Shooter vs Dumper Trade Study

[spc295]

Originally Posted by gburlison

I think that shooters dominated Aim High because the top goal was worth more points. With the balls worth the same amount, I think that either design can be effective. I think that a good dumper will be easier to build, so I expect to see more good dumpers in the finals of Lunacy than there were in Aim High.

I agree. but I would also like to say that I think a dumper on a turret will be the best. because it does not matter how you pin an opponent

[Creator Mat]

Thanks for making that rule clear for me

[MrForbes]

Regarding the PAYLOAD SPECIALIST retrieving balls....the tongs must be used to get balls from the AIRLOCK to the FUELING PORT....so even though you can dump balls into the AIRLOCK as fast as you want, the PS probably can't put them into play very quickly.

[CDH Jeff]

my question is, anyone here ever heard of a shotgun?

[647techangel]

i think making a dump bot is sticking to good old K.I.S.S , because if you think about it you have 3 "shooters" already (payload specialist).

[redbarron]

We have been debating on how to score since kick off but have decided to go with a shooter. When you are a dumper you are relying on getting close to the opponents trailer. Though you can can score more balls at once you will be sitting still while dumping. I am in no way saying that there will not be a team that will pin a bot and dump their load in about 5 seconds, but it will be kind of sad to see for example a load of 7 moon rocks get "dumped" as a super cell lands in the dumping robots trailer resulting in -1 points for the load of seven you just worked hard to get rid of. A shooter can be run at low speeds and if the balls are delivered to the shooter fast can be just as, if not more effective than a dumper.

Just my .02

[ScottOliveira]

Originally Posted by 647techangel

i think making a dump bot is sticking to good old K.I.S.S , because if you think about it you have 3 "shooters" already (payload specialist).

Unfortunately those shooters are immobile. The robots have to come to them to be in accurate range. While they can be pushed, remember that it means your team's robot(s) are right next to it, and a shot slightly off aim could easily land in one of your team's trailers (it doesn't matter who throws it, a ball in your trailer counts for the other team).

A robot capable of scoring on its own (if built correctly) almost completely negates the possibility of scoring on itself (although it could still hit a team mate).

[MattB703]

Originally Posted by redbarron

.... I am in no way saying that there will not be a team that will pin a bot and dump their load in about 5 seconds, ....
Just my .02

5 seconds is an eternity for a good dumper design. all of our prototyping says that we should be able to dump 7 balls in about 2 seconds. (not counting the time it takes to chase down and pin an opponent of course)

[spc295]

I think the dumpers will do better, because a shooter has to deal with broken orbit balls, the dumper just uses gravity.

[Aren_Hill]

Originally Posted by spc295

I think the dumpers will do better, because a shooter has to deal with broken orbit balls, the dumper just uses gravity.

not all dumpers will just use gravity, teams who really want a good dumper are gonna figure out how to effectively "hurl" the balls out of there robot quickly and in large quantities

[ScottOliveira]

Originally Posted by spc295

I think the dumpers will do better, because a shooter has to deal with broken orbit balls, the dumper just uses gravity.

But a dumper will have to deal with them too. If the dumper has any way to refill, whatever collection mechanism it uses will have to be able to deal with them. And whatever hopper it uses will have to be designed that broken balls do not get stuck/cause a jam.

[TheOtherGuy]

Have there been any videos posted of dumpers? I'm curious to see if there is any cloggage or missing because the balls are interacting with each other as they come out...

We're probably going with a short range shooter; tests show it's very accurate, and at a rate of ~3-4 balls per second, we should be able to unload just a little slower than a dumper... just with the added benefit of being to start earlier Not that dumpers aren't a viable strategy. I predict we might see one on Einstein this year.

[ebarker]

In this thread, what is the definition of dumper ?

a - a low dumper, over the wall in the corner

b - higher up, into a trailer

c - higher up, into the trailer and the corner


b and c are shooting dumpers

a could be an active or passive shooting or other type of dumper

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Aren_Hill

not all dumpers will just use gravity, teams who really want a good dumper are gonna figure out how to effectively "hurl" the balls out of there robot quickly and in large quantities

That's what all of these air propulsion system prototypes are REALLY about, ha! I came to that realization a couple of days after kickoff...nice to see someone else has it too.

But as a team we decided on a shooter, and we're not looking back this far into it.

[Swampdude]

After the no descoring rule change (design #1 scrapped), we went to a full up turret style shooter design, basically done and we all loved it. But ditched the idea after seeing all the easily broken balls (design #2 scrapped). If you think about it, each regional only has so many, and over 120 are in play each match, as the matches go on and on these balls will start coming apart and by late saturday you may be dealing with a lot of jamming. I know they won't be inspecting 120 balls between matches. It just takes 1 to jam up and end your match. Also its true a dumper needs to handle the balls also, but not nearly in such a precise way. A shooter seems risky to me, but I'm sure many will do very well with it. I can see how a shooter has the advantage if done top notch, but only within a few feet of a moving goal. I don't think pinning a trailer for a couple seconds will be that hard with a good drive system.