Vex teams, what are some predictions about a Vex game’s meta you made in your notebook that were hilariously wrong in the future?
Same here lol
“Lookin at the game pieces, it is smart to start with a design that can high a chore caps consistently and quickly.”
“Once our robot can consistently own the majority of posts, we will begin development on a shooter.”
Basically I thought ball mechs would be hard
Double catapults would be too hard to tune to make them a viable strategy
Itz would only have 5-6 cones on each mobile goal
“platforms won’t matter if our bot is good enough”
Didn’t park and lost by 2 points
Caps were op if done right
Same with @224x, we had a full on equation showing that focusing on caps could score more points than flags [caps] 6 + 6(2)=18 and [flags] 3+6(2)=15 but I frogot to figure in that we were planning either claw and lift or claw and shooter. So it should have been 3 + 6(2) + 6=21. Spent about two months before my team realized the error and it didn’t really matter because we spent too much time fighting over caps while the other team could easily shoot flags without having to constantly re toggle them. Fixed our design to a fly wheel and actually did well in a competition.
We decided the only way to get on the TP platforms was to build a massive tank tread base that weighed 15 pounds, and then we tried to power it with cortex motors.
One of the teams from my school basically tried the same thing. The base itself barely fit on a platform and used eight cortex motors.
we had an idea called “hatbot” where a main, large robot would pick up a smaller one, which would hold two balls. The robot would then hit the lower flag with its base, and the upper two with the balls that the upper robot was holding. It was OP, but illegal.
(This was for VEXU TP btw).
In ITZ that passives we’re bad (not exactly the question but it ended up being the best).
Caps were pretty bad until worlds, when everyone good built robots that could do both caps and balls.
I’m talking about specializing in caps, which most people thought was a horrible idea, the only issue is that your partner had to be able to hold their own upfront. At worlds I used every variation of the cap bot strategy and it worked really well whenever both opponents were after the flags I posted all six caps before going to front field to play defense. Whenever my opponent was playing defense on me I would post four caps and then defend turning it into a 1v1 for the flags while I was defending one corner in the back field, which is way easier than it’s made out to be.
The issue with cap bots wasn’t what most people think the issue is that the majority of cap bots at worlds were really long due to the 1814D style claw they used. This style of claw was fast but large, team 37409A was 15 inches when folded up but whenever extended they were approximately 24 inches long. Early season 1814D was even longer which made them really easy to play defense on.
Another issue w/ having a large intake like that was also tipping. When we first made the intake it severely restricted the size of our base. The main issue we dealt with at worlds was defense though as we had no great experience with it in our region.
Halfway through worlds our intake potentiometer started reading 180° around, presumably due to the heavy defense played against us. None of our mechanical stops were passed and the joint axle had not twisted or lost its previous rotation. We had to unscrew the mount for the potentiometer and turn it around to fix the issue
“pAsSiVeS aRe TrAsH”
Ok, I misinterpreted your comment. I agree with you: not having ball-shooter capabilities was fatal last year.
“Double catapult shot once miss twice, I’m going to build a double puncher. It would shoot faster than a puncher with angle adjuster.”
Lost semi-final at states. My TP season ended when I was so close to worlds.
It still hurts when I think about my terrible decision now
Double punchers were basically double catas with extra power, you got it this year!