Go to Post Dean Kamen is a pretty smart dude. If he wants to talk to me, I want to listen. - Taylor [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Rules/Strategy
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
View Poll Results: Do you think 8 MINI-CIMS allowed would be a good idea?
Yes, I'ld love to see what people come up with using 8 MINI-CIMS. 46 41.07%
No, I like the motor rules the way they are! 66 58.93%
Voters: 112. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #40   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-09-2014, 15:00
JesseK's Avatar
JesseK JesseK is online now
Expert Flybot Crasher
FRC #1885 (ILITE)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Reston, VA
Posts: 3,723
JesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 8 MINI-CIM SWERVE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oblarg View Post
You seem to be making a blanket statement that "any team that claims success due to additional motors on their drive is either downplaying the negatives or was trying to damage other robots."
The statement is more like "Any team that claims success due to additional motors on their drive has accounted for the negatives in a single subsystem of their own overall robot and was oblivious to or completely ignored the damage they did to other robots multitudes of subsystems".

The rules allow this. It doesn't meant the rules should allow this. I don't fault 4464 for its defense this year since it was actually pretty clean relative to other matches I've watched.
- You capitalized on it - great, I'm glad your team got to move on
- at the expense of other teams - not so great
- whom you never acknowledged or offered to help afterwards - and here's the point of reducing the allowed power on the drive train. Most defenders didn't care ("undue damage"? Really, we deserved damage?)

To phrase it differently...

There's a very public story from 2007 about one team's entire mechanism, made out of 1/8" tube and securely attached, being ripped out by a defender with a powerful drive train (for that year) after the defender shoved the offensive robot into the Rack. The comment from a ref supposedly was "well the mechanism should have been made stronger". The very well-worded public counter argument was something like "to account for THAT type of defense, it is impossible to make a robust enough mechanism".

The story still applies 7 seasons later. There is no type of "robust", without going to extremes, that can be used to account for the amount of power available to drive trains these days and how teams are choosing to use it.

Last edited by JesseK : 28-09-2014 at 15:06.
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi