Do you think there’s going to be a lot of congestion for robots who will have to drive around the stage to cycle? Would having a robot short enough to easily drive under the stage chains largely benefit cycle times?
Short bot will largely benefit cycle times just due to the more direct line to the speaker from the source. More places to go also means more ways to dodge defense if they cant drive under.
I expect more short bots than tall bots. The center of the field is smaller as a result of field structures closer to each other (compare with 2017 airships).
The existence of amp and source on either side of the field narrows the field even more. Going under the stage would be beneficial to many robots, especially at higher levels of play.
One of the big advantages of short bots if they don’t have to risk running by the opponents pedestal which would incur fouls or make them run along the edge which then the teams there can pin them for 5 seconds easily since they are already against the wall.
973 2020 taught me that size doesn’t matter.
2 Likes
Yes, prime example, i also thought of them.
But their strategy involved flooding the power port and taking advantage of the HPs and picking up power cells when dropped.
The only dropped notes up for grabs would be missed notes. Human players arent required to dump like they did in 2020.
A good driver would still find a way to get back to score though.
1 Like
How often do you think robots will be missing shots, either low or high?
One of the reasons it’s beneficial this year to be short at mid to high level play is the auto and teleop collisions that your robot may go through. The taller the robot the higher center of mass if not design correctly.
973 was the best robot in the world that year, that competed, IMO.
On the flip side, 2910 2023 taught me that an FRC robot the same height as FTC robots are 
.
15 Likes
Wording unclear: i meant “missed the robot’s collector” at source (like dropped gears in 2017 where you can steal)
You will probably see it makes sense to design for a lower robot to drive under the chain and stage to gain more traverse space. My team has almost unanimously decided for this making cycle times faster.
I’m not sure if it will matter or not. I personally see the CG of the robot as a more important factor than the height. I’m sure taller robots tend to have higher CGs by nature…
I do think the notion that you are just going to be able to fly through these stages with multiple poles and angles faster than you would be able to go through the open lanes as maybe something thats being taken for granted.
That being said I’d probably still rather be shorter.
With the floor zones there is a multithreaded Arial Assist play style option this year.
Linking
2 possible strategies come to mind.
(1) a robot at the source collects a note and passes it to the “neutral zone” where a waiting 2nd robot passes it to their wing, where the 3rd robot scores it.
(2) a robot at the source collects a note, races to the “neutral zone” and passes to either of the other two robots in their wing so they can score it. meanwhile bot one races back to the source.
Issues:
(1) probably has a fair possibility of having the 1st pass “intercepted”.
(2) probably the source robot probably can’t effectively feed 2 scoring bots, so maybe one of them is doing full field cycles or is playing defense instead.
Passing outside of the one game that required it (2014) has, to my knowledge, never been a major strategy. You lose some time in dropping and picking up the notes and it’s hard to coordinate. I could see a 2013-style strategy (red alliance), where long shots are attempted on the speaker and one of the other two robots picks up the missed shots. Very easy to disrupt with defense, however.
This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.