8 MINI-CIM SWERVE

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Oblarg

Or, in more legitimate terms, if you hit them enough they will find it hard to position themselves to accomplish game tasks.

I think it is unfair to characterize tough defense as "hitting people with the hopes their robot breaks." We played defense a lot this past year, and our goal in robot-robot contact was never to cause damage. Good defense is about being in the right place at the right time and knowing how to interact with the robot you're trying to defend against, not simply hitting them as hard as possible. Having additional motors definitely helps with this, both by allowing you to push for longer when needed without tripping a breaker (especially if your opponent cannot do the same), and by allowing you to get to where you need to be faster (and, as a lot of defense is stop-and-go and rapidly-changing, acceleration is critically important for this).

What I really find striking is that you seem to being saying the point of defense is to hit and that the hits have no "legitimate" post-match impacts to the teams on the receiving end. You also follow that up with saying that more motors allows a team to hit harder, more often and for longer, all in the name of gaining position.

The reality of the season (particularly when examining 4464's video) is that the defender simply wants to use the acceleration to make up for the fact that it screwed up and was already out of position. This was evident even when examining other events' video (which I did a ton of while scouting for Champs) and correlating the teams who won via defense with teams who had 6 CIMs at champs.

The point of this thread, and the counter argument I'm making, is discussing whether or not increasing available power to the drive trains makes sense from a game design perspective. I don't know that you've argued in favor for either so much as you've tried to justify and/or glorify what 6 CIMs can do. Perhaps you could clarify for me?