I would like to add that at week 4 in 2017 with the very terrible KPA, the average KPA rank points were sitting at 1.11% of matches where teams got the 40 KPA. (week 3 being 00.93% of matches (yes less than 1%)) It will be quite hard to predict exactly whether or not it will be worse but seeing the trend in 2017 where we jump from ~1.6% week 4 to ~10.5% when we get to worlds, I think that we will probably be seeing it rise by quite a bit. It will probably end up the same as 2017 ± .5%
Nice analysis. However, I would like to add that much of the kpa challenge was done in autonomous, and there was little incentive to defend it, so I expect this year’s success rate to not rise as sharply.
Is this a poll?
It is now.
Did your team design your robot with the intention of being able to complete a rocket?
- Yes, by ourselves
- Yes, with some help from alliance partners
- No (without significant alliance partner help)
My answer is yes, but definitely in AriMB’s second category. We designed a fast all-levels hatch bot, so we can’t complete a rocket on our own. We can (and have) completely hatch a rocket (plus a couple of other hatches) in a match. With the right help from alliance partners placing cargo, we do have the potential to make a rocket RP happen. We’re hoping to make it work at NC district Pembroke.
All I can say is, the best laid plans of mice and men…
The defense is getting better an better. Rockets are the easiest to defense. I have a feeling we’ve already peaked. Nothing to do but wait it out and see.
Yes. We designed to complete the rocket with the 4-bar heavily derived from Ri3D Zou Keepers. Instead of sprocket and chain to run the arm, we used a lead screw powered by Redline and encoders (which we broke 3 times). Not efficient to do hatch with the kind of mech we started with (velcro). Scratched the idea, instead came up with a low level hatch mechanism- worked alright, never really used in teleop, we were better cargo than hatch.
I like the idea for pit scouters to go up to teams and ask them what their robot can do. The biggest ‘flaw’ during pit scouting is the robot may be designed to do certain tasks but cannot do it effectively. This is why i encourage our pit crew to say “we are designed to do… but may not do it effectively” over “we can do…” without actual testing. Any other teams out there with this problem?
Our opinion is that every team totally believes in their design. How it really works out can only be determined in live competition. That’s why we make a big deal about scouting from the stands. In each match, we have a scouter for each robot. The statistics you see coming out of blue alliance (or take your pick of reporting apps) are alliance stats. Ours are individual robot stats. We still scout pits, but only for “design type”, “design strength”, and starting expectations. It would make me nervous to have a team tell me they didn’t believe in their design. Saying that we designed for X but haven’t tested thoroughly is a reasonable response.
We did design it, and with some tuning of strategy we completed it a couple of times this weekend.
At the next event we’ll work on getting some counter-D going in more matches. However, sometimes it’s just as reasonable to cut bait and go for winning the match with 3RP.
We designed our robot to quickly score hatches and cargo. Left alone we will finish a rocket. (8 rockets through 2 events some solo). Efficient defense will stop the rocket build since we will switch to scoring what isn’t being defended. There is no point in specifically finishing the rocket in playoffs.
In our first event, MBR, we completed 5 Rockets solo. Missed another one by a single cargo. This includes our first match in 2019.
So proud of my team!
This year, our scouting has gotten slightly better than previous years. It’s pretty hard to watch a robot constantly do what it does every match for 2 days. I can expect all the freshmans to want to scout 254 with their autonomous last year and not want to scout us last year.
I added the new “dib your team” where people can call dibs on teams they want to scout beforehand. Only 1 person wanted to specifically scout a certain team. No one else did.
Havent come up with a really good scouting strategy especially to keep the scouters paying attention to the robots. The main reason we dont necessarily form scouting alliances is we dont think we can do it.
At Rocket city, there was a team with 6 students and 2 mentors (or something like that). There was just no way for them to scout. We just gave them our database after the last match on Friday night. What else could we do?
We just assign scouters to stations (Red 1, Red 2, Red 3, Blue 1, Blue 2, Blue 3). They scout whoever is at that station.
While our robot is capable of finish a rocket in a match by ourselves, a lot of factors can come in to play to hinder our success of finishing a rocket by ourselves. We have resorted to putting the cargo ship as the #1 priority to fill in qual matches, as cargo points are the first tie-breaker and give 3 points per cycle vs the 2 points per cycle that hatch panels give. Winning the match is #1, getting the climb RP is #2, then filling the rocket is #3 on our list of priorities.
Our design priorities were these
- Manipulate both hatch and cargo
- Fast level 3 HAB climb
- Be capable of placing hatch and panel all rocket levels
- Pick up both panels and cargo from the floor
Yes, we did. My team, 5010: Tiger Dynasty, had planned on completiting a rocket all by ourselves at the beginning of build season. So far the fastest we’ve been able to do it was in just under 3 minutes without sandstorm and defense bots in play. Even though we designed for the rocket, we found that based of of scouting data, we are one of the fastest cargo placing bots in Indiana at the moment. When hatches are on the cargo ship and rocket, we can fill them extremely quickly.
Would you be willing to share your scouting data from the Tippy event? We have been keeping very close track of how many cargo balls we have been scoring, and are interested to see how our numbers compare to what other people’s scouting says about us.
Also, to make sure I stay on topic with the tread, we didn’t design around the rocket at all, and instead choice the cargoship. We choose to work within our abilities for the current level of the team. Build simple, bag early, get milkshakes.
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.