While surfing youtube today, i found this match, so far this one of the best matches i have seen so far.
That claw dumper can score cubes and stars every 5 sec, whuch is extremely impressive as most of star-stuck matches are extremly slow…
Thanks for sharing, I had missed this one.
I agree that that rate of scoring is very impressive compared to most of the other match videos that I’ve seen so far this season.
What do you suppose gives this claw design in particular the ability to hold onto and release so many stars?
From what i have seen from claws, they seem to be pretty slow at grabbing stars and realising them, i believe that 1:5 gear ratio for the claw is fairley reasonable, with elastics. As for the arms i see that it is a single bar, with at least 6 motors, for claws, we have seen bulky and heavy 6 bars, which seem do demand a lot of torque unlike that single bar and there is driver pratice
I think it is clear that this robot has been fine-tuned to the point where the angle of dump, amount of “tip” the robot allows, grabbing range of claw, etc. are all able to shave off seconds from the overall cycle time while still letting objects be scored into the far zone. I feel like this style of dumper is extremely powerful in early season competitions, particularly because it can be built quickly and then continually improved with practice and time.
We’ve heard and seen catapults with similar stats and fire rates though, so I am eagerly looking forward to a clash between a robot similar to this one and a catapult robot of similar caliber.
One shining example is XLR8’s robot, but the speed of scoring with these robots is insane
I can’t tell if the ratio on the claw is 1:3 or 1:5.
Does anyone know?
Man, every time i see a video like this i go through like a civil war inside me about whether or not a catapult is worth it. I really don’t see how this design could possibly get that much better. Maybe a faster raise and lower for the lift, but that’s pretty much it.
One thing to consider is that when watching this video, most of the objects are in clumps, which allows this design to excel. Part of the reason the scoring rate is so high is because the situation that this game was in, with 4 claw bots, allowed each robot to pick up a ton of stars at once. Try to imagine how this design would work if the objects weren’t so clumped together. Realistically they would only be doing 1 to 2 stars per second. That’s what makes Starstruck cool, though, because the rate in which this design can perform goes up when they are losing because there are more objects on one side. Ultimately what I’m saying is that a catapult will outperform the claw because it can spread the objects out better, which will make this design less efficient. To me, the same principle will hold true for the “traditional” dump bot.
Wow i really like this idea, it works pretty well. Been debating something like this since the reveal, wish i actually went with this idea lol
The clawbot is obviously well-built, but I am REALLY impressed with that driver. Good skills for this early in the year.
Elegant design and good driving skills are a good recipe for success. Moreover, the design can be refined to optimize scoring opportunities. Well done!
Perhaps this will soon be the most common bot we see in starstruck, as this could possibly defeat a dump bot
only weakness is towards wallbot, but if someone is making a wallbot, that’d be impressive
People can always make their arms longer 
Aren’t wallbots illegal?
They are legal if the wall is on the same side that you start in and “doesn’t trap your opponent”.
But they trap your opponent on the opposite side of the fence and provide no avenue of escape.
Your opponent is already trapped on the other side of the fence. That’s what the fence is for.
If the wall is on your side, then technically your opponent isn’t trapped. Also,I quoted the trapping part thinking that people will realize that I don’t want a trapping debate.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure that was a joke. @Highwayman is one of the “clarification champions” of SG6a, and I think he (she?) was referencing the ambiguity of that rule.
I was responding to the response to my question.
My students lost to these guys in the quarters and let me tell you, it wasn’t just the robot that won it (there were multiple robots that could perform the same), but the driver was just phenomenal. You could tell that this student put a LOT of time in practice.