I don't really think that there has been an increase in the number of poor quality bots versus the past year. The difference has been made slightly more visible by the lack of secondary scoring in this year's game, resulting in more bots that play pure defense. But I feel that there are just as many teams that struggled last year. The number of teams with poor arms this year is about the same as the amount of teams with poor shooters. Heck, last year, all you had to do for a minimally successful autonomous was drive forward, then release your starting supply of balls (and if your robot wasn't designed to do that, you could shoot them out at a low speed towards the corner goal and still hit a couple, look at 1541), yet a vast quantity of teams couldn't do that.
Then why do we see less teams capable of placing tubes on the rack than we did capable of placing tetras? Several reasons:
- Tubes are much harder to manipulate than tetras. Even though a tube is much lighter, to properly grip a (round, soft) inflated object with slightly varying sizes is much harder than lifting a fairly uniform solid object. In addition, the margin of error of the tubes for placing them on the rack is much smaller and requires a lot more precision than placing a tetra.
- There is another feasible design objective, ramp/lift bots. In 2005 there was only one real way to score. The positioning points were smaller and only required a drive-train, making virtually every team focus on scoring tetras (whether under or on top). In 2007, ramps are worth more and require contributions other than a drive.
- The rack is dynamic.
- The rack is central, making if further from the drivers than some of the goals in 2005, and closer to all the other robots.
- New size/weight rules. You could build 5 ft 120lb. in 2005, now you can't.