Terrifying Karthik

[orangemoore]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

Where did the term "Tortuga" come from (in this context)?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...hlight=Tortuga

This is the first place I saw it.

[ratdude747]

*Note- I only read the first page, these are my personal thoughts. Also, as I am not currently affiliated with a team, I am probably not a good candidate to send MTN Dew to*

I see it as a couple of simple yet deep factors.

First, the issue is that out of five classes of defenses (9 total), that 90% of teams voted to focus on the one that is the most limiting in terms of resultant design constraints (more on that below) indicates that at least, perhaps, 65% of teams didn't weigh design choices well. I will say this here and say it again, the low bar IS the tunnel from 2010. So, I'll make a call to my experience as a student that year to illustrate. Many of the best robots that year were unable to fit in the tunnel. Robots like say 1114, 148/217, 177, 111, etc. come to mind. Significantly fewer of the best could. Of those, the only three that come to mind are 1625, 294, and (Indiana bias showing ) 1501. However, in the actual field of robots that year, based on my memories of scouting matches, most robots (just over half?) overall did fit in the tunnel, to include the robots built by both teams I have student experience with (and both robots I did eventually work on at one point or another). The point here is that while a robot could both fit in the tunnel and perform well, it wasn't the case most of the time; that is, most good robots skipped the tunnel and hopped bumps instead. This year, like 2010, the bar/tunnel isn't the only way to cross the field (nor is it required to BREACH, as only 4 of the 5 defenses need DAMAGED).

The other factor here is the limitations presented by making a bot slim enough to fit under the bar (or in 2010, through the tunnel). First, I'll mention another famous bot from 2010 that couldn't fully fit under the tunnel, 469. The redirector design they made was, obviously, a disqualifier to using the tunnel to cross the field. In fact, they didn't even need to cross the field! Sure, with a few exceptions (say 51 and to a lesser degree 1024), nobody else chose that strategy, but to say "must use tunnel" would have pretty much precluded such an innovative strategy. Even if one didn't opt for such a "game breaking" strategy, there still were major issues faced by opting for a slim design. Kickers had to be very compact. Hanging mechanisms, something obviously not required that year for success (although it did tend to separate the absolute best from the pretty good), were in most cases impossible, although the "vertical pole" hanger could be made to fit (1625 comes to mind here). Even harder was making a robot that could also cross bumps AND go through the tunnel. My team at the time, 1747, tried and succeeded at that, but nothing more. Our kicker had issues (oh the poor AM gearboxes we trashed trying to make that work ) and our ball suction devices never took off (although the roller never had a fair chance as it was destroyed in the pits due to a kicker cable failure). Those could have worked had we figured things out sooner, and sure, some teams are so good they can make almost any design work (especially with a good drive team). However, the packaging constraints were indeed quite tight; as a result our winch for an attempt at a hanger never did work (the rube goldburg gearbox had binding issues and couldn't even lift a bucket of scrap steel) and the means of making the hook reach never took off (pun intended?). This year is even worse, as there are so many different ways to score and function (it's like FLL in that way). Trying to get those to work in a slim bot was bad. Trying to have a shooter and feeder (which is almost guaranteed to be bulkier than a 2010 kicker), a hanger (which is subject to more strict rules this year, the result of which is likely added bulk), and one or more mechanisms to deal with the other defenses. An average team would be hard pressed to make all of that fit in a slim bot, with a good drivetrain (for the low defenses), and make them work well. However, eliminate the slim limitation and those become that much easier to work well; one can design mechanisms to work well out of the box, rather than fit a tiny space and be tweaked to sorta work well (if the stars line up and the groundhog misses his shadow, that is). The point here is that in terms of "Karthik points", the tradeoff of fitting under the bar is a net loss of points, and as that goes contrary to Karthik's teachings, he would indeed be terrified to see so many Chief Delphi aware teams (presumably) get it wrong.

Also, I'll sum this up to a final point: It seems many teams didn't remember 2010. Those who forget history are destined to repeat it.

[GMeyer]

I think Karthik is concerned about how the matches will be. Although I've seen exceptions, the majority of robots that will be capable of going under the low bar will probably be incapable of doing much else, as Joe G. has convincingly argued elsewhere.

Therefore, I think Karthik is worried that if the poll is true, the matches will be boring, as most of the robots on the field will be ineffective limbo bots, while the experienced teams will run away with the matches and drive up the scores.

If this is indeed what concerns Karthik, then I think he can relax. The poll is likely accurate as to the amount of teams that plan to build low bar robots. However, that does not that they actually will. I think the task may just prove too difficult, and many teams will decide to scrap their low bar plans before the end of build season. The rest will either make effective limbo bots or get weeded out in the course of the season.

[Doug G]

By building a low robot, teams may find themselves limiting other possible functions the robot could do in this game. Our team is going for a low robot and still trying to do everything else, and it is by far the hardest build we've ever done. If only we still had the old perimeter rules (28x38 from 2012).

[GMeyer]

There's another possible reason I can think of: Karthik may be terrified because he thinks everyone else will be able to go under the low bar. But he has not planned for this, so he's concerned he'll be at a disadvantage. A bit like how people get concerned about whether they are underdressed or overdressed before a party.

Although my previous answer is more plausible, I think this one is a possibility as well.

[cait.schroeder]

We have a few (more than a few i lied) possibilities here.
1. Karthik is scared of all the idiots that are going to make their robots 15-16 inches and are not going to be able to make it under.
2. He is scared that people making their robot able to go under the low bar are not going to be able to scale or shoot and are going to make the game boring (not a fun choice but a possibility.
3. People are going to have problems fitting everything and attaching bumpers.
4. There are going to be a lot of robots nipping at peoples heels.
5. The game will be boring due to lack of fighting/ defending robots and none getting flipped on their sides and such.
6.The results are terrifying because a lot of teams are overestimating themselves and are going to have a lacking robot and be a disadvantage to other teams.
7. Karthik is joking and freaking us all out.
8. Karthik doubts the abilities of short robots.
9. Karthik knows something we don't.
10. He meant to type terrific (I know he didn't whatever).
11. Karthik is going crazy.
12. Karthik is scared for the 10% that will not go under as they may be less likely candidates for alliances in the late game.
13. Karthik knows there is no reasons for like all the robots to be able to go under the low bar as other teams can do that and it will result in a lack of good shooters.

PS. I know Im crazy but I might add more as I think.

[cj3958]

Originally Posted by cait.schroeder

12. Karthik is scared for the 10% that will not go under as they may be less likely candidates for alliances in the late game.

I like this one. Karthik is terrified because there wont be ENOUGH limbo bots.

[Citrus Dad]

Karthik finds it terrifying that such a high proportion of the teams finally recognized an important fundamental function for a game.

[cait.schroeder]

Originally Posted by cj3958

I like this one. Karthik is terrified because there wont be ENOUGH limbo bots.

Yeah lol. And the numbers are also a little off because of multiple people on teams voting, teams not voting, etc.

[anishde]

I'm just thoroughly amazed by how one post by one mentor (albeit one of the most respectable in all of FIRST) has set off SIX PAGES of posts in just one day...

[Kevin Sevcik]

It's going to be a confluence of factors, I'm sure. I'm guessing the primary concern is that 90% of robots using the low-bar implies that 90% of robots on the field have apparently decided to use a one robot wide section of the field as as their main thoroughfare. In a game that's going to require constant cycling over defenses to score points. Thinking back to 2013, where something like 90% of robots were too tall to sneak under towers, this sounds like a recipe for a traffic jam of immense proportions. Of course in 2013, you could score 4 discs per cycle. This year it's just one boulder, so cycling is going to be more frequent.

But the terrifying thing is this: In 2013, being low was a significant challenge you took on to gain field access and mobility. This year, it appears that a significant number of teams have probably sacrificed other functionality, including defense crossing ability, in order to throw themselves into a traffic jam and likely reduce their overall field access and mobility.

[Chris is me]

I think the terrifying thing is how compromised robot shooter / defense breaking / hanging effectiveness will be by the massive design compromises teams made to do a task that, while having value, does not need to be done by every member of an alliance.

I'm thinking we will see at least one top tier team totally skip the low bar in order to play the rest of the game at a very high level. Even powerhouse teams skip important game tasks. 1114 completely ignored floor loading in 2013. It was important, but only one (or maybe two) robot(s) on an alliance needed to do it, and it allowed them to put more focus on, and devote more space to, their end game mechanism. They played a different role on an alliance and played it better than nearly anybody else. I'm not saying 1114 is skipping the low bar this year, but some powerhouses will.

[tindleroot]

(Most) Low Bar robots will have limited capabilities in other aspects of the game as a trade-off. If 90% of robots are opting out of high goal, hanging, or other defenses (or all of the above), the game is not going to be played to its full potential. An "ideal" alliance would probably have one low bar robot, not three.

[Jon Stratis]

Being a team that is working towards the low bar, I can tell you... it is a SIGNIFICANT engineering challenge to do the low bar and everything else. The low bar is one of 5 defenses your team will have to face in each match, and successfully tackling the other defenses becomes much easier when you have more room in your robot to work with. Add to that scoring - as others have said, a low point of release makes you easy to block on the field. Then add on climbing at the end - having a mechanism that lets you successfully climb with this year's rules limitations is difficult. It's even more difficult when you ask said mechanism to fit within ~10" of space and expand to over 6'.

These are all significant engineering challenges to fit into such a small space. What he's afraid of, I think, is that the challenge is way too big for most teams. Yes, there will be some that accomplish it with style. There will be others that accomplish it by intentionally forgoing other aspects of the game. But I think most of them will end up compromising too much, leaving themselves with a robot that has poorly performing mechanisms in every other aspect of the game. That's the fear - that teams are turning an already difficult challenge into a nearly impossible one for the sake of a single defense.

[nighterfighter]

Let's start by examining the results of the poll:

90% of responses said they are planning on going under the lowbar. That is a LOT of teams planning to go under the bar (Note: I didn't bother checking to see if every response was from a unique team), especially compared to past years game where some objectives were not even attempted by most teams (2015- Can grabbing, 2013- Scaling the pyramid, 2012- Triple Balancing, 2010- Hanging, and I'm not familiar with FRC games prior to 2008). Of course, Chief Delphi is not representative of all of FRC teams.


I think Karthik's fear might be 1 of 4 things:

1) He fears that rookie teams will think it is possible/easy to do everything. Go under the low bar, shoot in the high goal, climb, etc. And then they will be able to do none of those effectively.

2) He is worried that teams will misjudge the actual height requirement, (see this thread: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh....php?t=141439), and based on the time of the poll (19 days into build season) it might be too late for teams to redesign their robot.

3) He thinks that 90% of ChiefDelphi-going teams are overvaluing the value of the low-bar.

4) He realizes that so many teams are doing it and they aren't! What did he overlook! (Okay, this option is basically a joke. I'm sure 1114 will pull everything off. I wouldn't be surprised if they literally fly under the bar and above the tower!)


PS- I see by the time I have finished writing my post, others have already posted. Sorry if this post contains repeated information/opinions.

Edit: It seems like Dr. Joe secretly wants to be a barista! First giving out Starbucks, now Mountain Dew? What sugary beverages come next!