Over the bump or under the tower

[killerofkiller]

reminds me of the 2003 Stack Attack debate."Over the Ramp,or under the bar?"

[DanDon]

Originally Posted by killerofkiller

reminds me of the 2003 Stack Attack debate."Over the Ramp,or under the bar?"

In that case, it was definitely "under the bar."

[thefro526]

Now that 816 has done a bit more thought on the subject, we're going forward with the intent of crossing the bump in every match. Not because we'd like to, but we feel like we're going to need to.

Because of this, we're designing our machine to be able to cross the bumps with minimal problems, and 50% of driver training this year is going to focus on conquering the bump. Our Drivers are going to need to be able to cross the bump with a minimum of a 98% success rate to make the cut this year - I'm not kidding. (98% is derived from 1 failure in 50 crossings, with 50 crossings being derived from 5-6 crossings per match in 8-10 matches)

[Hito Seika]

I think a Properly made 6 wheel bot will be able to do both. I think...

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by TheWhiteReaper

My team is deciding that we don't WANT to go over bumps but if we HAVE to (in the event of an allied robot being disabled) you should BE ABLE TO. Our drive train will allow us to go over but we will ONLY if we have to.

Our team came to a similar conclusion. Also, if you plan to hang at the end, and you start in the zone not adjacent to the tower, you will have to cross a bump before hanging.

[GODUX123]

We're tying to do both

[Puffin]

Bump is a better idea because it is faster to get across since you don't need to line up with the tunnel, but it's also riskier. Also, I doubt there will be a problem with getting blocked in the tunnel. It would take too much effort for an opponent to see that you are trying to go under the tunnel, then block you. Also, that robot won't be doing anything other than just sitting there and blocking, while you can do other things while you are being blocked such as scoring.

[falconmaster]

Call us crazy.....but we feel that if you need to cross the bumps then you are loosing the game. If each robot is doing its thing in their own zone, you don't need to leave it. We hear that many teams feel that the tunnels are easy to block, so what if they are. If the opposing team is blocking a tunnel then they leave another function in their zone open. We feel that you need to think of this game more like soccer and less of an engineering problem. You play position unless you see an opening then you can take the risk of leaving your position. We could be totally wrong, but we feel that the losses due to engineering a bot to go over costs in other capabilities of the robot....I guess we will see. We also see stopping a robot going over a bump as a fairly easy task. If you move your own robot so they can't complete going over and then move your own robot when they are pressing up against yours can possibly make them loose balance and then fall or tip. The key to wining soccer is a good midfield that can feed the balls to the striker!

[ThirteenOfTwo]

OK. #1: Bump is clearly a better idea, because it presents less mechanical limitations and you can't get blocked. Also, if you're building a striker bot, you actually have to go over the bump during the finale period if you want to hang, because if you so much as touch the tunnel walls you get a penalty. In any event, blocking the tunnel is as easy as moving about ten feet, whereas blocking the bumps is both dangerous and nearly impossible. If you build your robot carefully and have a good driver, you should not flip.

Second, I disagree with the idea that having one robot in all zones is always the best. In the qualifying rounds, playing defense and winning 10-0 is worse than not playing it and losing 11-10. Defense is totally out of the question in quals, because you want matches to be as high scoring as possible. As falconmaster said, having a good midfield is important. I predict that in the qualifiers, having two bots in midfield and one striker will be a better strategy than 1-1-1. Elimination is a totally different game, though, and in there you want to play defense.

Also, falconmaster, keep in mind that your blocking strategy won't work because A) intentional flipping is illegal B) there's always a faster, holonomic bot C) like you said, a bot on defense in midfield isn't doing its job and D) even if you do block them, and they flip, they land on you, probably incapacitating you as much as them.

[lenny8]

i think since we are going to have first year drivers going over the bump is the best option. going in the tunnel is too precise and also limits what one can do this year also don't think the tunnel blocking is a problem since with a small robot u have better capabilities to create a little bulldozer.

[=Martin=Taylor=]

Our design mentality went something like this:

1: We want to hang.
2: Its easier to reach a 7' bar when you're 5' tall than when you're only 18" tall.
3: Build a tall robot and climb the bumps.

[Chris is me]

Another thought to add.

The strategy I believe will work in regional competitions works best with one alliance partner who can move between the field's zones. Not necessarily or always doing so, but at least one alliance partner needs to have the option. The only way to ensure an alliance always has a particular component is to put it on your own robot.

[ThirteenOfTwo]

@ =Martin=Taylor= : It's easier to fall over with a 5' robot than it is to do so with an 18" robot.

[=Martin=Taylor=]

Originally Posted by ThirteenOfTwo

@ =Martin=Taylor= : It's easier to fall over with a 5' robot than it is to do so with an 18" robot.

That’s a rather arbitrary statement. Just because a robot is tall doesn't mean its COG is high.

The top part of the robot can be built very light.


I'f this game turns out to be like 2003, where the actual task is too difficult for most teams to accomplish (controlling and kicking the balls). I foresee low robots, with scoops scoring most of the balls by pushing them under the tunnels.

[ThirteenOfTwo]

But I would be amazed to see an 18" robot with a center of gravity higher than 18".