A Horrible Idea

[generalbrando]

I had a horrible idea for a strategy and I haven't seen the idea fully discussed anywhere, so I wanted to put it on here and hope that most everyone would agree that this would be a horrible thing to do!

I think on the Q+A board on FIRST's site someone asked if we can block the view of the drivers. And there's a discussion now about blocking the ball chutes. I could imagine a robot being able to do both. It would essentially stop the other team from being able to compete!

You're all going to say "but you get the losers score!" I know, but the score doesn't matter in the finals! (If you win it doesn't anyway) If you go into the finals as a top seed and you pick a bot that can disable the other alliance and then let you do whatever you want, then you would win.

I know this bot would be hard to design and I'm sure that it would receive some damange. But don't say it can't be done! Even if it's just not feasible - pretend it is for the fun of the discussion.

[Jessica Boucher]

Though it does sound really cool for a finals robot, I wouldn't want to bet my entire season on being picked.

Building a robot to be picked is very nervewracking - just ask the majority of teams in 2001 (not yourself, though, since youre from Hammond and they dominated in 01 :-P). It's a lot of emotions to go through during alliance selection, a lot of selling your team to other people and being in the right place at the right time.

So, I'd rather be seeding well than selling myself. But it's still a cool idea. Gold star for creative thinking!

[Mr. Ivey]

Voice of expirence here, don't try and control the game. Team 384, my team, tried this in 2001 with Sparky v3.0, it won many design awards, but failed in competition. So don't try and control the game, you will get burned. with big arms, comes leverage that can be used against you. Do one thing and do that one thing well. Just if you try to cover the drivers, you will get burned, and throw in control over the corrals, you have arms to bend, torque, and destroy. Just heed the warning.
Ivey

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by Mr. Ivey

Voice of expirence here, don't try and control the game. Team 384, my team, tried this in 2001 with Sparky v3.0, it won many design awards, but failed in competition. So don't try and control the game, you will get burned. with big arms, comes leverage that can be used against you. Do one thing and do that one thing well. Just if you try to cover the drivers, you will get burned, and throw in control over the corrals, you have arms to bend, torque, and destroy. Just heed the warning.
Ivey

It was 2002 Mark, not 2001. 2001 we played the game, and did it well.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Jessica Boucher

So, I'd rather be seeding well than selling myself. But it's still a cool idea. Gold star for creative thinking!

A full defensive robot can seed 1st in this competition.

All you need to do is go 8-0.

So, the above strategy (if legal) could potentially be a high seed, simply because it wins every match.

The "losers score" stuff only matters if there is ANOTHER robot that is 8 - 0. Wins are everything people.

John

[Jessica Boucher]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the blue alliance bots start on the blue side of the field? I still think Murphy's Law - or another robot - would get in the way. And by losing a match, you fall to the bottom of the double-sort.

I dont know, I still think it's a cool idea, but too risky for me

[bigqueue]

Originally Posted by Mr. Ivey

Voice of expirence here, don't try and control the game. Team 384, my team, tried this in 2001 with Sparky v3.0, it won many design awards, but failed in competition. So don't try and control the game, you will get burned. with big arms, comes leverage that can be used against you. Do one thing and do that one thing well. Just if you try to cover the drivers, you will get burned, and throw in control over the corrals, you have arms to bend, torque, and destroy. Just heed the warning.
Ivey

But then again, if you are going to "control the game", you had better really do it and not think you will.

I am thinking of a robot two years ago called "BEAST" that basically fell down, extended two huge arms and "inched" its way forward, collecting all three goals, muscling them to the scoring zone.

It was slow, but it was very powerful. It was "out-played" in several matches, but I would say that 80% of the matches I watched, it did its job with great consistancy.

If I recall, it was on the winning alliance, and it ended up playing in every match of the finals except the last one (or two) because it had been damaged in a prior game.

Like I said....if you want to dominate, you had better to it well....and it is possible.

-Quentin

[generalbrando]

I agree it's risky and I don't want to try it or even see anyone try it! Good point though - if you win all of the qualifying matches, you'll more than likely seed.

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Originally Posted by Jessica Boucher

Building a robot to be picked is very nervewracking - just ask the majority of teams in 2001 (not yourself, though, since youre from Hammond and they dominated in 01 :-P). It's a lot of emotions to go through during alliance selection, a lot of selling your team to other people and being in the right place at the right time.

Building a robot to be picked IS very nervewracking. You bring up 2001 and Hammond not having to worry about that...but look at 2002. Hammond couldn't score that many points, but they could prevent other teams from scoring. Therefore, we didn't seed very high but people noticed what we could do. In effect our bot was built to be picked but like someone pointed out, you better know you can do it and not just think you can.

Perhaps the best offense is a good defense...

[Jessica Boucher]

Yes, but part of the reason why Hammond was looked at was because they're Hammond...and everyone expects something good out of last year's National Champs. That's nothing against your team - in my book it's more of a compliment....a community of 800 teams looks to your team as one that consistently knows what to do to win. There have been conversations about this before, how there are some teams that are known all over that don't need to sell themselves as much. Hammond is one of them.

Also, he only mentioned 2001 in his signature - and since I don't know him well and he has other teams (without dates) listed in his signature, it makes an outsider assume that he wasn't on the team in 2002.

So to rephrase, it may be something good for a more popular team, but I think it's really risky for a team that isn't as well known.

[Mr. Ivey]

Originally Posted by bigqueue

I am thinking of a robot two years ago called "BEAST" that basically fell down, extended two huge arms and "inched" its way forward, collecting all three goals, muscling them to the scoring zone.

It was slow, but it was very powerful. It was "out-played" in several matches, but I would say that 80% of the matches I watched, it did its job with great consistancy.

-Quentin

Yes, that's what Moe, and Sparky 3 both did as well. And they could push the 3 goals that year. But in the end at the final matches, both bots started falling apart on the field... But honestly look at the physics, of it, your arms could be used against you when trying to cover the corrals. It's just not the most sound idea. Also yes you can try to control the field, it's not impossible, but improbable of it working. Just look at the physics.
Ivey

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Good point.

Reputation will always help when it comes down to being picked. But I believe that if you have a machine that can do something that will catch the attention of teams on top, it will be a little less nervewracking

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by Mr. Ivey

Yes, that's what Moe, and Sparky 3 both did as well. And they could push the 3 goals that year. But in the end at the final matches, both bots started falling apart on the field... But honestly look at the physics, of it, your arms could be used against you when trying to cover the corrals. It's just not the most sound idea. Also yes you can try to control the field, it's not impossible, but improbable of it working. Just look at the physics.
Ivey

Geeze, Mark do your research before hand!

The robot talking about was Beaty, 71. They won the 2002 Nats with that bot, so it can be done, but don't count on it working very well.

[animater31405]

Ok. If you can make a robot like that your probably a person just like me I was thinking if you can always spank your opponents severely in every match then you ARE more than likely going to get picked as an alliance partner. you just have to play so that it will actually work. I don't think it's a horrible idea.

[bigqueue]

Originally Posted by Mr. Ivey

Yes, that's what Moe, and Sparky 3 both did as well. And they could push the 3 goals that year. But in the end at the final matches, both bots started falling apart on the field... But honestly look at the physics, of it, your arms could be used against you when trying to cover the corrals. It's just not the most sound idea. Also yes you can try to control the field, it's not impossible, but improbable of it working. Just look at the physics.
Ivey

Perhaps it "could" be used against it....but the robot I am talking about in fact dominated the games it played in and in fact was on the team that won the nationals.

It was truely a fantastic thing to watch. (I think you are talking about another robot???)