|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Quote:
I will be honest 1071 is in no way a "defensive" team. we only played defense in 4 or 5 matches all weekend, includeing Thursday's practice rounds. I think it's important that all teams need to be fast cappers, but having a team that can play defense (not pushing and ramming) but real defense is probably going to be the key to the winning alliances at nationals at some point during the elminiation rounds. |
|
#17
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
I must admit that is very GREAT move by 1071, but I look at it this way...
1071 spent most of the match (if not ALL of the match) defending against 230, which is a great strategy because of how effecitvely they capped. But if all you are going to do is block against one robot, why even bother trying to knock tetras loose if you have a strong drivetrain. The move was amazing by 1071 but it also spent time etc to do it. A robot that could simply keep a robot from scoring at ground level could defend easily against them and also another bot that entered that zone, which did occur a couple times in that match. That is just the way I feel... |
|
#18
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Quote:
I am done debating (not because I don't think it's fun, but because I have to get some real work done) this issue and I will see you all at The Championship. I will give an update from The MidWest Regional on how defensive strategies worked. -Paul |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Quote:
Had 1071 not hit the center goal with the tetra and have it fall off, we would have scored 3pts on that goal while 230 was still loading in the human zone. If 1071 didn't play defense it is safe to say 1071 would have given a MINIMUM of 9 points, not includeing triple plays. (1071 averages 12-15 points per match) Its realistic to say team 230 would have scored atleast 12 - 18 points not includeing possible triple plays. (230 was averageing like 12 - 15 when they weren't being hit and defended in qualifing). That movie is probably the only effective way to play defense, which is takeing one team out of the picture and effectivly allowing the other 4 teams to do the scoreing. Had we choosen offense, our alliance would have probably still won, but instead maybe the win would have been by 3-6 points instead of 14. If we felt (or the alliance captain felt) the other two teams on our alliance couldn't outscore the 2 teams from the other alliance obviously defense would not have been an option. Last edited by nobrakes8 : 24-03-2005 at 12:26. |
|
#20
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Quote:
0.6 Mb Video :: stolentetra.wmv |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
At the Pitt Regional our team played a lot of defense. We were the strongest robot at the place and could push any other bot. We had an arm and were capable of capping, but our drive train was just the best feature.
|
|
#22
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
[quote=Swampdude]The 3rd round pick in alliance selections is usually going to get you a 1-2 tetra capper. So lets say you could instead pick a defensive player that could negate more than 2 caps from any opponents best capper. You've effectively selected a 3 tetra capper. Right?[quote]
well for one there is only 2 rounds. and for two my team (65) was a SECOND round pick at Midwest and we usually scored about 6 tetras a match. i think our highest was like 8 one time. so that SECOND round pick could get you more then 1-2 tetras. |
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Based on the 226 experience, I'm going to say that 3 offensive bots is the key. In the finals in Detroit, we did the best our first match when we went completely offensive, and the next two matches were progressively worse as we stepped up the defense. We won our first match by a landslide, and lost the second one by 1 point, and lost the third by a lot. I know (well, nothing is ever certatin, but I'm 95% sure) that if I had worried less about defense in the second match we would have won it.
~Allison |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
I say that a dream team would be two robots that have the ability to stack with a great defense robot.
In our regional in Arizona we finished third overall and eliminated the alliance made up of the 1st and 2nd place ranked teams in the first round of the finals by playing defense. Our little blue bot has a two speed transmission (fast and faster), it is two ounces less than the maximum allowed weight, our frame was made of fiber glass, it drives with four CIM motors running four 10 inch pneumatic tires, two omni wheels (All wheel drive) and a brake that totally stops the robot from being pushed around but it is small enough to fit trough the field tetras . We had no problem removing tetras from underneath them by pushing them out. We didn't have problems maneuvering or pushing other robots around. We built the robot with stability in mind and after the competition there wasn't any significant structural damage on the robot. It even kept most of its paint on. It has an arm that can place tetras underneath the field tetras or pull them out but the pwm cable kept coming off during matches. |
|
#25
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Keep in mind that in order to score most robots require several moments of precise meneuvering. Defense does not require this precision. In Portland we were chosen for our aliance because of our defensive abilities, and we were able to do a reasonably good job preventing the other teams robots from scoring. We just hung out in the center of their side of the field and would dart in and push out of the way any robot that tried to score. The best defense (or offense.... whatever) against this was to try to send the best scoring robot to our half of the field while the other two kept our robot busy.
|
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
During the qualification rounds this is a very vailid strategy, as most alliances wont have more than 1 or 2 strong offensive bots. But during the eliminations, particularly between higher seeds or at more competitive events (such as nationals) it wouldnt hold true. In the Chesepeake regional for instance, team 173 was probably the strongest force in the entire regionals. During the finals, team 122 tried to stop them, and let it more or less become a 2v2 match-up. But 173 was able to slip by the opposing defense enough to let them score enough points and to help their alliance to get solid victories on their way to winning the regional. NO defense is perfect, and any strong offensive robot can beat a defensive robot enough to allow them to score enough points to decide the match. Look at the Colorado regional for another example. Teams 118 and 233 were dominant offensive threats. Every opposing alliance would send defensive robots to try and slow them down. Slow them down they did, but not enough to make 233 and 118 lose a single match during the eliminations. 233 adn 118 would crush any opposing defense and win the regional. The example is shown again in VCU. The #8 alliance managed to advance to the finals by playing very tough defense, but they would lose to a stronger offensive alliance. During the first match of the finals, Team 401 (who was on the winning #3 seeded alliance) was knocked down early, limiting them to the 4 points they scored in auto. In the process the robot that knocked them over was disabled (but not penelized or DQed). This is exactly as if they had both just been in a shoving match for the entire match, and niether scored a point. The #3 alliance would win the match. Proving again, for the 3rd time in the 3 regionals I attended, that offense wins matches and championships.
|
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
In the Waterloo regional, the winning alliance (68, 1305, 1241) was extremely defensive. 1241 actually removed their arm to play pure defense! No scoring whatsoever- simply a pure chassis with an incredible drivetrain.
Truck Town had it's arm go down in the finals at waterloo (unplugged victor... grr) and playing with 2 defensive robots for a game against an almost purely offensive alliance ended marvelously with Truck Town's defensive alliance winning not only that game, but the entire regional as well. I believe the ideal robot is one that can do both well, defense and offense. A good capper with lots of traction and not too tipsy is a scary, scary robot to play against. |
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Quote:
The finals, 121, 126 and 350 were up against 138, 175 (562 subbed in for them in Final 2) and 58. Now all three of those robots were offensive, yet 121, 126 and 350 were victorious. Although 138, 176, 58 and 562 did extremely well and really gave 121, 126 and 350 a run for their money. a 2-offense/ 1-defense alliance can beat a 3-offense alliance. My idea of a winning alliance is 2 strong offensive bots, and a 3rd robot that can cap (although not as well as the other 2) but also has a strong enough drive to play defense. |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
I don't think the drive train is necassary for defense. My team lost a qualifier at BAE simply becuase 1027 laid there arm down on the top of the tetra on a goal we had to stack for a row. They just sat there with there arm. They were going to defend that goal to the end. We couldn't cap becuase of it. Becuase of the aggresive driving penalties this year its all about playing defense on the tetra not the robot.
|
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Winning Defensive Allaince?
Yes, but a robot with a weak drive train defending a goal with their arm can be pushed aside.
The problem with defending, especially when your defending a particular goal instead of a robot, it ofren becomes a 2v3 (or 2 and a reduced capability robot, so like 2v2 1/2). Defense is part of the game, but to dedicate a robot to defending the entire or most of the match is usually a foolish decision. The robots who call to be defended are usually the power house teams. These are the robots can cap score 20-30 points on their own. Even when defended they will still usually score some points. Now you have to hope your other two robots can outscore their other 2 and the few points the defended robot contributes. And that is harder than it sounds, because that defended robot is a powerhouse and is probably ranked pretty high, meaning hes got good alliance partners. And beyond that defense typically will have higher penalties. Not always more penalties, but the penalty points a defensive robot accumulates will usually be higher than that of an offensive robot. They also run the risk of DQ or decapping as aggressive driving may DQ you, and if you defend goals with your arm you may accidentally knock a tetra off. And then theirs the matter of the qualifying matches. Most defensive robots arnt as flashy and dont finish as high in the standings as offenseive bots (not that they are lesser robots, but they typically wont be ranked as well), so it puts them at a disadvantage during the selection process. So some alliances will pick a defensive bot knowing their strategy ahead of time. But the problem with that is if you find yourself down in points late in a match, a defensive robot wont be able to help you gain those points back as quickly as an offensive robot would. But if you choose an offensive robot instead of the defensive one, that bot wont be as good for your defensive roll. Now if you choose to go 3 offensive, you wont have that dilemma. Plus, there are certain situations, specifically late in a match when you have a lead, that you may choose to play defense. Now you can commit 2 or even all 3 bots to that task, and in numbers they can perform better than 1 dedicated defensive bot. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Do defensive, low scoring tactics work? | haverfordfords | Rules/Strategy | 37 | 18-02-2005 12:25 |
| Extent on Defensive Game | Jeff K. | Rules/Strategy | 1 | 18-02-2005 00:21 |
| What will the winning robot have? | sanddrag | General Forum | 59 | 16-01-2005 14:16 |
| Winning Robot Strategy | tenfour | General Forum | 41 | 08-03-2004 21:18 |
| Was the winning alliance unbeatable? | archiver | 2001 | 9 | 24-06-2002 03:21 |