|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 2015, Year of swerves?
Quote:
Many of the swerves that came out of 2014 are some of the best ever made, and therefore swerve gained a lot of popularity (and rightfully so, looking at you 2451). Why did we see a lot of good swerve? Because 2014 was a great game for it, and some teams have been developing a swerve for years, waiting for the opportunity to use it. Did a swerve drive win champs? No. Why? Because other robots defeated the swerve bots. The fact is, there is no "best drivetrain." These broad generalizations like "ALWAYS USE TANK" and "SWERVE IS BETTER THAN TANK" are invalid because they attribute the success of a robot to one small aspect of the robot. Sure, the drivetrain is important, but its significance is nothing compared to everything else that goes into making a successful robot. The success of a robot is determined by every component, every design, every man-hour, every line of code, and every strategic discussion contributed to it; all of these factors are what make a robot successful, not just the drivetrain. To respond more directly to OP, there's a lot of of post-2014 swerve hype, but it all comes down to what happens this weekend. Last edited by evanperryg : 02-01-2015 at 16:47. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 2015, Year of swerves?
Disclaimer: This post reflects only my opinion.
I really like some of the discussion going on in this thread. Before reading it, I wasn't 100% locked down on what my goals were for this FRC season. I love to win. I'm very competitive, and I've come extremely close to national titles in several other competitions before (Most notably Chess and FLL), so one of my main goals this season (along with most other people) is to win. However, my view on this competition has been molded over the years, and after winning the Dean's List Award last year; I really want to inspire people on my team, and on others. This was a battle going on in my mind for the past year, and I think I've come to a conclusion: I wan't to build the best robot, even if that means that I don't go quite as far in the competition. That statement may seem strange, but it might help if I give some examples: 1) In 2012, I believe that team 1717 had, by far, the best robot in the world. They had amazing capabilities, with a deadly accurate shooter and an awesome swerve system. However, they were not the world champions because there robot broke down in the field elims. 2) I don't mean to bring down the 2013 world champions but I would have much rather built 469's robot than any of the robots that won. This is because, in my mind, they built the better robot. 469's machine could play more of the game, more effectively than any of the winning robots, in my opinion. So even though I want to win, I don't want to do it with a better implementation of the same robot that everyone else built. (This is not to say that you have to use swerves to have the better robot; Only that I want to build the better robot, and swerves can slightly help in doing that.) |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 2015, Year of swerves?
I find it strange that people in this thread are not impressed by clean, efficient, well engineered robots. Creativity and producing the best, most capable robot design, although important, isn't always the mark of great engineering. Sometimes it is taking a fairly standard design and making it better than every other implementation. For a real life example, think about cars. Although having many features in a car is nice, what really seperates low end cars from high end cars is build quality.
So with that being said, I don't think a competitive robot can be "boring", because to me the best robots are the ones built to be the most competitive. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|