Robots vs. Humans

[Lil' Lavery]

Are the robots allowed to play contact defense?

[Poseidon5817]

Originally Posted by the duderoni

You realize 2014 is just basically a distorted version of regular sports, right? No chance that robots would win Aerial Assist, especially considering the fact that humans can essentially dunk the ball for a high goal and gaining the points from a catch over the truss would be simple rather than extremely rare.

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Are the robots allowed to play contact defense?

That's what I call Aerial Assault

[Rebecca Pelzer]

A few people and myself were actually talking about something along these lines a few days ago. Our idea was basically humans vs robots but with humans trying their hardest to take down and reset stacks/the field before a match was over. Noodles would be caught mid-air or they score.

While our idea was more of an "ultimate field reset" than humans vs robots stacking, either one still seems incredibly fun.

Wanted to add: you can DEFINITELY pick up a 5-stack and at least push a 6-stack. While neither is advisable, it can happen pretty easily if you're determined to not make two trips back to the field!

[Ali Ahmed]

This would a fantastic match to see at various off-season events. Just remember your safety glasses. One question though, would humans be allowed to catch thrown litter and throw it back?

Either way, I feel that humans would win due to speed. 3 humans could work together to make a capped 6 stack at a time in under 10 seconds. That's 13 stacks.

Off topic: From my experience to add to The President of the Universe's post

2005: Robots win. Humans would have trouble capping large stacks, especially the center goal

2004: Humans win. Hanging would be a problem for humans, unless you got some tall people. Capping would be simple for a human to do but herding would be more difficult. Since humans players were the primary scorers any way, humans have the advantage.

2003: Humans would win, because they could make a stack and protect it fairly easily. The king-of-the-hill though, I want to say humans but there were some powerful robots with low CoGs in that game.

2002: Humans by far...unless they're up against 71, then the Beast would take it.

[tindleroot]

Originally Posted by ali_rockon22

2003: Humans would win, because they could make a stack and protect it fairly easily. The king-of-the-hill though, I want to say humans but there were some powerful robots with low CoGs in that game.

However, I bet some humans would run towards a stack as the time ran out so they would drift into it and knock it down

[Georges]

Either way, I think it would be hilarious to watch a "match" played by humans this year.

[GreyingJay]

I wish they had thought of doing this as an exhibition match during a break sometime during champs.

Too bad our team practice field has to be dismantled soon. This would have been fun to try.

[Ichlieberoboter]

Originally Posted by themccannman

If it's full contact I think robots may take it every year. No way in heck I'm getting in front of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThRNXECDS2o

Mr. McCan makes an excellent point.

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

Whats interesting is how differently the humans would play the game than the robots each year.

2015: Humans would likely build stacks, then cap them unlike most teams in 2015 who build a stack underneath a container.

2014: Humans would often opt for truss/catch maneuvers instead of trussing to HP, and they would finish from up close unlike many other robots.

2013: Humans would be able to basically dunk 4 discs into the 2-pt goal easily, and some would be able to do the same for the 3-pt goal. Humans could easily climb the pyramid and dump colored discs, as well as block the robot's full-court shooters with ease.

2012: Humans would dunk, but balancing might be hard for three humans, as all three would be constantly moving their body weight around.

2011: Humans don't have minibots, but could otherwise easily fill up all scoring slots

2010: Humans would crush at this game, and could hang from or climb onto the tunnels with ease.

2009: I don't even wanna think about this one.

2008: Humans could hurdle the ball and catch it with ease and do far more laps than most robots.

I have to disagree with 2008, I think some robots could go much faster than humans. Plus, I think a lot of the humans would end up getting trampled.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Ichlieberoboter

I have to disagree with 2008, I think some robots could go much faster than humans. Plus, I think a lot of the humans would end up getting trampled.

Ignoring the trampled aspect, I think humans would win. They're not going to outrace the robots, but they sure could outhurdle them. I remember doing a lot of creative maneuvers involving passing the ball with humans while simulating that game early that build season. Ultimately they didn't materialize in the robot world, but they would present a massive advantage for a human alliance.

[Oromus]

This has made me remember how much I want an off-season competition where people bring humans to play the game instead of robots.

[Yamin]

It depends on who the robots are and who the humans are, if it is the number 1 team VS a normal out of shape nerd (like myself) the robots would most likely dominate however if it were a team that had a lot of practice and were in shape then maybe they could win.


-Yamin
Have an epic day/night

[TheOtherGuy]

Do humans have to follow the size and weight limits?

[tindleroot]

I doubt any human could defeat 71 in 2002, any of the tall stackers from 2005, 148 from 2008 (In laps anyways), or any of the top teams from 2009.

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by tindleroot

I doubt any human could defeat 71 in 2002, any of the tall stackers from 2005, 148 from 2008 (In laps anyways), or any of the top teams from 2009.

How did 71's arms attach to the goals? Were they just hooks, or did they somehow actuate and close around the goals? Depending on the setup, it might not be hard for a human to unhook the goals.

[Mrcope9]

It depends, especially how the rules would go. Speaking of the past four years:

2012-Humans, definitely. Especially if NBA players are involved. Also I think it's much easier to fit 3 people sitting down on the little bridge than 3 robots.

2013- Kindo of a toss up. Full court shooters can definitely make more shots, but humans can easily pick up from the floor and I think the average person can climb the tower quicker than most robots.

2014- Well the defense would make it difficult for us carbon based lifeforms, but humans can catch, and pick themselves up if they get tipped over. All in all, if standard rules apply, robots win.

2015- I would say humans on this one. I think a skilled player could win a can battle, assuming they grip correctly and apply the right force. Also, humans can deal with the upside down totes and litter everywhere much more efficiently than a robot can.