|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
One GEAR at a time does not preclude multi-GEAR autonomous.
|
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Nothing stops you from going back to grab a second or third from your alliance partners. Same rule somewhat applied last year for Boulders, but that didn't stop a few teams from pioneering 2 ball autos.
|
|
#18
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
2 gear auto probably only makes sense in Champs elims, because it's mainly useful as bonus points in excess of a hopper dumping high goal auto.
First, 2 gear auto is only useful if you're going for 3 total gears in auto. Otherwise the second gear is useless and you should have shot fuel instead of fetched it. Yes, I'm assuming a 2 gear auto team could also gear + high goal. That seems entirely reasonable to me. Second, you need a reason to do it. Scenarios: 1. All three robots can auto gear, 2 can gear + fuel. Call this +40 for gears, +16 for fuel. So +56 in this case. 2. Third pick can't auto. +20 gears, +16 fuel. +36 3. Third pick can't auto, someone can hopper + shoot. say that's an extra +25 fuel over #2. +61 for this auto. 4. Third pick can't auto, so you need to auto for it to get 3 gears. +40 gears, + 8 fuel, +48 points. 5. Third pick can auto, 2nd can hopper, 1st can 2 gear. +40 gears, +33 fuel. +77 total. 5 is the winner, but only works if you have two highly auto capable robots on the alliance, and a 3rd competent robot. Needless to say, this is a rare alliance. 4 is another 2 gear auto. But if you're in this situation and can pick between 2 gear auto and hopper + shoot, you should hopper + shoot unless you have terrible accuracy. Basically, if you can catch and hit enough balls from the hopper to make +20 points, you should be refining that auto first, since it's useful in many more situations. If you get that dialed, then you should think about a 2 gear auto, though you'll probably never use it. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Quote:
GEARS D. One (1) available to each team to preload in their ROBOT (any not preloaded are staged with GEARS in E) E. Eighteen (18) in each LOADING LANE (staged on the carpet between the LOADING STATION and the STARTING LINE) F. One (1) in each AIRSHIP |
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
I know but it seemed like that rule was being over looked. And the only way to do it would involve a gear picker upper thing. Then you have to me the robot find the gear on the floor where ever it will be and then accurately pick it up in the time allotted. If you can make your robot score a gear and go back to pick up another from the ground and then score it, more power to you.
|
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Quote:
|
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Quote:
That said, if you're going through that effort to make a two-gear auto peg, you might well be better served with a gear floor pickup that's useful at other times. I guess it'd mostly be about packaging at this point. In terms of a second gear being less useful than fuel, absolutely, but realize that the team in question may not have that choice. It is possible to have a gear system capable of a two-gear auto and yet not have the capability do fuel handling in your robot. Also realize it's not always playoffs. (We're actually running into this right now: we have some vision targeting strength on the team and the climber and basic gearer are okay, but we're having fuel problems. Fitting a gear floor pickup might actually be better--meaning less likely to hurt our climbing and gear performance even if it doesn't work--than burning more time and tradeoffs trying to integrate fuel. It's not a trajectory I would've picked originally, but somehow it's Week 4.) |
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
TL;DR: practice 2-gear autons for quals, but if the 3rd partner and timing aren't right in elims then totally scrap it outright.
2 gear autons have a 'cool' factor. There will be the occasion where the robot places the 2nd gear with enough time remaining that it counts towards some more autonomous points, but it will be rare. If the 2nd gear causes a robot to miss its 5-pt line crossing, a non-scoring 2-gear autonomous is a total bust. Otherwise non-scoring 2-gear autons don't save much time in teleop compared to the other sequences that can be done in autonomous. If a partner drops a gear for my team to deal with, is it a better long-term strategy for us to pick it up immediately or to instead move the robot down-field for the first gear cycle? What if the gear were dropped on the side with the boiler, or near the airship where opponents couldn't see it? |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Also keep in mind, you don't have 15 seconds to do this in Auto and get two rotors moving.
Even with two competent pilots, I expect nearly 3-5 seconds to get the last of three gears in place and rotated three times. (I say last because rotor one can be achieved while the last two gears are being collected) Does not negate a two gear auto bot, but does add one more factor to make it harder. |
|
#25
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Quote:
|
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Quote:
Anyone with a Q&A code: Figure 2-1 still shows the baseline as partway down the barriers, whereas Figure 3-1 shows it at the barriers' edge. TU1 told us that the Field Tour placement (and Figure 2-1) is incorrect, and "the BASE LINE is shown as being directly next to the AIRSHIP when it’s actually out at the edge of the Barriers", but the figure doesn't yet reflect this. Also note the spelling of baseline changes to BASE LINE after page 13. I get no relevant Q&A hits for either spelling. |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Quote:
ROTORS only start if GEARS are installed in ROTOR order: 1, 2, 3, and then 4. The order of GEAR placement within a ROTOR set is not important. To start ROTOR 1, the PILOT places the GEAR in the GEAR slot at the top of the STEAM TANK, opposite the stack light for ROTOR 1. Steve |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
I think the most common 2 rotor autonomous success will come from alliances where all three robots score a gear on separate lifts. They should be able to easily complete that task with plenty of time remaining in autonomous for two reasonably skilled pilots to finish the job.
A two gear autonomous by a single robot is only interesting if: 1) the robot scoring the other gear does it soon enough so that the pilots can focus on the exclusively on the final gear in the last 5 or 6 seconds and the 2 gear robot gets it there by then, and 2) it frees the 3rd robot up to get points the alliance would not otherwise score (probably fuel oriented). This second point is important as it speaks to the consistency of the 2 gear autonomous. If on a given alliance, all three robots scoring a gear is very consistent and the 2 gear autonomous is somewhat less consistent at getting 2 rotors moving, are the other points the 3rd robot may score worth the risk? This is one of the reasons I am really starting to like this game. There are a bunch of interesting trade-offs to consider. Thanks, Steve |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Same thing I said previously. You don't have 15 seconds for the robot to do it's thing. You have 10-12 seconds with the last bit of time eaten up by the pilot placing the last gear and spinning the rotor 3 times before auto ends.
|
|
#30
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2 gear autonomous
Quote:
1. Rotor X+1 won't start and won't accumulate rotations until Rotor X is started. 2. Rotor X+1 will NEVER start or accumulate rotations if it EVER sees a rotation before Rotor X starts. #1 is straightforward programming in any language you care to use. #2 is a literal interpretation of your quoted text, but requires more complicated programming to implement. You have to intentionally latch a fault condition and intend to lock out all further rotor scoring if there's an out of order rotation. Silently, apparently, since there's no mention of any warning displayed for teams or pilots if they shoot themselves in the foot like this. So, obviously, I think it's incredibly unlikely that the system works as in #2. I think the rotor scoring logic is just inartfully stated in the manual, which is a thing that happens every year. But I can't FIX this because I can't post a Q to determine exactly what the GDC means. It'd be simple: "Can you place gears out of rotor order? Eg. place 2 gears in Rotor 2, then place gear in Rotor 1, then turn gears in Rotor 2. Does this result in 2 started Rotors?" |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|