have been possible for us to take a more active role in the match and still be in the corner when we needed to be. We still have the MARC and the WMRI coming up. Perhaps we will get some chances to try it again!

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink

In hindsight, I think it would have been possible for us to take a more active role in the match and still be in the corner when we needed to be. We still have the MARC and the WMRI coming up. Perhaps we will get some chances to try it again!

You nailed it here. Later after being eliminated, I told Ken Patton that I blew it. Every time you guys left the corner to track down a loose ball, you always made it back to the corner - even when defended. I told Ken that I should've made that strategy adjustment in the semis. I thought about it, but I was too afraid to make the call to do it. All I saw was the 390 and I thought to myself, "if we make that change and lose, then I'll have to live with the 'why did you go away from what worked?' questions." I beat myself up that night about that.

What really kills me is that in both of the semi-final matches that we lost, the opposing alliance missed an auton shot and we had the opportunity to to try to shut them down at the start of the match, but we were too focused on getting the cycle started because "hey, we scored 390 in the first match". In retrospect, putting up a score that high in the first match was probably the worst thing to happen to us. After our first loss in the semis, I should've had us go 2 bot cycles for as long as we could defend them from clearing their missed auton ball to build a little lead before starting the 3-bot cycle. Then I thought, "but we scored 390" and chickened out. Oh well. Then again, the alliance we lost to was really great so there's a good chance we would've lost anyway. Ifs and buts, candy and nuts, and all that stuff. I guess I can't complain.