What does everyone think is more important this year? Manueverability to quickly traverse the field and nab balls, or traction to hold your ground and push other robots? I’m privy to traction myself (our team decided not to do a swerve drive, so manueverability basically implies mechs which =/= traction). I think a strong 6wd system would give excellent traction while not being too unwieldy. I know it’s a tradeoff between the two, so what’s everyone else thinking about?
We’re thinking that a good mix of the two will be helpful. Since the object is to get and score balls, maneuverability is going to be important, and also if a robot is playing defense by blocking/pushing then that robot is not scoring. Then again, there will be times when you don’t want to be pushed around, so having decent traction, but not so much that it makes you robot hard to steer, should be helpful.
In other words, it’s a draw 
Driving over a bump with a 6wd robot looks scary. Adding two more wheels might work better, but we haven’t tried it yet so I dont know for sure.
I honestly think that maneuverability is a big part this year because scoring balls is not the problem, it is the fact that your robot will either have to climb over the bumps or go through the tunnels and for that, you will need to have good maneuverability. I know that Traction will make a difference but you want to be able to maneuver your robot and turn it if you have to. Lets say that you are going over the hump and you are blocked by another robot when trying to come off the hump, What are you going to do? You have to be able to maneuver yourself a lot quicker so that way you are not trapped there for the whole game because if that robot doesn’t move, you are stuck there unless you have good maneuverability. I know that my team seems to be focusing more on maneuverability than traction because I know that we do not want to be stuck in the situation that I stated above. What I said above is defiantly something to consider. But that is just my opinion…
- The two are not mutually exclusive.
- Strafing != manueverability.
You really have to aim for both, IMO. Maneuverable to be able to receive moving balls and traction to hold your ground on the defense.
I wish people (probably myself included) would stop using “maneuverability” as a catch all term for any kind of movement. It leads to “Well, robots have to be maneuverable this year, so let’s build an omni drive! That’s more maneuverable!”
Does your robot need to be able to move in a straight line quickly? Turn well? Strafe? How important are each of these relative to each other? Relative to traction and pushing power? Are any of these uncompromisable?
You’ll quickly get hung up if you decide “we need to be maneuverable” and leave it at that.
Go with a swerve/crab drive.
With the right programming, it will be a dangerous machine.
Like the Ovechkin of Robotic soccer.