Is the Boiler worth it?

[ldsedam]

The fuel is the only method of scoring in this game that has no limit. In higher level of play, the rotors will get capped out with some time left. After this, the determining factor is the fuel. Whichever alliance can put in the most fuel into the boiler is how the winner will be decided.

[IronicDeadBird]

Gears are bursts of points, boilers can get you points in the background while you go around and do other things. Both are worth it, you should ask what you want to prioritize more. In all honesty I look at all the objectives on the field and most of them can be accomplished with minimal moving parts. I imagine some of the best robots out there are going to be insanely simple designs augmented with active mechanisms to make them run more efficiently but that is a different conversation.

This game kinda reminds me of cookie clicker, Star Craft or Age of Empires in regards to resource management. If you only do one or the other you are going to have a ton of down time where you aren't scoring and if you aren't scoring you still need to be doing something.

[itsjustjon]

I'm confused as to why one entire method of scoring game pieces would be invalid for use?

Scoring in the Boiler gives you one RP in Quals, and that RP can be guaranteed in the autonomous period given kPa is equal to each fuel in the High Efficiency Boiler. That means that you can do both.

That being said, there still can be a case made that the Low Efficiency Goal isn't worth it.

[Boltman]

Absolutely... RP and difference maker

As for LE goal depends on design...if you can ensure a cycle of 50 dumped..that nets 5+ points per cycle.... if you can do 7or 8 cycles that's a RP that would require both hopper load and super fast floor pickup. The advantage of LE is its semmingly higher probability then HE for many teams. That being said HE is the way to go I think in terms of fuel especially in auto.

[BenGuy]

Originally Posted by ShammyWhammy

I can't seem to figure out a reason why you'd wan't to go for the steam over the gears. You gain points in a much more efficient manner with the gears. If you get all the rotors started you get a minimum of 120 points with a qualification point in teleop. With the steam, you get something like 40 points and a ranking point for 120 balls shot in the high goal. With a processing rate of 5/s, that comes out to 24 seconds of just processing and that's not accounting for the chance of you missing and collection time. It just seems extremely inefficient compared to the gears. Is there a maximum on the kPa you can have?

Put simply - steam in auton, gears in teleop

[Grim Tuesday]

The low goal strikes me as useless in teleop. If your robot can carry 40 balls and you dump them in the low goal you get 4.4 points and bit more than 1/10th of the way to a RP. Spending that cycle time on defense against gears (average gear worth is 15 pts, not counting the RP or point bonus for all spinning). I imagine some good defense could double or triple cycle time for gears, making it more worthwhile use of time than low goal scoring.

[frodobaggins05]

No

[Mark Westwig]

I agree that the gears have a higher face value than fuel, but in higher level matches, all the gears will be placed before the match is over and you don't want your robot sitting around on the field waiting for the ropes to drop.

[Rangel]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

The low goal strikes me as useless in teleop. If your robot can carry 40 balls and you dump them in the low goal you get 4.4 points and bit more than 1/10th of the way to a RP. Spending that cycle time on defense against gears (average gear worth is 15 pts, not counting the RP or point bonus for all spinning). I imagine some good defense could double or triple cycle time for gears, making it more worthwhile use of time than low goal scoring.

Not only that, but dumping balls into even a decent shooter robot would be a far better use of balls than dumping them in low goal. Literally the same task but done at different heights and one gives far more desirability and effectiveness in a match.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Mark Westwig

I agree that the gears have a higher face value than fuel, but in higher level matches, all the gears will be placed before the match is over and you don't want your robot sitting around on the field waiting for the ropes to drop.

I wouldn't overestimate the realistic number of possible cycles for the average competent team. Going back to 2011 scoring tasks have often been protected by zones or keys. Scoring the gears are not protected tasks, similar to trying to place a 2007 inner tube (e.g . this vintage defense. In recent years, defense has been limited to jostling robots around while they travel around the field. This year brings back "big defense" where you can interfere with robots while they perform scoring tasks. Knock someone out of alignment while they're crossing the field and they'll adjust, maybe you add a second or two to their cycle time. Knock them out of alignment in placing a gear and they'll probably need 5-7 more seconds to realign, unless they (wisely) designed their mechanism to not require major lineup precision.

My point is not that the boiler should be ignored but this: supposing you score all the gears, there are better uses of your time than low goal cycling. I like Rangel's idea of loading up high shooter bots.

[Mark Westwig]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

. This year brings back "big defense" where you can interfere with robots while they perform scoring tasks. Knock someone out of alignment while they're crossing the field and they'll adjust, maybe you add a second or two to their cycle time. Knock them out of alignment in placing a gear and they'll probably need 5-7 more seconds to realign, unless they (wisely) designed their mechanism to not require major lineup precision.
.

I completely agree with playing defense while crossing the field, but as shown in the field tour videos (I believe it is the one about the airship), there are shields protecting the gear placement slots, which in my mind makes playing defense while placing gears rather difficult.

[Brian Maher]

I think that the top teams at events, both in terms of alliance captains and first picks, will tend to be robots a mastery of gear manipulation as well as one of high goals or climbing.

While gears are the big points in this game (I think everyone agrees here), they are finite and rather defendable. Plus, with how obviously advantageous gear-scoring is, I think robots who do so will be abundant. Teams will be served well by having another scoring method in their toolbox to stand out and give them a strategic edge.

40 kPa of boulders yields nearly the same number of match points as climbing, plus one RP. Last year, bonus RP made a world of difference, and with them being considerably harder to earn this year than last, I think robots who can pull off the high shot will quickly scale the rankings.

However, with shooting this year being harder and way more defendable, I think it's really important to not put all of your eggs in the shooter basket. To be successful, I believe shooters will need to something else really well as well. Defense this year is going to be ferocious. For this reason, I think the fill-the-boiler-in-auto strategy is going to be incredibly powerful. Shooters who don't intend to finish the job in auto better plan around defense in teleop, or they will be easy targets.

Climbing is also rather valuable, and is not defendable. For this reason, I think the most desirable robots during alliance selection (i.e. the early first picks) will be relaible gear/climber bots. Those climb points will be particularly value in elims, where having a climber instead of a shooter doesn't sacrifice an RP.

[AndyBare]

For all those discounting the low efficiency scoring method, remember this: after the fuel is scored, it goes to the opposing alliance. They have 3 buckets that can hold roughly 50 fuel each, meaning around 150 fuel max. After this point, they go to overflow. So, if you can move and score fuel faster than the other alliance, the fuel will be forced into returning back to your side of the field via either their loading lane or your overflow loading station.

[Edit] - that being said, I'm not saying it's the way to go, but I do think that it could potentially present a large pressure point on the opposing alliance.

[Josh Tatum]

Originally Posted by Mark Westwig

I completely agree with playing defense while crossing the field, but as shown in the field tour videos (I believe it is the one about the airship), there are shields protecting the gear placement slots, which in my mind makes playing defense while placing gears rather difficult.

Not only do the barriers make defense difficult, but drivers will also not be able to see the lift-side of their opponents airships well, This will make trying to defend them much more difficult.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Mark Westwig

I completely agree with playing defense while crossing the field, but as shown in the field tour videos (I believe it is the one about the airship), there are shields protecting the gear placement slots, which in my mind makes playing defense while placing gears rather difficult.

Good point, that's something I missed!