Nothing but net strategy?

It seems alot of the robots revealed so far have had similar strategies: they drive around the field, intake the balls, and shoot into the high goal from various (presumably preset?) places on the field. It also looks like what matters most is the number of balls in the high goal. Is this a fair assessment?
Alot of the robots I’ve seen so far virtually ignored the elevation part of the game… Why? because it’s only 50 points? or they didn’t want to reveal too much too early? or what?
How important do you think lifting will be for nbn?
What are your thoughts on strategy?

The high goal is definitely worth much more than the low goal. The low goal isn’t really worth it, and you can’t fit all too many balls in it anyways.

I think the main reason that we haven’t seen much elevation yet is because it is early in the season and elevation is pretty hard. Most teams (that have built a robot) focused on the shooting first, and said they are working on elevation strategies.

I think the reason for what you are observing is that most teams decided that the most important first step in this game is a working shooter for the high goal. I think the reason that you dont see the lifters yet, is that they present a significant engineering challenge, if you lifter is internal to your robot base it takes up a lot of room, possibly taking away from a shooter or an intake, and if you have it outside of you base, you have some serious issues with tipping. The other problem is you need some sort of mechanism for holding/grabbing that will work on any robot. I think as we get later in the season you will see more lifters

Yeah that’s basically Nothing but Net at this point, likely will get more complicated and aggressive once we see more high-performing robots in competitive matches.


I think it’s because a lot of teams (at least the ones we’ve seen) have been focusing on building something to shoot balls into the high goal and just haven’t spent much time on elevation yet. Shooting is more or less mandatory while elevation is more of a bonus.

It’ll be important by the end

By the way, it sounds like Iron Wave’s soon to be revealed robot will be able to elevate other robots

Well in two days you will know:D. But if you all remember that last year many teams lost matches because of there skyrise auton not working on the new feilds like us or 62 in the arts division. 10 points was less than 10% of the total points last year. This year a match may be as much as 300 points and 50 ponts is 16% of that, elevating will be important.

my kids strategy has been to focus on shooting first because WOOT LAUNCHING STUFF!

Seriously. I’m pretty sure the reason teams have focused on shooting and not elevating because, while interesting from an engineering perspective, elevating is boring.

Shooting however, is much easier, more straight forward (There are these known mechanisms to shoot balls lets try them) and very rewarding. I don’t see my kids even thinking about elevation until they get bored of launching stuff across the garage.

Well last year i thought it was boring looking at RobotC code for days on end fore a 3 then 4 then 5 skyrise auton but it did prove rewarding. Though i do like launching balls better than jamming your finger in an elevating system:D.

Nothing to do with teams only having 1 robot and they want to see what everyone else shows up to competition with so they can start figuring out how to elevate it?

I think we will start to see teams getting elevation systems once someone reveals an effective and universal way of doing so (like how the swinging Skyrise arm design spread out to numerous teams mid-late season). Then, we might see an astonishingly effective design a few weeks before worlds, like 62’s arm.

It’s always been my thought that high elevation was assumed for dedicated teams like the ones who frequent this forum. In other words, high elevation won’t be a problem at higher level competition, it will only present a challenge in design and building. 25 or 50 points may not seem like much compared to the top possible scores, but I have a feeling it’ll decide a lot of early matches, and it’ll be necessary at later ones.

last year, of the two robots per color, one robot did the cubes and the other built and filled up the skyrise. (generally)
I wonder, will there be a similar kind of set up this year, where robots specialize into distinct groups and what would those groups be,

I agree that elevating will decide the matches at the end of the season. It is an important ability your robot cam have. Look at the early matches this season, every one is already almost filling up goals. There will be three types of robots: The all purpose robots able to lift others and score balls fast, but these will burn out easier; there will be light-weight robots that score balls extremely fast that will be lifted, these will get around the field fast; then last of all there will be lifting robots that will also block others from scoring. But each design needs a compatible robot, that may mess up qualification matches for teams. Just my opinion , what is y’all’s.

I’d imagine both robots collecting balls and shooting, and then going for the driver loads. However, an alliance may also have one robot shoot driver loads and the other go collect and shoot/give to their partner.

For collecting balls quickly, I’ll go with a quick base to reach the piles before the opposing alliance does.

I think that NbN will be a lot like sack attack in the sense that once matchloads are gone in 25 seconds, there will be more 1v1 squables for scoring elements. Blockibg , defense and manuverablility may be the deciding factor of matches since there is no descoring, so lost points don’t come back.

Again like I said, elevating will be necessary.:cool:

As is always the case, there are more ways to win than people realize, so I like to avoid considering any component of a game ‘neccessay.’ It may be necessary for high scores, but anything over 341 is overkill (316 if you don’t elevate).

I think what most people are forgetting is that in terms of winning margin at the highest level (when all objects are used), shooting objects off the floor is twice as valuable because it denies points from your opponent. If we consider there are 10 pyramids, each has a potential value of 25 points (3x5 + 1x10) but it denies another 25 points from an ideal opponent, making one pile equivalent to high elevation.

Consider these two strategies:
Red (can’t elevate):
-All 32 pre/driver control loads (160)
-6 pyramids (150)
Blue (scores all remaining points):
-All 32 pre/driver control loads (160)
-4 pyramids (100)
-High elevation (50)

Red (can elevate):
-All 32 pre/driver control loads (160)
-5 pyramids (150)
-High elevation (50)
Blue (scores all remaining points):
-All 32 pre/driver control loads (160)
-5 pyramids (125)
-High elevation (50)

In both scenarios the match is tied except for autonomous, and the blue alliance has scored all possible points. Therefore, both alliances are just 11pts away from a perfect chokehold (guaranteed victory against any opponent) so long as they execute properly. As these two red strategies are functionally equivalent for teams who want to win worlds, the choice between these two options becomes which is most realistic.

Because the red strategy requires fewer mechanisms and does not depend on compatibility, most teams seem to be going that direction at this point in the season. The risk to option two is that is either robot is too late, stalls out, or disconnects, that is 50 points and probably a match down the drain.

That is my analysis, but I am curious what conclusions other teams make.

Edit: This analysis is only on strategies to win worlds, so if that is not realistic for your team, these strategies may not be in your best interest.

Yes, but why merely beat the competition when you can annihilate the competition?:smiley:

I really like your analysis, but I doubt any NbN match will be quite that clean and organized. I’d certainly be happy to see a match like that, though.

My point was mostly that if your objective is consistent wins, the ability to consistently execute a chokehold should be a higher priority than the ability to set record scores when opponents stay out of the way.

If you want a good sense of how this plays out, look at any green egg strategy. 44 has always been masters of guaranteeing victory with as simple scoring as possible. If you look at the round up scoring you will get how they could (and consistently did) chokehold their opponents without scoring on the wall goals or the ladder.

Unless 44 or Blue Rooster is involved, it probably will be a bit messy, but I think that with this thinking you can easily evaluate the significant of consistency (spoiler alert: huge).