Shooters vs Arms

[akash155]

concerning the blocking of the shooter, I understand this might be skewing the rule book but i was wondering if you guys might possibly consider blocking a ball in the air from the shooter as a violation of the protection while hurdling rule <G42> and even if it isn't the force that it takes to project that ball over the overpass is so great that a team would not sacrifice its arm unless it was specifically made for blocking.

[flyingcrayons]

we had a HUGE discussion about this the other day. i think that the shooter can also knock the ball of the overpass. it wouldn't be too hard

[Madison]

Originally Posted by akash155

concerning the blocking of the shooter, I understand this might be skewing the rule book but i was wondering if you guys might possibly consider blocking a ball in the air from the shooter as a violation of the protection while hurdling rule <G42> and even if it isn't the force that it takes to project that ball over the overpass is so great that a team would not sacrifice its arm unless it was specifically made for blocking.

Once the trackball is no longer in possession of the robot -- that is, once it's been flung at the overpass -- it's fair game. Knock it out of the sky.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by akash155

concerning the blocking of the shooter, I understand this might be skewing the rule book but i was wondering if you guys might possibly consider blocking a ball in the air from the shooter as a violation of the protection while hurdling rule <G42> and even if it isn't the force that it takes to project that ball over the overpass is so great that a team would not sacrifice its arm unless it was specifically made for blocking.

IF and ONLY IF the ball were clearly away from the robot (not contacting it in any way, shape, or form) would I consider it fair game for blocking. Once the ball has left the robot, the protection of <G42> no longer applies. You do need to be careful as to where you block it, as once it has crossed, it counts for 8 points for them once it hits your robot.

Standard disclaimer: I am not one of the game designers; therefore, I am not necessarily the most accurate source of game info. Q&A is.

[GaryVoshol]

<G42> protects a HURDLING robot (and the trackball it is holding) from "overt, blatant, or aggressive contact that interferes with the HURDLING attempt." (emphasis mine) If an opponent can block a shooter without contact, and without impeding, it should be fine. This would be a question to ask in the meeting with the Head Ref on Friday morning of competition, to see how <G42> would be called. It most likely will be covered in referee training.

[Nevets Amstier]

i really think we'll have to wait until the pre-season compitions start and we see how the game is really played.

[TubaMorg]

It would be interesting to see what happens to a robot that is hit with a ball fired by a launcher into its extended blocking mechanism.

[Brandon Holley]

Like I said earlier this thread is 100% matter of opinion, while I can see shooters being very quick, i can also see the versatility of an arm. Its going to come down to ball capturability and overall effective design, just like it does every year.

[EricH]

What would really be cool is: 2 arm robots and a launcher. The arm robots capture the trackballs and load the launcher. Launcher fires, arm robot who just loaded it scurries under the overpass and grabs the ball, taking it around again. Meanwhile, the other arm robot comes in to reload the launcher. At the end of the game, the arm robots put the trackballs up, and the launcher crosses the finish line.

[MrForbes]

Eric, I guess you haven't seen how easy it is to self load a launcher with just a simple moving arm sticking out the front of it?



.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by squirrel

Eric, I guess you haven't seen how easy it is to self load a launcher with just a simple moving arm sticking out the front of it?



.

I realize that (I've seen 118's video), but it might be more efficient if the launcher didn't move and had two arm robots supporting it--similar to 2006's "Atom Bomb" strategy. Twice the rate of fire sound good to you?

[Swampdude]

It's always true how you execute your design is the deciding factor as to how successful it will be. However 118 showed how easy it is to make a great launcher. We contemplated copying that when we saw it. It would have been easy to do (the launcher anyway). I'll bet a number of teams did. Why not?
However, all things being equal, this simply is the most efficient solution, mainly because of the clothesline factor. When executed properly you can't score faster with a mechanism that goes above the overpass for a period of time during the score. So how you get the ball off the ground becomes important, but no reason a shooter can't use the same mechanism an arm can.
Yes there will be plenty of arms scoring faster than shooters, but that will be because of execution or techniques. But if done right I can't see how even the best arm (anything that goes above the overpass) could score faster than the best shooter.

[Jonathan Norris]

Personally the best robots this year will be a combination of both, we will see robots that can knock down, pickup, place, and shoot the ball. I am willing to bet that a couple of the top teams will build a bot that can do all of the above extremely effectively, hey we haven't seen 71, 111, 67, 254, 233, 1114 ect. yet!

[SteveGPage]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Norris

Personally the best robots this year will be a combination of both, we will see robots that can knock down, pickup, place, and shoot the ball. I am willing to bet that a couple of the top teams will build a bot that can do all of the above extremely effectively, hey we haven't seen 71, 111, 67, 254, 233, 1114 ect. yet!

Team 836 has designed our bot to do just that. All the various components work quite well, and tonight we will start the extensive integration testing to see how effectively they all will work together.

[=Martin=Taylor=]

Originally Posted by Swampdude

It's always true how you execute your design is the deciding factor as to how successful it will be. However 118 showed how easy it is to make a great launcher. We contemplated copying that when we saw it. It would have been easy to do (the launcher anyway). I'll bet a number of teams did. Why not?
However, all things being equal, this simply is the most efficient solution, mainly because of the clothesline factor. When executed properly you can't score faster with a mechanism that goes above the overpass for a period of time during the score. So how you get the ball off the ground becomes important, but no reason a shooter can't use the same mechanism an arm can.
Yes there will be plenty of arms scoring faster than shooters, but that will be because of execution or techniques. But if done right I can't see how even the best arm (anything that goes above the overpass) could score faster than the best shooter.

Exactly.

One thing I've noticed is that many of the successful "arms" are VERY adept at picking up the balls quickly (rollers: 121, 179, 1902...)
Yet they are slightly slower when it comes to hurdling.

The catapults on the other hand, excel at hurdling, but struggle to pick up the ball.

I believe that in the end the two designs will hurdle equally fast. Catapults will hurdle faster, and arms will pick-up faster. (provided of course that both designs are properly executed)

This is all the result of engineering trade offs...