Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5

[philso]

Originally Posted by Drakxii

In my opinion for a regional that started a day after bag day that percentage is amazing. I was expecting more like 30% but I was also expecting more teams to try. So this percent might just be high given that there was less then 1 shot per match.

Also does this include auto?

Originally Posted by philso

Of 84 shots on the HIGH GOAL, only 47 (56%) went in.

I logged hits and misses that I could see on the screen or I could hear the announcer commenting on beginning at about the first match in the second round of the QF's. I am sure there are some that the announcer or I missed.

When I had the LiveStream up while doing paperwork at my day job on Friday, it seemed that the hit rate was around 1/3 or lower. This led me to start logging the hits and misses on Saturday afternoon.

Yes, this does include shots on the HIGH GOAL taken in Auto. I did not log the hits and misses for Auto separately but my impression is that it was similar to Teleop. The most I saw was 2 shots on the HIGH GOAL in Auto by any one Alliance so the shots in Auto would constitute maybe 15%, or less, of the shots that I logged.

[D.Allred]

Originally Posted by mrnoble

Inspired by this quote from Boltman...

"Hey can someone there give us a summary of things you learned that you did not know going in... just an overall REAL vs theoretical breakdown. Like what was easier/harder, challenges and did human players have any significant effect."

In particular:

• Real field elements
• Real line of sight for drivers
• Real defense
• Taking real shots at the high and low goal
• Real damage to robots
• Real problems with the game
• Real fun parts

Here are my thoughts after competing at Palmetto.

Real field elements:
Low Bar, Rock Wall, and Cheval de Frise performed about the same as the wood models. The Portcullis was much easier since it is counterbalanced by constant force springs. Rough Terrain and Moat were tougher. Other drive train configurations may have different results.

Real line of sight for drivers:
You were expecting to see? It can get bad depending on what you are trying to do. For the most part we could see what we needed especially with help from our camera.

The tower blocks part of the field if you are playing defense. Your own defenses and audience selection can interfere with the Neutral Zone. Then you have to see around your opponents defenses into the Court Yard.

The plastic dividers between the defenses and on the Batter are hard to see. Saw lots of robots having trouble running in to them.

Real defense:
There was very little until eliminations and was a bit surprised not many wanted to show that skill. If you are going to defend, please show your ability to help breach if nothing other than to get back to the Batter.

Taking real shots at the high and low goal:
This was about the same as our shop, although our camera tracking had difficulty with the glossy tower surface and arena lighting at some angles.

Real damage to robots:
Very real. You know it’s a tough game when you see a bearing on the floor.

Real problems with the game:
The biggest issue is field set up logistics – lots of moving parts. The field reset crew did a wonderful job, it was just crowded.

I do not suggest loading your robots using the classic driver station order. We set up for our low bar auto routine every time. If we were the third robot to enter the field, we had to navigate around our partners and opponents in a narrow neutral zone without stepping on defenses or boulders.

Real Fun Parts:
This is a great game with plenty of strategic depth.

Here are a few miscellaneous thoughts:
G5 - I know those flat platforms with missing defenses look inviting…

Practice parking on the Batter. It’s not a given. An elimination alliance needs to ensure their partners can at least park.

David

[Fauge7]

Originally Posted by Chris Fultz

What do you mean by "best" defense? The best one to select for the other alliance? The best crossings? Curious the definition of best.

what i meant was that they are the statistically the hardest to cross, different definition of best...I think I might add up the week one and get a running total to see if it changes

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by BenGuy

Scores were a lot higher than I personally expected them to be, at least compared to last year. Our first match last year was 2-0

Last year, fouls subtracted from your team's score, this year they add to your opposing alliance. Scores shall be higher. Honestly, last year a cockroach 'bot (drive system only) should have been able to put two or three totes on a scoring platform (though not on top of each other).

Originally Posted by pandamonium

Low goal is harder than teams think and more time consuming. It is easier and more realistic to take 3 high goal shots and only make 2 than to put 5 into the low goal.

We called this on game reveal day. High goals are quicker (assuming auto-aiming with a camera), and low goals require driving up to a goal and reversing your loader, but there is zero computer assist available for a low goal shot unless your software is way more subtle than we usually have. Now that we realize that the batter separators are transparent, this is even more the case. In any case, your boulder pickup needs to somehow center the boulder within your robot to attempt a low goal shot.

Originally Posted by marshall

The defenses are brutal on drivetrains and I'm not of the opinion that the wooden team versions provide the same difficulty that the actual ones provide. We managed to crack some versa hubs (https://twitter.com/FRC900/status/703693490752978945). Thanks to 1296 for graciously providing us with some aluminum replacements. Team 900 loves #TeamIFI!

Not unexpected, but perhaps a bit worse than expected. I foresee that in addition to mechanical tightening, we'll be wielding the hot glue gun on many of our electrical connections on Thursday, despite Al's likely advice.

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

You'd be surprised how many teams don't read the rules period.

It's taken several years, but I think I've finally pulled my team out of the "don't read the rules" event horizon. Last year, we had two students really familiar with the rules, this year it's around four to six, most of whom are likely drive team members, and the others are certain pit crew members. We actually had a core group of students study general game strategy "underground", that is, independently of mentors over the summer, thinking that the mentors were opposed to such studies. I was one of the few mentors they trusted with this information at the time. Team dynamics can be tricky.

[HumblePie]

My observations (from the stands):

Game play was exciting, and teams at all levels found important roles to fill.

Officiating was generally lenient; robots were fairly consistently awarded challenge points when rolling down off the batter as soon as power was cut, teams were not penalized for dropping things like sections of bumper, or even batteries, onto the field. Also, it did not appear that any method of measurement was used (other than eye-balling) to award scaling points.

I was generally surprised at the difficulty of the moat and ramparts, and the ease of the portculis and rough terrain (it was our driver's favorite). It was also a lot more difficult to navigate between the lexan dividers than anticipated, and it often proved painful for robots that hit them dead-on.

In spite of field reset issues, it was a good time, and one of the best FRC games in recent memory.

Congrats to the winning alliance!

[mac]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Last year, fouls subtracted from your team's score, this year they add to your opposing alliance. Scores shall be higher. Honestly, last year a cockroach 'bot (drive system only) should have been able to put two or three totes on a scoring platform (though not on top of each other).



We called this on game reveal day. High goals are quicker (assuming auto-aiming with a camera), and low goals require driving up to a goal and reversing your loader, but there is zero computer assist available for a low goal shot unless you're software is way more subtle than we usually have. Now that we realize that the batter separators are transparent, this is even more the case. In any case, your boulder pickup needs to somehow center the boulder within your robot to attempt a low goal shot.



Not unexpected, but perhaps a bit worse than expected. I foresee that in addition to mechanical tightening, we'll be wielding the hot glue gun on many of our electrical connections on Thursday, despite Al's likely advice.

It's taken several years, but I think I've finally pulled my team out of the "don't read the rules" event horizon. Last year, we had two students really familiar with the rules, this year it's around four to six, most of whom are likely drive team members, and the others are certain pit crew members. We actually had a core group of students study general game strategy "underground", that is, independently of mentors over the summer, thinking that the mentors were opposed to such studies. I was one of the few mentors they trusted with this information at the time. Team dynamics can be tricky.

Woo Gus. Don't use hot glue. Use duct seal. It can be reused and removed. I like all your post. Your into this stuff. Try to come to the east coast some time.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Insights tab, right next to Teams.

It's on the webpage, but not the app.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by The other Gabe

also huge props to 1369 for their amazing defense. It was so much fun to watch them completely shut down opposing alliance's shooting

And why was 1369 left to the #1 alliance? They were the best hope to stop that alliance in elims.

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

And why was 1369 left to the #1 alliance? They were the best hope to stop that alliance in elims.

Because no one understands how important defense is yet... trust me, it will change.

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by marshall

Because no one understands how importance defense is yet... trust me, it will change.

Next week especially in eliminations.

[D.Allred]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

And why was 1369 left to the #1 alliance? They were the best hope to stop that alliance in elims.

My assumption is some of the second picks had auto points available and they would play situational defense. No team played more defense and was more prepared than 1369 - guarantee you that!

I'm interested to see how this game will evolve. The court yard gets very crowded with 3 or 4 robots trying to maneuver through blind spots. Feeder robots may be more useful than a full offensive assault. There are many options.

David

[PayneTrain]

I'm interested as well. In the past most FRC games have a meta that has consistent elements with sliders on the qualities of those elements shifting by event and by week. This is the first year that will wildly turn the meta on its head at a certain point at every event and change drastically between events.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by D.Allred

The court yard gets very crowded with 3 or 4 robots trying to maneuver through blind spots. Feeder robots may be more useful than a full offensive assault.

This. I'd be interested to see how a game of attrition would play out from a nimble robot with quick intake that steals balls and half crosses completely crosses the low bar to deposit into courtyard. From what I've seen, it's possible the low goal is the way to go except in higher levels of play.

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by CalTran

This. I'd be interested to see how a game of attrition would play out from a nimble robot with quick intake that steals balls and half crosses the low bar to deposit into courtyard.

This is not a legal strategy, see G40.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes

This is not a legal strategy, see G40.

Edited the original. Theory is still the same, the robot just has to go the extra foot and a half or so.