# =========STRATEGY PROBLEM #4==========

Posted by Anton Abaya at 02/22/2001 3:04 PM EST

Coach on team #419, Rambots, from UMass Boston / BC High and NONE AT THE MOMENT! :(.

Robots A, B, C, and D are on the playing field:

Robot A, B, and C need the bridge.

A can pick up balls with an arm and can balance 2goals.
B can pick up balls with an arm and can balance 2goals.
C can pick up balls with an arm and uses the arm to push 1 goal to balance.
D limbos and has two hooks to balance 2 goals.

Whats the best strategy?

Posted by colleen - T190 at 02/22/2001 3:47 PM EST

Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Massachusetts Academy of Math and Science and WPI.

In Reply to: =========STRATEGY PROBLEM #4==========
Posted by Anton Abaya on 02/22/2001 3:04 PM EST:

First off… i think assuming in every match there is more than one team that can balance 2 goals is some what overestimating the abilities… but hey, it could happen…

and in that case… and case in point for all… any time in a match that you have 2 robots that can perform the same function… there are two things to analyze…

1.) Whose robot is the fastest and most reliable for that task?

2.) If the other 2 robots can’t do much of anything (or are just very limited) then analyze the 2 robots who do the same thing to see who has the most “other functions” that would help maximize points in a match… (i.e. of the 2 2-goalbalancing robots, one can score large balls, one can’t…neither of the other 2 can score large balls… you would want the large ball scorer to do that while the other balances to increase points)

On the topic of “considering points” etc and things you thought teams didn’t take into consideration in Quincy… i think you’ll find several teams with “playbooks” that already have most of the scores and scenerios analyzed for the various situtations… I’m working on one for WPI and I know of other teams who have already developed them…

Posted by Anton Abaya at 02/22/2001 5:24 PM EST

Coach on team #419, Rambots, from UMass Boston / BC High and NONE AT THE MOMENT! :(.

In Reply to: Some points to ALL strategy problems…
Posted by colleen - T190 on 02/22/2001 3:47 PM EST:

: First off… i think assuming in every match there is more than one team that can balance 2 goals is some what overestimating the abilities… but hey, it could happen…

: and in that case… and case in point for all… any time in a match that you have 2 robots that can perform the same function… there are two things to analyze…

: 1.) Whose robot is the fastest and most reliable for that task?

: 2.) If the other 2 robots can’t do much of anything (or are just very limited) then analyze the 2 robots who do the same thing to see who has the most “other functions” that would help maximize points in a match… (i.e. of the 2 2-goalbalancing robots, one can score large balls, one can’t…neither of the other 2 can score large balls… you would want the large ball scorer to do that while the other balances to increase points)

:
: On the topic of “considering points” etc and things you thought teams didn’t take into consideration in Quincy… i think you’ll find several teams with “playbooks” that already have most of the scores and scenerios analyzed for the various situtations… I’m working on one for WPI and I know of other teams who have already developed them…

what the heck am i spending time on this for?

okay well, not all teams are going out of their way to make “strategies”… i do however disagree that it is improbably to have more than two robots that can balance goals in a match.

it seems to me from the robots i have seen so far, that majority are picking up balls, followed by balancing goals, followed by controlling the bridge.

it is fairly common to see robots that can both pick up balls and have two hooks as an attempt to balance.

but like u said, who knows what will come about when we get down there.

i wish these “strategies” can be written down for everyone because i have high doubts that the organization of coaches and strategies will be ideal each time.

time will tell?
-anton

-anton

Posted by Chris Orimoto at 02/24/2001 3:45 AM EST

Student on team #368, Kika Mana, from McKinley High School and Nasa Ames/Hawaiian Electric/Weinberg Foundation.

In Reply to: =========STRATEGY PROBLEM #4==========
Posted by Anton Abaya on 02/22/2001 3:04 PM EST:

Sorry if my posts are getting repetitive, but I do think that this situation also calls for a similar strategy…I shall assume that big ball grabbers can also push the bridge down. This time A is on the stretcher.

C takes the first initial sprint over the bridge to grab a big ball. While this happens, B hooks onto the stretcher, goes to bridge, pushes bridge down and goes over. D is pushing near goal to alliance station. After B passes over the bridge, C would probably be ready to come back. C comes back and places big ball on near goal (which should be full). D limbos and heads for far goal. After dropping off the stretcher, B loads a big ball into the far goal, which is to be dragged by D. By the time this is done, C should have already crossed BACK over the bridge and into the endzone. D then takes far goal, grabs near goal and balances.

The assumption here is that, since D is “MADE” to be a hook-balancing robot, it should have the best balancing capabilities. If not, then B can do the balancing, but its “arm” would suggest that its slower, although that does not HAVE to be the case.

10+10+10+10+10+10+15=75
75*4=300

If done in under 1:30, then
3002=600
If done in under 1:45, then
300
1.5=450

Just my personal thoughts…

Chris, #368