Hey man, Passive intakes can be good. This year doesn’t have to be all traybots. Some can do really well. And @enothecool just did not understand what was happening about this thread. Half of it talks about passive intake while the other talks about traybots. Passive intakes do need to be accurate when intaking but they can still be good.
Guess a lot depends on what’s your definition of good?
Like what @weilin said, at my part of the world, passive intake is not gonna be good enough (at least for this season game).
And think weilin has even clearly explained why passive intake is not going to be good enough as well. Trust me - at high level games, you don’t have time to aim to be accurate before you intake.
Mind explaining how does passive intake translate to a faster speed?
Passive intake is not a magic pill.
And what worked in previous seasons doesn’t mean it will work for this season.
And really, even for most of the previous seasons, the high level teams normally tried to avoid passive intakes., unless the game elements made it easy for passive.
Don’t think @weilin is saying it has to be all traybot. He is just saying about whether it should be an active or passive intake.
Hmm… don’t think I can agree with this assessment - the MS teams in Singapore were already hitting stack of 8 cubes since June.
But yes, just like weilin, I would really like to see a real good passive intake that will be as effective as the active intake. I would want to save some motors too 
62019X has a completely passive intake, on a dr4b that could hold a bunch of cubes (7 I think) that was really successful when paired with a good traybot. I think passive intakes can be really good with the right partner. I’d say that a robot like 62019X is a better partner for a good tray than another tray would be.
Thanks your information was helpfull ive been looking at the goofy 448x alot is what im looking for where it can put cubes in tower and stack alot of them in a tray, im gonna find a way for the tray to flip up instead of the tray raising as cubes come in as i was wanting to do previously
This robot?
Smooth intake and outake for a passive intake system.
They did a good job for a passive, but with all due respect to them, this is the part that will cost them the (high-level) game - 1:24 to 1:27.
Don’t get me wrong - obviously it is a very good passive intake system over here, but still don’t think it is as efficient as a roller intake system.
And interesting view from you - about a stacker-bot making a better partner for a traybot than another traybot
Allow me to play the devil’s advocate over here - let’s consider the china’s traybot (that is already stacking an entire stack of 10 to 12 cubes), do you think they will need stacker-bot?
of course I think a lift bot will always lose to a tray 1v1, but I believe that one of those china traybots could easily manage three stacks on their own, and with a lift bot playing defense during this time, could do so quite unopposed as far as getting enough cubes goes. then after they make three stacks, they could switch roles, with the traybot playing defense and the lift adding to the already existing stacks. with this strategy, I feel confident in a tray lift alliance’s ability to beat 2 trays.
An interesting but very different game analysis from the way I see this season’s game.
-
Don’t think you will need specifically a stacker-bot (or a lift bot) to play defence.
-
Regarding stacking on top the existing stacks…
a) In order for the stacker-bot to be contributing to the existing stacks, it will need to lift up to at least 10 to 12 cubes high to stack (based on china’s traybot capacity). Not so sure if it is practical to even attempt it.
b) Assuming the opponents also have at least one china’s style traybot, think the field will run out of cubes for the stacker-bot to collect and stack further onto the existing stacks.
Le’ts take the lower limit of 10 cubes, and we are looking at high level games whereby all the 6 stacks (from both alliances) will be up - 6 x 10 = 60 cubes.
Meaning, the field will be left with 6 cubes for the towers?
And between choosing to put these remaining cubes to the towers or on existing stacks, I’d rather take the towers.
Ive seen one game where passive intakes worked, ITZ. Doing passive intakes in TT is a waste of time, they will be unreliable, and in contrary to ITZ, the game pieces have to be picked up from a certain angle, meaning you have to spend time lining it up then sucking it in. I dont see a reason to do something that will hold you back in the long run
You guys do what you want but I believe passives solve a lot of issues faced by most designs like compression and intake gearing.
I’d also argue that lining up the cubes isn’t even all that time consuming. Here’s an example of a bot without an intake of any kind, just an outward c channel, aligning the cubes.
Imagine what a bot like that can do with an added intake
edit: lol just noticed it was already posted in this thread