pic: REX (Team 4334 - Alberta Tech Alliance)

[sg999]

First off, REX was an amazing example of what can happen through hard work and a little bit of humility. Now to the debate.

I feel that it's better to have a robot that can only play in autonomous and the end game than to have a robot that can play the entire game badly.

Our strategy for our regional (CT regional) this year was to try to play the entire game, which didn't work out so well because we could play everything badly. (Yes, I'll admit it, I was a strong proponent of being able to do everything) Yes, we worked hard last season to become one of the reliable shooters. However, it didn't work because we don't have the basic skills needed to build even a strong drive train. After our regional, we redesigned our robot to play only autonomous and the end game. This strategy, for us at least, was much more effective (see sig).

I think 4334 took the right approach their rookie year by trying not to do everything. If they had tried to immitate their alliance partners' success by building a robot that could sort of do everything, they might not have done as well (I don't know, just hypothetically speaking). While being a defensive robot might not be for everyone, it's still important for developing teams to have a robot that can do something at least. Even though there are teams out there that might be ready to take the next step and become an offensive robot, there are still teams (like ours) that need lots of improvement to be a great support robot.

Just my two cents.