Low vs. High robot poll

[AngryCalculator]

Is your team going to go under the low bar?

[KosmicKhaos]

there's no poll

[AngryCalculator]

First time doing a poll. Sorry. It's there now

[kyle_hamblett]

I think due to the fact that the low bar is 100% guaranteed to be there the entire time, it would be hindering your abilities if you didn't. You would need to guarantee the ability to traverse nearly any defense if you weren't at least making the robot capable.

[MrJohnston]

Interesting..... There are definitely pluses to going under the low bar, but it has negatives as well... Likely, such robots are going to be rather short - a disadvantage when shooting at the high goal - especially when facing a defender... Any device designed to grab the high bar for scaling the tower wall will have to have a longer reach... Etc.

[Trevor1523]

The results really surprised me actually.

[cait.schroeder]

Many people are saying low, but I disagree, your robot should not be very high for center of gravity reasons, but a low robot really limits your building space and your ability to do missions. Also a low robot may be at a disadvantage when pushing doors and such such as the Sally Port and Draw Bridge. Your robot should be somewhere in between. It also depends on the skills of your team, if you are able to make a low robot that can achieve many things, go ahead but if you can't and you are doing it just for the low bar it is not worth it. But this is just my opinion.

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by cait.schroeder

Many people are saying low, but I disagree, your robot should not be very high for center of gravity reasons, but a low robot really limits your building space and your ability to do missions. Also a low robot may be at a disadvantage when pushing doors and such such as the Sally Port and Draw Bridge. Your robot should be somewhere in between. It also depends on the skills of your team, if you are able to make a low robot that can achieve many things, go ahead but if you can't and you are doing it just for the low bar it is not worth it. But this is just my opinion.

Teams should build the robot that best matches their goal, strategy, and capabilities, whether that's a tall robot, a low robot, or somewhere in between. Likewise for capabilities. Personally I'm not of the opinion that there is a general set of characteristics that will define the robots that win at regional events this year-- there are far too many valid strategies, some of which include going under the low bar, some of which don't involve many obstacles at all.

As always, teams have a tendency to overestimate their capabilities-- this year more than any other in recent memory making that mistake could cost a team dearly.

[snoman]

It may be hard to shoot / climb and make it under the low bar let alone do other obstacles.

[New Lightning]

I'm am of the opinion that if you choose to have your robot go under the low bar then that is a tactical/game theory choice made by your team to possible ignore several other aspects of the game. Here's what I mean, while not impossible, it would be very difficult for a robot to go under the low bar and still scale the tower at the end of a match. I came to this conclusion for a couple of reasons. First a short robot has much less space to work with when it come to implements that can be manipulated outside of the frame perimeter. Second any such extension that would come off the robot in order to get to the bar would be a very long stretch, in fact the difference is exactly 5 feet. From the 1'4" of the low bar to the 6'4" of the rung on the tower.

Additionally having a robot that could go under the low bar would be similarly hindered trying to lower the drawbridge or opening the sally port on their own. One of which is guaranteed to be on the field at all times.

Again a further limitation is imposed with the shortened list of possibilities for a high goal shooter that can fit under a 1'4" clearance. Not saying that it can't be done in fact I believe that it can and will be done this year; however, it does limit the possibilities somewhat.

[Procolsaurus]

Low robots can be taller than the low bar and still go under if they assume a conformation that us low enough while crossing the low bar.
The largest compromise for choosing the low bar is you cannot also have a tall shooter. Tall shooters are much harder to block than short shooters.

[Anthony Galea]

If the results of this poll stand true, expect a return of pool noodle blockers strapped to 3rd robots.

[Hgree56]

Originally Posted by Procolsaurus

The largest compromise for choosing the low bar is you cannot also have a tall shooter.

Our team is actually working on a way to over come that. We've had a few designs and CADs passed around that might actually allow us to do both.

[GreyingJay]

Originally Posted by 3175student17

If the results of this poll stand true, expect a return of pool noodle blockers strapped to 3rd robots.

Peacock robots?

[itsjustjon]

Now, what would be interesting is to have a poll asking what teams are sacrificing in exchange for low bar capabilities.

The low bar is definitely a great strategy, and with a good enough drivetrain, you can get over all of the drivetrain-centric defenses (categories B and D).

My prediction is that a lot of low bar robots will be the 3rd pick at many regionals, and if these bots are able to run boulders to a courtyard shooter bot, then you have a solid team right there.

Can't wait till LA to see what the rookies and the veterans do.