I redesigned Recycle Rush. Introducing Speed Stackk

[PayneTrain]

Hey Andrew this looks cool but it's pretty obvious you didn't make any considerations for defensive play.

/s

I think there are some good ideas in the works here and I'm looking forward to see how it develops.

[asid61]

Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence

/snip
Most robots this year don't have a drivetrain designed around pushing, and even if teams changed their drivetrains for this sort of offseason event it would be difficult to knock over stacks inside robots who have designed proper stack holding devices (and that was indeed a part of this year's game, so it's not something new that would need to be added). Combine that with how close the protected zones are to all the totes and how little travel distance is required between tote collecting and scoring and defense knocking over stacks in robots isn't enough of a concern to change anything.

That would be true, but from what I've seen of 2002 it is extremely hard to protect a stack. Any robot that's not U-shaped would be killed really fast, and most U-shaped bots would probably fall over due to the higher center of gravity. Most robots are far less maneuverable with totes than without, so playing defense would be pitifuly easy; just whack them as they try to get totes and watch the totes not settle properly, then block them as they try to place (this would literally be the role of the third robot on each playoff alliance, and because of the way scoring zones are set up they could block multiple at once). You would have to redesign the rules to protect any bots with totes, and then it's just Recycle Rush Mark II.
We designed to protect totes from themselves, not from others.

All that being said, watching top-tier teams like 254, 118, 1114, etc. all stack up on this field would be amazing, because they all have the necessary stack-inside-frame-perimete design and are all really good.

Originally Posted by asid61

That would be true, but from what I've seen of 2002 it is extremely hard to protect a stack. Any robot that's not U-shaped would be killed really fast, and most U-shaped bots would probably fall over due to the higher center of gravity. Most robots are far less maneuverable with totes than without, so playing defense would be pitifuly easy; just whack them as they try to get totes and watch the totes not settle properly, then block them as they try to place (this would literally be the role of the third robot on each playoff alliance, and because of the way scoring zones are set up they could block multiple at once). You would have to redesign the rules to protect any bots with totes, and then it's just Recycle Rush Mark II.
We designed to protect totes from themselves, not from others.

All that being said, watching top-tier teams like 254, 118, 1114, etc. all stack up on this field would be amazing, because they all have the necessary stack-inside-frame-perimeter design and are all really good.

I understand your point, but I still think that you're trying to apply 2014 defense to a game that would play out more like 2012 defense. I agree that most teams did not design around having a robot knock into them, but teams are more than welcome to make upgrades, and those who did not design around keeping stacks sturdy while being possessed by their robot fell short in Recycle Rush in the same way that they likely would in this game. Aside from minor defense, it's the same requirements to hold a stack together. If teams could do it in recycle rush effectively (and I don't mean barely holding on to a single lip, that failed a lot in-season), then they should have no trouble with this.


Side note - for those saying tote stacks on the sides would block the view, I made this handy dandy model to show how many stacks could fit (most alliances would get a third of this).

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence

I purposefully put the scoring zones on the sides and not the ends because end scoring zones kill the view from the alliance stations and it doesn't solve any of the problems from the in-season design.

I think you might have misunderstood what I meant, hopefully this should help explain it better (pardon the MS paint, I can't open the CAD format you posted)...

Originally Posted by cbale2000

I think you might have misunderstood what I meant, hopefully this should help explain it better (pardon the MS paint, I can't open the CAD format you posted)...

That makes a lot more sense. Yeah, that's totally a viable option. There are a ton of ways this can be played out that would make it better than how it is right now. The field is so adaptable that there are multiple ways to play.