I’ve seen a few live streams and competitions and noticed that some speedy dr4b bots are matching if not doing better than bots that collect the mogo. So I’m wondering if it’s even worth it to make a bot that scored with the mogo?
This is an excellent thread topic. Personally, I have to think that internal stackers (or as you call them, bots that collect the mogo, but all offensive bots should be able to pick up mobile goals) are going to be faster in the long run, as they are more optimized. However, I say that as someone who has just finished building a so-called “external stacker.” I’m not sure if I am going to completely rebuild over the winter, or modify the current bot to make an internal stacker, or keep what I have. I have to think that I will switch to an internal stacker, because I see those being far more efficient in the long run. But then again, someone needs to do the stationary goal, so having a robot on an alliance that can stack on stationary goals faster (an external stacker) may offset the downside of being slower at stacking on mobile goals. The other consideration is that external stackers should be able to score the mobile goals faster, since they should have faster drives and just as good, if not better, mobile goal intakes. I am of course, speaking in optimal terms.
I don’t think its worth it anymore, there are so many optimal internal stacker designs should be able to easily take care mogo only robots. For example would be us and our X or K team, We should be able to win a match against just mogo robots or a mogo robot and an internal stacker. We have 1 minute and 45 seconds which should be enough to do at least 10 or 11 cones on 2 mogos and 3-6 cones on the other mogo in the 10 pt zone and 1 cone in the 20 pt mogo. The best way to go is make an internal stacker. The mogo robot however would be very useful in skills. For skills I would say make a 10 motor turbo pushbot with a 2 motor mogo intake.
I have so many matches where an internal stacking bot would be completely useless. Sometimes teams decide to dump the mogo in the zones with fewer cones on top. Sometimes there’s 15 seconds left where the internal stacking bot would have nothing to do, and struggle with stacking cones on stationary goals. Where as an external stacking bot. would easily just score on, scored mogo’s. Some speedy external stackers can match internal stackers.
Good point, but that also comes down to poor match strategy. Also, internal stackers should all be programmed with an external stacking mode, for topping off mobile goald or stacking on stationary goals.
Just remember that it still isn’t mid season yet. There’s still a lot of improvement that is being done by teams. I think one of the reasons externals are catching up to internals right now is just because internals can be harder to tune (much harder). So maybe it’s just because it’s early (ish) or maybe externals really can be good, i don’t know for certain; only time will tell I guess.
I don’t understand - why is the internal stacker not able to stack on stationary goal?
If it couldn’t, then I would think it is not properly designed.
And I agree with @Aponthis , it sounds like either a badly executed game plan or poor coordination between the 2 teams in the alliance.
Edit: another advantage that internal stacker has over external is that it is almost impossible to stop them from stacking, whereas it is easy to stop an external stacker from stacking. This will be crucial when the season starts to see more defensive play.
Our team is using a dr4b. While it is a good option, after we started, we saw some other bots that had a better design, and collecting cones faster, like some bots with a 2-bar and a chain lift, and other bots that just collected mobile goals and had no other apparent function. The dr4b is defiantly the most common bot in our club, and it seems to be working pretty well, depending on how you build it and use it. I think it is better than bots that just collect the mobile goal, though we have a dr4b with a rocker lifts so that we can keep the mobile goal with us as we stack. The best two robot designs that I have seen are the one I have just described, and a 2 bar that has a mobile goal collector
Yea I agree, meta game will reveal a lot about which type of robot will end up at the world finals.
At the end of the day, the differentiating factor is driver ability. The smarter driver will come out on top with any type of robot.
I 100 percent agree with this.
Well… a good driver cannot make a useless robot useful, but driving is certainly a huge factor. External stacker is more reliant on driving, internal stacker is more reliant on programming… if you do it properly.
I agree, intuitive controls on an internal stacker are essential for getting the most out of it. Speed and accuracy with an internal stacker will probably get you to the top.
We have an internal stacking robot but we have an attachment to our mobile goal intake as well as some programming to allow us to line up and stack on a stationary goal pretty quickly. I think that if you have an internal stacker you need to be able to stack on the stationary as well.
As programmer for an internal stacker, I would REALLY like to know what these intuitive controls are because I cannot think of anything.
the only reason for an external stacker being better than an internal stacker would be a difference in driver control and fine tuning. If an equally fine-tuned and equally driving external and internal stacker fought, the internal stacker would win every time. Internal stacker has more potential, so use it.
And the stationary goal is a death trap. You can score a good 3 cones on a mobile goal in the time you can score 1 on a stationary goal.
Also, you can score externally on scored mobile goals as an internal stacker if you build it correctly.
Yea, but see if there are 2 robots on each alliance able to stack on the stationary goal and the match is very close you might want to battle for that highstack on stationary.
It would prove to be quite inefficient to stack on mogos already in the zones, as there is a risk of knocking it over, and it would be much quicker to stack on the stationary goals.