This Ball handler, goal grabber topic seems to be a bit testy.
What I hear is,
‘we’re a ball handler, we know how to play the seeding matches’
and then
‘we have the most power, pick us for your alliance and we will push everyone around, just stay out of the way’.
I am starting to think that this game is ingenious.
If you want to talk about alliance and the cooperation between teams, this game takes the cake.
My observations to this point.
Ball machines seed higher than goal machines.
Goal machines are KEY in the elims.
The problem is, I am starting to see a dividing line between the two. One can’t survive without the other. Goal bots will not get to the elims without the ball bots, and ball bots can’t win the elims without the goal bots.
I agree that ball bots are key in qualifying and goal bots are necessary in elims. understanding the fact that boal bots can’t get to elims without ball bots, I don’t think that balls matter that much in elims. if one alliance gets all the goals (or at least two of them) and scatters all the balls (therefore making it hard to collect them), then that alliance has won their match. however, having seen these matches, I understand that the “ideal” alliances don’t always win. we (team 365, MOE) designed our robot this year for elimination rounds. we designed it to win every time. our capabilities of three goals freeze scoring (I’m done talking about our capabilities now). we’ve seen some pretty high torque and high traction robots there that could torque us around (but we changed things to fix that problem). basically what I’m trying to say is that in elims, you need a goal bot and a HIGH TRACTION/TORQUE goal bot. a lot of these teams that scurry around and gather all the balls and dump them into one goal only use wheel chair wheels. they do nothing for teams like us. just chiming in my two cents
two “balls-only” bots together would pick every ball around the world but wouldn’t have a place to put them in.
and two goal bots have to fight all the match for the goals, if not they loose.
The perfect alliance has one ball bot and one goal bot.
against two goal bots:
you let your opponent with two goals. they will be very satisfied and will be concerned only about protecting them, so you can freely score A LOT of balls in the goal your partner is holding and win.
hey guys…what what you say…double goal grabbers can score 90-100 points easily every match…and as far as i can see, in most regionals that would be in the top 8. So…that being said, there is no real basis to say who will score higher…lets live in harmony and rack up the scores!!!
Why 90 points? There were many regionals where NO robots had an avg. qualifying score of 90 points, despite having good ball robots present. For example, the Lone Star Regional, where Baxter (Team 16) was #1 seed and had an avg. QP of 80.38… In fact, after the first week (I’m not sure about the avg. QPs there), there were only 6 robots that managed to sustain an average QP of 90 points or above. I’d say a better “high” average score to suggest people find a goal robot for (a challenge which I don’t have the time to research =P) would be somewhere around the order of 80 QPs… just my 2 cents
Just to let you know, 90 qualification points is probably not enough. We seeded first in St. Louis with 105.43 qualification points, which a goal bot can never do, therefore, you better hope ya get picked by a ball bot
Oh… I just wanted to inform goal bots that not all ball bots have wheel chair wheels and run around on drill motors. You are forgetting the hybrids. Us hybrids can usually hold our own goal to score our own balls in. (ours has never been taken from us in 30 regional matches) So… just don’t forget stuff like that. I imagine our low drive system is up there with the top goal bots, in fact, we’ve pushed goal bots out of the way, and i’m sure i’m speaking for other ball bots too. I imagine 111 can do the same thing with their tank drive. Ball bots will definately be a force to be reckoned with. Not only will many of them be the pickers after qualification rounds, but they will also run the scores up in the elims. Yes, and that is against goal bots in the elims. I’m sure nationals will be very interesting to watch anyhow. I can’t wait to see how it all turns out!
our team went against the odds at the midwest regional by winning a match against two goal grabbers while paired with a goal grabber only ( we are a goal grabber also ). By preparing a very well thought out strategy we, team 930, and team 857 we able to push a goal around and protect, trading this duty as the other collected, and dumping sufficient balls in, to beat the other alliance. we maintained control of one goal without a goal function on either bot and placed 34 balls in it to win. This goes to show that the unexpected can happen and that strategy makes the difference of who wins or loses, and 2 ball bots can beat 2 goal manipulators!
I’ll give credit that ball bots are capable of putting up high scores, and that in Baxtors case, and wildstang, and the aztechs, they were able to achieve top spots with a strong proven strategy. Going after that however, the top scores drop significantly. We as a double goal bot were definately in the top three until we suffered some mechanical issues that had gone unresolved throughout construction. They have been fixed, and we are ready to roll…goal bots versus ball bots…lets just do it together.
*Originally posted by Mark_lyons *
**Tell me ONE goal bot that averaged 90 points in the seeding matches… **
My team was a ball/goal robot for the first 6 matches at NYC, and averaged 57.5 QPs on 3 wins and 3 losses. After that we igonored the balls on the field and became a strict goal robot. After that, we didn’t lose a match in the quals (4 - 0) and averaged 95.25 QPs, and moved up to the 2nd seed. So we didn’t do it for the whole competition, but look out at nationals
I used 90 points because Deej’s posting eluded to goal bot that can easily average 90 points. I just don’t know of any.
What I think this is going to come down to is strategy.
A team like 16 (and 157 if we were going), would be wise to work on their strategy PRIOR to the end of the seeding matches. Their track record indicates they will be a high seed, and can look ahead. Remember Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance!
I do feel bad for the goal bots though. Without them, a team will not win in the elims. The problem is, they are at the mercy of the teams selecting. If you decline an invitation because you don’t think you match well with the team picking you, your done! You can’t be chosen by anyone else.
I agree that double goal bots can score 90 points on occasion. It is done and can be done. But the seeding matches are a cumulation of points over a period of matches. It needs to be done consistantly.
ive been hearing a few arguments against ball bots that are not true in all cases. Someone mentioned that the ball bots all had 2 wheel drive and wheel chair wheels. No offense, but you are mistaken… do a little research if you dont believe me.
and someone else mentioned that ball bots are nothing if they dont have a goal to dump it in… theres many ball bots out there who dont have the capability to hold the goal, but there are also many who do, and many of those can hold thier goal with no problem.
While i do agree that a ball bot goal bot alliance is the best… that is if your definition of a goal bot is one that only hold goals, and a ball bot can only pick up balls… but having two ball bots that can hold one goal each would probably be an even better arrangement… i am also a fan of very powerful drive trains, i dont think speed it as important of a factor (i know there are situations where speed means everything, and if you dont get to the goal first theres no way to get it back… im just saying in general torque is more useful)
i guess what im saying is that im seeing a lot of labeling… everyone is forgetting that there is something in between a ball bot and a goal bot, some robots out there that can do both… and if you took off the ball mechanisms you would still have a decent goal bot
