|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
In all honestly, the MCC for most events in 2014 would simply be great drivers and the ability to receive from the human player.
When 1712 prioritized our design, the ability to pass significantly outranked the ability to truss (which outranked the ability to score in the high goal). During our subsequent design and brainstorming processes, we didn't arrive at a shooter/intake geometry that would allow us to have the level of passing ability we desired before our downselect, so we opted not to shoot. In the end, that ended up generally working in our favor. We arrived at a single-intake design with a significant area to catch the ball (particularly useful for inbounding, but occasionally for catching trusses as well) driven by a 6-CIM 6WD with versa wheels. We were selected at all three of our events, including MAR Championship. Being able to score easily in the 1-pt goal was definitely a benefit as well (we quite often were the finisher on our alliances, including in two of our elimination alliances), and a consistent 16 point autonomous was quite useful. Last edited by Lil' Lavery : 20-11-2014 at 08:42. |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
And you can always make sure you are noticed by talking to the teams that will be in a position to pick. I have been on a high seeded team a number of times - never once did I have a team come to me to discuss their value as a 3rd partner. Any team that would commit to working with our strategy and could demonstrate their ability to do it would leap up my pick list. Last edited by RunawayEngineer : 20-11-2014 at 08:49. Reason: Typo |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Bryan,
MCC 2014 - kitbot, pneumatic actuated roller bar intake that allows spitting out. Robot could gain mobility bonus in auton and score in low goal. Robot could also be valuable inbounder and then harry the other alliance as they attempt to score. With clever play this robot could have seeded quite high due to the importance of assist points. As such I've prioritized driver practice over any sort of trussing capability. However, it will be hampered by the serpentine at small events where it can't pick up a solid trusser as a third. |
|
#19
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
|
|
#20
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
|
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#22
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Yeah, the thread was over as soon as 5136 was brought up. The robot every rookie (and many veterans) should have built.
|
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
I don't know that the MCC "build" discussion paints the entire picture of what happened in 2014 - at least not from a "what lessons can we carry forward" perspective. I'd like to point out it took quite a while for the GDC to admit that the definition of possession required refs to deduce intent. This means that if the teams with a spring or other such passive intake/passthrough did not actively go talk to the refs there was a very good chance the assist would not be counted. It also means that it is a terrible idea to design for such a concept during the build season given its subjectivity.
Additionally in 2014 there are inherent risks to an alliance associated with a passive device like a lawn chair - it is just as easy for the robot to get an opponent's ball accidentally, considering the lawn chair's inbounding zone is the same zone in which to catch the opponent's truss and/or HP scoring zone inbound. I think 5136 and 4242 got MCC perfect this year. 4242 was even a captain in DC. |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
Sadly when teams are successful at building a MCC you tend to get picked in tough positions (usually first/second round of the bottom four alliances) which is what happened to us in 2011. |
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
![]() |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
5136 was one of my favorite robots this year, probably number 5 in my personal list (Admittedly there may be some bias from CVR). A pure inbounder, with good defense, AND a goalie pole?!?!? They were the part that really scared me about the Newton alliance, because that was their BACKUP, and with some shuffling, could have replaced any of those robots and still have a scary alliance. |
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
|
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
MCC is one concept that is defined in a certain way, but it brings a different question to mind.
For a team with median resources, assuming that competitive success is prioritized over cool factor, given what was known about the rules a few days into build season, What is the smartest robot design to attempt? This year, lots of teams prioritized shooting over acquisition and ended up not being able to participate effectively in assist cycles. It wasn't a secret that ball control would be hugely important for every robot. It was right there in the way the game and its scoring system were designed. Why did so many teams miss on that? Should we have this thread nice and early next year? It will probably be possible to take a decent shot at MCC (or similar) in the first week of the season, and that might be useful to a lot of teams that would otherwise put their eggs in the wrong basket. |
|
#29
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
The "bounce pass" possession was called very inconsistently (and oftentimes, not at all) before the World Championship.
|
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: [MCC] Minimum Competitive Concept 2014
Quote:
I just worry that many teams think that the only way to win/get picked is the "primary" game, so they don't look for alternatives. Meanwhile, the captains of seeds 1-3 are digging through data to find any means to differentiate between the middle 12 robots. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|