Our team has been discussing it, and we’ve come up with four general arcetypes that we think the majority of bots will fall into this year. I’m interested to see if you all agree with this analysis, where you disagree, and if there’s any niche we’re completely missing!
Rocket Bot
Able to place hatches and cargo on all three levels of the rocket.
Generally tall, so many will be unable to climb to HAB 3
Can generally solo-complete the upper levels of at least one rocket in a game
Will run tank drive for stability and to help with any opponents playing defense
Cargo Bot
Able to place hatches and cargo on only the lowest level.
Generally small, therefore most likely to be able to climb to the third level
Can be aided by rocket bots once the rocket(s) is/are full
If you’re going to see mecanum, it’s here - defense will generally be played on the tall, flashy rocket bot, and these bots can dodge defenders to simply go to another ship
Hatch Specialist
Able to place only hatches on only the lowest level.
Generally short, but most will be unable to climb to HAB 3
Can generally solo-complete all low hatches on the cargo ship and at least one rocket in a game, after null hatches
Will likely run tank drive due to simplicity and reliability
Tank Bot
Focuses on playing defense, hopes to be picked by an alliance with two rocket bots.
Generally short, but due to focus on size and weight most will be unable to climb to HAB 3
Focuses on blocking opponents from their rocket
Most likely archetype to run treads for extra pushing power, also likely to just use traction wheels
Obviously there will be hundreds, if not thousands, of robots that fail to fit perfectly into any of these categories, especially from upper-level teams (who I expect are very likely in particular to be able to fill a rocket and climb). But right now, this is how our team predicts the majority of teams will approach their designs. Please let us know if and where you disagree!
I would expect Tank bot, Hatch bot, and the Cargo bot to contain some mechanism that aides other teams to the second or third platform. I mean, they are already limited in what they could do on the field, so I would expect them to do something to at least help other bots.
The 30-inch limit makes ramps hard to do, and most teams going for defense or hatches only will, in our opinion, be less experienced than those going for rocket bots or cargo bots that can do multiple things well already.
We know that the higher-level teams will be perfectly capable of both. We do not expect that will be the majority.
An elevator is much easier than a stair climber on a tall bot. As this list focuses on bot archetypes by most average teams, the high-end bots already tend to defy this kind of cookie-cutter description.
In my opinion, most “Rocket specialists” are going to choose a defense capable team in alliance selection as a second pick to compete against other “Rocket specialists”
I’d like to differentiate between defense capable and defense oriented. Being able to play defense and defend against it is a necessity in all games (except 2015). However, designing your robot specifically to play defense without also focusing on other parts of the gameplay is nearly as effective of a strategy this year as it has in other years (ex: 2014)
D Bot… a small fast sturdy bot with vertical appendages that stick up and vibrate like a sonicare at 1’3" just to bother Cargo Ship deliveries and upper stage rocket deliveries to create at-risk cargo and Hatch Covers…then ferry those items to the home side partners.
Start narrow or small enough to fit 2 small bots on single L2
In endgame have a ramp to get bots to L3 or able to get to L3 on own
Definitely concur on rocket bots and cargo bots, though I’m not entirely sure cargo bots are “most” likely to do the L3 climb, because they’re likely to come from low-mid resource teams. Tank Bot is just a drive train, and there are always some of those, either by design or failure of other mechanisms. Hatch Specialist makes sense strategically (can’t score cargo without hatches), but the greater difficulty of manipulating hatches vs cargo is likely to make most teams break high (Cargo) or low (Tank) of this mark. I actually expect to see more teams who can manipulate cargo but not hatch covers, because they tried both but only succeeded at cargo.
Also, should note that most cargo bots and hatch specialists can also place hatches and maybe cargo on the lowest level of the rocket(s).
I feel you underestimate the speed at witch most teams could do hatches or cargo. For example you said a rocket only robot would be able to do the entire, 6 hatches and 6 cargo, alone. That would be every 8.75 seconds of teliop (not including end game). I think that’s far too quick. My team estimated a 15 second cycle time for most fast robots, but take that as you will.
Secondly I have the same problem with your hatch specialist robots. I doubt a team that decides to only go hatches, likely less experienced teams due to the relative simplicity, will be able to have a hatch cycle time of 10 seconds. Again, thats just from my estimations, but I feel that only the best of the best could pull cycle times that quick.
My apologies, “solo-complete” is misleading - that is meant to imply not that they can do all hatches/cargo on their own, but for the rocket bot means complete the (upper levels of) a rocket and for the hatch specialist means complete all lower hatches after null hatches are taken into account. I’ll probably edit that to sound less like they can move super fast - after all, this is for the average bot.
No stress, i’m glad I could help! Otherwise I think your predictions are head on. I’d be interested in hearing what you think the break up will be in terms of ratio.
For example, for the average district event, my team estimated that the bottom preforming 20 teams will be hatch only. The middle 10 teams would likely be Cargo Bots. And the top 10 will be rocket teams. With a few tank bots sprinkled in the bottom 20. What do you think of that?
