|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#46
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
For example, let's say your pit scouts talk to a team about their stacking. And they say that they can do two 6-stacks, uncapped. Sounds reasonable, right? I can see teams going for that this year. But what YOU don't know--necessarily--is that that's their design/non-interference/non-spec (and, in non--RR games, non-defense) field number. The real number, as your scouts find by observation, is that they're actually doing 1 6 stack, or maybe 3 3-stacks, or one 4-stack and one 2-stack. Basically, it's not the data points that you can't verify that you get from the pit that are the problem--most teams can verify anything they get from the pit scouts. It's that many teams will be optimistic--I don't accuse them of lying outright--but this is a physics problem. (Read: Equations (gameplay) work out nicely in the theoretical frictionless vacuum world, not quite so well in reality.) Then the verification shows that optimism to be misplaced. My opinion on pit scouting is actually a bit different than most people's. My personal opinion is that it's NOT about the robot when you're scouting in the pit. The only thing you do with the robot is to take a picture (remind the field scouts what this robot looks like), and maybe note what work is being done. The TEAM is far more important, in terms of getting to know them. Let the match scouts collect the data on whether the team works on the field: if two teams work well together and are good friends, and both have decent robots, look out in eliminations if they're on the same alliance. |
|
#47
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
|
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
|
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
The definition of pit scouting in my book is asking teams questions about their robot that can't be answered through match scouting. Limit pit scouting to data your actually going to use(anything that can't be answered through match scouting) or in other words like you said, keep it simple(actual questions can be complex, but not redundant to what your match scouters are observing). Don't ask teams questions you can answer through match scouting because It'll be a waste of time and It'll be a pain on Friday night going through redundant pit scouting data.
|
|
#50
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
|
|
#51
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
"Why not just not get data points that you can't verify in the pit?" Guess you're a stereotypical English-challenged engineer; that's a multi-negative and an unclear prepositional reference in the same sentence. What I initially read was something more like: "Why not just get data points in the pit that you can verify?" If I could rewrite the initial statement to what you meant: "Why not only get data when you're pit scouting that you can't verify on the field?"
And if that is what you meant, then my response is: What data do you mean? Just about any key data point that you could pick up in the pit--like the ones you mentioned--can also be picked up on the field, given time. The biggest difference is that if you get it in the pit area, you might get it faster (given that teams don't always play all their cards on the field at any one time). That being said, I'm sure there are exceptions to that: inter-team dynamics, and what improvements they're planning on (or can be persuaded to adopt), are two of the ones that come to mind. Oh, and the all-important one for a top seed: What the odds of them accepting your selection are... |
|
#52
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
|
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Yeah. I know I am not a good writer (I usually revise my posts a fair bit to compensate for this, like five minutes just writing this sentence out).
Quote:
With respect for inter-team dynamics and improvements, most of that analysis can be done informally by the drive team and pit crew in preparation for matches, especially since they'll be the ones working directly with them during matches. |
|
#54
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
It may also help the field scouts select which robot each will watch. For example, if Bill and Carol watch most of the landfill 'bots and Mary, Frank, and Ted watch most of the feeder station 'bots, results are likely to be more consistent than if assignments are random. |
|
#55
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
I'll bet EricH and ArtK would quickly meet in the middle if they both agreed scouts should collect data that drivers, etc. want and will actually use; and that scouts shouldn't waste time collecting any other data (unless they have time to waste); and that scouts should get the needed data from wherever it is available, regardless of where that is.
If you need data from the pits, go get it. If you don't, don't do scouting there. People shouldn't have the job of pit scouting, they should have the job of getting needed data; if you know what I mean. |
|
#56
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
For example, in 2014 Team 20 thought that the amount of time the robot possessed the ball was going to be extremely important, and that our second pick would be largely based on that. As it turned out, that was completely unimportant, and our match scouts did far more work than necessary getting that information, and things like "What drivebase does Team X have?" and "How smart are their drivers and how well do we work with them?", both of which rely at least partially on pit scouting. However, assuming you have the manpower to make it happen (not something Team 20 lacks), it's always better to have more data than not enough. If you don't have the manpower to make it happen, either team up with another team so you gain the manpower, or find a way to narrow the data collection to only what is essential. |
|
#57
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
|
|
#58
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
*INCOMING CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENT*
I'm truly surprised at how intensive some of you guys are with scouting during competition. I mean to be fair this year was the first time I was faced with having to make a pick list. But scouting didn't effect match to match strategy as much as Q'ing up did... |
|
#59
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
Quote:
|
|
#60
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Strategy Sub-Team
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|