pic: REX (Team 4334 - Alberta Tech Alliance)

[yottabyte]

loading photo ...

[Mk.32]

What's with the black battery? I assume an non-legal battery for off season play?

[yottabyte]

Originally Posted by Mk.32

What's with the black battery? I assume an non-legal battery for off season play?

yup

[Mk.32]

Originally Posted by yottabyte

yup

Anything special? Extra capacity? Was thinking about getting some larger batteries for demo purposes.

[yottabyte]

Originally Posted by Mk.32

Anything special? Extra capacity? Was thinking about getting some larger batteries for demo purposes.

Nothing special. Get them cheep from a local supplier.

[CalTran]

Without the bumpers, your collector almost looks wider than the actual drivebase...I think it may actually be wider than your robot...

Where was this at? A demo, or just a robot photoshoot?

[yottabyte]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Where was this at? A demo, or just a robot photoshoot?

The photo was taken during the Calgary maker fair.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Without the bumpers, your collector almost looks wider than the actual drivebase...I think it may actually be wider than your robot...

Where was this at? A demo, or just a robot photoshoot?

Their appendage is right at their frame perimeter. Our pit was across from theirs at GTR east, so I got a good look at the robot in person.

(And this was before they were famous )

[JoeWithTheSpecs]

One of my favorite robots of the season It was so sad seeing it being disassembled after IRI

[Chris is me]

I think a large part of FRC needs to step back and seriously ask themselves why they didn't build this robot. All the long bots who missed elims, shooters that could only do 2's from a tiny portion of the fender, teams who were in over their head in basically any capacity... You can learn a lot from this robot. With just enough features to have a competitive presence at all levels of play, I really think this is the best simple robot of this year, and an example of excellent strategic design.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I think a large part of FRC needs to step back and seriously ask themselves why they didn't build this robot. All the long bots who missed elims, shooters that could only do 2's from a tiny portion of the fender, teams who were in over their head in basically any capacity... You can learn a lot from this robot. With just enough features to have a competitive presence at all levels of play, I really think this is the best simple robot of this year, and an example of excellent strategic design.

From a strategic game playing perspective, this is absolutely true.
We see too many times where teams try to build the "do it all" bot and fail to different extents.
I will say however, that the journey is just as important. Regardless of how the robot turns out, its a success if the students, adults and mentors all learn something in the process.
Some teams understand this, but still go for the gold because of the value they place on that journey.

[LeelandS]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I think a large part of FRC needs to step back and seriously ask themselves why they didn't build this robot. All the long bots who missed elims, shooters that could only do 2's from a tiny portion of the fender, teams who were in over their head in basically any capacity... You can learn a lot from this robot. With just enough features to have a competitive presence at all levels of play, I really think this is the best simple robot of this year, and an example of excellent strategic design.

It's probably because most teams don't want to play the roll 4334 played this year. I'm not trying to take away from 4334 in any capacity. They accomplished a tremendous amount this year, not just for a rookie, but for any team. Rookies making it to Einstein is not a frequent event.

However, 4334 was, for lack of a better term, a support robot. Their claim to fame is being a great feeder robot for two of the most dominant teams in FRC, 2056 and 1114. And there's nothing wrong with that. Since matches are played 3v3, being a support robot, a defensive robot, a feeding robot, is a necessary role. Most teams, however, don't want to play that role. Most teams want to be take an active scoring role for their alliance. Honestly, I find that to be the more fun and enriching part of FRC. If every team built a simple robot, didn't try to stretch boundaries, if the offensive roles were left to the teams that could only do it reliably, I'll be honest... It would be boring.

If a team wants to finish their season well, then yeah. Building a robot like this is awesome! It's a very desirable robot to round out a powerful alliance. 4334 should serve as an inspiration to all teams. They analyzed the game, and decided that it would be better to build "The little robot that could" than try to make 3 pointers. But I don't think "a large part of FRC" needs to try and follow this trend.

I will agree with you that, however, 4334 has taken a leap in strategic design that most teams haven't found yet. They built within their boundaries extremely well.

Cheers to 4334, on an amazing rookie year, and for many, many more great years to come!

[AlecMataloni]

Originally Posted by LeelandS

If every team built a simple robot, didn't try to stretch boundaries, if the offensive roles were left to the teams that could only do it reliably, I'll be honest... It would be boring.

More boring than watching a regional competition where, let's say, 70% of the robots try to shoot 3's and only 15% can make more than one a match reliably? Because we've all seen something similar and if you haven't, allow me to tell you how painful it is to watch. There's a certain regional (maybe more) that in 2012 saw an elimination round match where the score was 0-0. That's not just painful. In my book, it's unacceptable.

I'd rather see an FRC competition where EVERYONE can at least score the bare minimum point values than one where everyone tries to do something really tough, with the majority failing miserably.

Boundaries should definitely be pushed if a team wants to play on the next level, but that doesn't mean teams shouldn't be realistic with their goals.

If everyone built at LEAST the MCC (Minimum Competitive Concept), Qualifications and Elims would both be way more exciting and I would be a happy scouter and spectator, not to mention the fact that I would be happy knowing that every team in FIRST had a chance to be a potentially fantastic alliance partner in both qualifications and eliminations.

[LeelandS]

Originally Posted by AlecMataloni

More boring than watching a regional competition where, let's say, 70% of the robots try to shoot 3's and only 15% can make more than one a match reliably? Because we've all seen something similar and if you haven't, allow me to tell you how painful it is to watch. There's a certain regional (maybe more) that in 2012 saw an elimination round match where the score was 0-0. That's not just painful. In my book, it's unacceptable.

I'd rather see an FRC competition where EVERYONE can at least score the bare minimum point values than one where everyone tries to do something really tough, with the majority failing miserably.

Boundaries should definitely be pushed if a team wants to play on the next level, but that doesn't mean teams shouldn't be realistic with their goals.

If everyone built at LEAST the MCC (Minimum Competitive Concept), Qualifications and Elims would both be way more exciting and I would be a happy scouter and spectator, not to mention the fact that I would be happy knowing that every team in FIRST had a chance to be a potentially fantastic alliance partner in both qualifications and eliminations.

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree in some respects. I don't think it's okay if teams start saying "Well, we won't be able to make 3 pointers anyway. So let's not try to make them." I know that's not what you were saying was happening, but it was an implication I could see occurring in this circumstance.

Personally, yes. I would rather see 70% of robots try to make 3 pointers and only 15% make it. Because the 55% now have something to improve upon. And, in a nice, not necessarily perfect world, many of them would be working hard to become reliable shooters.

I love 4334's robot this year. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to disparage them. They did a brilliant job building with their resources and experiences and it obviously payed off. And I'm not trying to say, to anyone who is reading this, "It doesn't matter if you don't think you can do it. Try it anyway." What I'm trying to get at is that I don't think everyone in FIRST should build a simple, support based robot, because you start taking away part of what I love about FIRST: The diversification of designs, the run for improvement on a team, and teams stretching their boundaries and learning from what happens as a result.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by LeelandS

Personally, yes. I would rather see 70% of robots try to make 3 pointers and only 15% make it. Because the 55% now have something to improve upon. And, in a nice, not necessarily perfect world, many of them would be working hard to become reliable shooters.

I think you're missing a bit behind their (assumed) intentions.

Lets talk about the team that due to current skills, resources, etc. can't effectively score no matter how hard they try. They can work hard, improve these skills, get resources, yada yada, and in the long run become much more capable. However, this can take seasons.

In the mean time, they can develop other skills (the intangible "how to win an event", or being competitive) by making simple, support robots. The team with less skills and resources can easily make these support robots.

As the team improves, they will some day flip a switch and decide to aim higher; and I'm darn sure they'll be more prepared to be a top tier team (in both robot design and competitive execution) than the team who spent the same amount of time always aiming to be a top robot.

Not only does it work out better for the team, it works out better for the other teams. It's incredibly depressing picking an alliance where your choice for a 3rd is more or less, "Well we can pick the team that reliably can't really do anything, or the other team that did something once". It'd be nice to round out every alliance at every regionals with robots that can provide meaningful capability.

I can't speak for 4334's intentions, but I doubt their five year plan involves being a support bot for every season.