Is anybody talking about the low bar?

[pHolmgren]

We've been curious as to what some other teams are considering going for the low bar. We've talked about some of the design constraints and decided that it is super dependent on other robots. So what are you guys thinking? Is it worth it to go for the low bar if no one else is?

[Sperkowsky]

If you actually looked at Chief Delphi before posting you would know there already has been countless posts about this in the last 2 days.

Sorry for the saltiness but it really annoys me as it disrupts discussion.

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by pHolmgren

We've been curious as to what some other teams are considering going for the low bar. We've talked about some of the design constraints and decided that it is super dependent on other robots. So what are you guys thinking? Is it worth it to go for the low bar if no one else is?

This thread might interest you: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...hreadid=141515

[edong4273]

Our team is thinking of just not doing the low bar because of the restraints involved with having a robot that could fit under the low bar.

[Thromgord]

Our team has personally made the decision to go for the low bar, as it provides an easy way of scoring during autonomous and is a simple defense to overcome (as long as you meet the height limit). There will likely be many teams that are going for the low goal, though, and I can see why you would be debating the pros and cons.

At the end of the day, this decision is up to you and your team. You could easily find a way to score points either way.

[GreyingJay]

One potential option to consider is using a detachable mechanism. Low bar capable when the alliance strategy determines it.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by GreyingJay

One potential option to consider is using a detachable mechanism. Low bar capable when the alliance strategy determines it.

To make sure I'm understanding correctly what you're saying. A mechanism that you could take off prior to a match which would then allow you to use the low bar in certain matches?

Dynamic robots by match would be interesting this year. Not necessarily for changing based on the selected defenses (however you should know which defense was selected by the audience before queuing for a match) but maybe based on what your alliance can do.

[GreyingJay]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

To make sure I'm understanding correctly what you're saying. A mechanism that you could take off prior to a match which would then allow you to use the low bar in certain matches?

Dynamic robots by match would be interesting this year. Not necessarily for changing based on the selected defenses (however you should know which defense was selected by the audience before queuing for a match) but maybe based on what your alliance can do.

That was my brainstorm, yes, whether or not it's practical or useful, I haven't really thought through yet

[Kyle Butzerin]

Hey SOTA,

We skipped it, there is a whole thread on the idea, (as you have seen) which was a surprise to me at first.

Identify what you wish to do strategy-wise, then make a way to pass under the bar.

FRC 4579 RoboEagles

[bEdhEd]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

If you actually looked at Chief Delphi before posting you would know there already has been countless posts about this in the last 2 days.

Sorry for the saltiness but it really annoys me as it disrupts discussion.

I've noticed an influx of new members on CD this season; more than I have seen in the past. I think we should cut em some slack. Yes, all it takes is a simple search, but do I really expect someone with less than 10 posts to know exactly what to do in CD with regard to avoiding starting a redundant thread?

If you don't like the thread, either ignore the thread or graciously send a PM explaining why it is important to do a search and also why it is important to read the sticky threads about basic posting etiquette.

If you're gonna respond to a redundant thread, answer the question or direct the OP to the thread where they can find the answers. If you really gotta tell them what they're doing wrong, leave that as a private message so you're not calling them out publically.

It's this kind of tactless impatience with new members that can drive people away from this forum.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by bEdhEd

I've noticed an influx of new members on CD this season; more than I have seen in the past. I think we should cut em some slack. Yes, all it takes is a simple search, but do I really expect someone with less than 10 posts to know exactly what to do in CD with regard to avoiding starting a redundant thread?

If you don't like the thread, either ignore the thread or graciously send a PM explaining why it is important to do a search and also why it is important to read the sticky threads about basic posting etiquette.

If you're gonna respond to a redundant thread, answer the question or direct the OP to the thread where they can find the answers. If you really gotta tell them what they're doing wrong, leave that as a private message so you're not calling them out publically.

It's this kind of tactless impatience with new members that can drive people away from this forum.

Same goes for whoever gave the person negative rep before I bumped them back to positive. This person did nothing to deserve negative rep, if it bothers you that much ignore it.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

Same goes for whoever gave the person negative rep before I bumped them back to positive. This person did nothing to deserve negative rep, if it bothers you that much ignore it.

Did not mean for it to come off that harshly. It's just something that really gets under my skin when you look at the home page and literally see a low bar or not poll 2 posts down... It's really not the OP's fault it's the other 50 new members doing the same thing slowly driving me nuts. As a ex forum mod on a much larger forum (Linustechtips.com) this stuff drives me insane. Also the lack of sleep is probably not helping.

[bEdhEd]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

Did not mean for it to come off that harshly. It's just something that really gets under my skin when you look at the home page and literally see a low bar or not poll 2 posts down... It's really not the OP's fault it's the other 50 new members doing the same thing slowly driving me nuts. As a ex forum mod on a much larger forum (Linustechtips.com) this stuff drives me insane. Also the lack of sleep is probably not helping.

Haha no problem man. We all get annoyed at times, especially with the high stress of build season and the even more stressful weeks to come. I've got my heaviest workload yet at UC Davis as a senior math major this quarter, so that just piles on the stress for me, (definitely gonna lose sleep, as I already am) but I gotta stay positive and not let anything drive me nuts!

[Schulzee]

Originally Posted by GreyingJay

One potential option to consider is using a detachable mechanism. Low bar capable when the alliance strategy determines it.

Our team discussed this option, and found many flaws involved, I'd encourage you and your team to careful weigh how many benefits are had by doing this, and what are they. Just an idea, because it could prove an amazing design, or it could prove fatal to your robot during the season. Best of luck from T3!

[GeeTwo]

Our answer was YES, we need to be able to cross under the low bar. It's there every match, in the same location. It's ESSENTIAL for teams going after lots of boulder points (which is the only "unlimited" source of points), and still pretty important for teams playing for a sapper (focused on breaching defenses) function. I think most top 8 and first-pick alliances will fall into one or both of these two categories.

I would not be surprised if our initial configuration is more than 14-16" tall, but I absolutely expect us to have a configuration that will fit below the low bar while carrying a boulder.