Game trends

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by karatekid

The 2009 game, you couldn't go fast due to low friction. You would spin out.

Re-read that. Curtis never said anything about moving fast, just about scoring fast. One of the things that made 217 so effective in a season of "oh shooters won't have a chance" was the fact that as long as they were saddled up next to you in pretty much any orientation (weren't they one of the ones that were scoring over other robots?), they could adjust and put a crap ton of balls in your trailer while most of their opponents had to be lined up just so. Could you still beat the Thunderchickens? Sure--it happened 14 times this season. But you had to bring your A game to do it.

[EricH]

To add to what Billfred said, many teams had traction control, allowing them to NOT spin out, no matter what they did.

Also, 2003 and 2004 had HDPE as the surface in places. Very rarely would a robot be going so fast by them that it would become airborne. Not so much as in 2006, when a ramp structure had diamond plate on the ramp and Lexan on the top.

(And some teams had unique ways of scoring quickly, those years.)

[karatekid]

Originally Posted by EricH

To add to what Billfred said, many teams had traction control, allowing them to NOT spin out, no matter what they did.

Also, 2003 and 2004 had HDPE as the surface in places. Very rarely would a robot be going so fast by them that it would become airborne. Not so much in 2006, when a ramp structure had diamond plate on the ramp and Lexan on the top.

(And some teams had unique ways of scoring quickly, those years.)

What is the HDPE?

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Doug G

Of the 10 past games, six of the games have included objects or field elements in which robots must navigate over or under. 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2009 are the only ones that didn't. I'm not sure you would say this is a trend, but I would be surprised to see yet another flat field in 2010. Start designing those 12" wheels!!!

I would disagree, one problem with navigating over/under things is that said thing has to be robust (read as probably heavy) and large (read as, heavy++). There are exceptions but in the interests of keeping field costs down I would doubt us having any massive field elements.

Additionally, going over Tetras was a real problem in 2005, I saw quite a few teams try to drive around the field and end up immobile due to getting caught up on a Tetra (either the large goal ones or the small game piece ones)

Originally Posted by karatekid

What is the HDPE?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-density_polyethylene

Also, breaking my own rule not to say stupid stuff but, yay, 900 posts. Interesting fact, in 100 posts the number of digits in my post count will equal my mental age.

[karatekid]

Originally Posted by Billfred

Re-read that. Curtis never said anything about moving fast, just about scoring fast. One of the things that made 217 so effective in a season of "oh shooters won't have a chance" was the fact that as long as they were saddled up next to you in pretty much any orientation (weren't they one of the ones that were scoring over other robots?), they could adjust and put a crap ton of balls in your trailer while most of their opponents had to be lined up just so. Could you still beat the Thunderchickens? Sure--it happened 14 times this season. But you had to bring your A game to do it.

Sorry. Also, the comparison I was making was regarding moving fast.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Billfred

Re-read that. Curtis never said anything about moving fast, just about scoring fast. One of the things that made 217 so effective in a season of "oh shooters won't have a chance" was the fact that as long as they were saddled up next to you in pretty much any orientation (weren't they one of the ones that were scoring over other robots?), they could adjust and put a crap ton of balls in your trailer while most of their opponents had to be lined up just so. Could you still beat the Thunderchickens? Sure--it happened 14 times this season. But you had to bring your A game to do it.

217 had a shooter that launched over robots. 1114 later replace their shooter to do this (based on 217's design, I presume) and seemed to use the feature more frequently than 217. I've only seen 217 shoot over robots when it had a Supercell. 1114 used their shooter even when they weren't being held against a wall, while 217 seemed to prefer driving around until they could push the opponent from the side and fire down.

Part of that might have been since 217's shooter was on the front of their robot, another robot that incurred under 217's intake could block their over-the-top shooter (2775 did this in an IRI mentor match). 1114's shooter was located farther from the front of their robot, so they could more easily shoot over the top of other robots.

I have this gut feeling that I know far, far more about the functionality and scoring style of other team's robots than I ever should know.