@1200 I’m curious to know what your unbeatable interaction zone autonomous is? Because at our competitions, anyone who attempted a “dump” on the 30 inch goal were eventually countered by the finals by just a ramming autonomous.
A well built tank tread design can compete with a 6-bar. 
I actually think that a six bar lift could/will beat a tank tread design. Mainly because there are more ways of descoring and other designs.
@PaperTowels9876
I guess robots just vary to much from region to region to makes these generalizations. I know that in my region and most regions I have have seen videos out of, the NZ designs or something similar take the cake, but in your region it might be different. We will see what is the best at worlds. (And yes, I did have to say cake. :p)
Edit: I forgot to mention that 6-bars can also reach over the wall in interaction to score across while may tank treads either can’t or only can inaccurately. This will also be important I feel.
i think the winner will be NZ, special, special (not calling names… ;))
here is my reasoning:
if you have all NZ bots face off (assuming they are all maximized for efficiency), the only thing that determines who will win is luck (stacked in a special way, dropped objects), or strategy (field placement, blocking, ect)
now only when you go deep into strategy, that you realize that you can specialize robots that does a certain strategy WELL (better than a typical NZ bot can) (such as a wallbot) you might have to sacrifice some scoring capabilities, but if done right, it would be strategically smarter and, if executed properly, win the match
If nz designs are the best, then the New Zealand teams will win worlds because they have the best nz designs. I watched their nationals and 2915a has the best nz style bot I have seen.
Yes, in our region NZ designs are always the winning robots in our region. Well and a first time design
hey guys, get on chatango!
What about a max-efficiency NZ design that is also “special,” without sacrificing any speed or scoring potential? 
While NZ intakes are very high scoring, tank tread intakes can win. My team did win a tournament against 2 NZ robots with a tank tread robot. However our alliance partner was also a NZ robot. It’s possible.
Also, many NZ robots are not effective if their drivers are poor. You’ll see many NZ robots tip over if their drivers are bad.
Could someone please define what is meant by the NZ design? I may be wrong, but I believe that the design you are referring to originally came from 24C very early in the season.
I think that either the winning alliance will be NZ + 1107B + wall bot or NZ + NZ + NZ or NZ + NZ + wallbot because there is a high chance of the first 20 teams being NZ (1107B could get in too but it depends in part on their match schedule)
1107B’s current strategy of just staying in the interaction zone could be easily defeated by 2 NZ bots and their alliance partner has broken down or is paired with a protobot or something like that.
There is a high debate on which team started the design. I think maybe 24C inspired the beginning teams, but it was the NZ teams that made it explode, which is why the NZ teams are known for it more.
I agree with the NZ explosion. However I do know teams that had this design since May.
Yes, and 3057 had this design very early. On my reveal thread, the very first comment was by 3057, and that was back in early June, and when I believe the “different way of going about it” was the side-roller intake.
~Jordan
Well, last year AURA used the 6-bar with Chups at Worlds. So it could have started with that in New Zealand.
I think a very tuned tank tread robot could match a NZ bot. Our tank tread bot can score across the isolation zone too. And our robot is so fast that we can easily out run most of the robots on the field. I also think that autonomous is going to be killer this year. If you can score most of the objects in the interaction zone during autonomous, there will be less to do during driver allowing our team to open the gate at about the 1:50 mark.
Our A team beat you to it.
I’m not really interested in who popularized the idea for twin side rollers because even if nobody posted it, there’d still be a large number of them just because of convergent design. Just add in stuff like 6bar arms and fold out ramps, etc.
The thing is, most of the designs are “efficiency” designs: they score as fast as possible. Vertical intakes, NZ rollers, top-down clean sweep rollers, dual tank tread… They all play the game normally. It’s like the debate last year between needles and claws. A lot of it comes down to how well optimized they are, then driver skill, then strategy, and then luck.
this statement is incredibly false edit i realize that it might seem like i am saying 2915a doesn’t have the best, but i was mainly saying that the whole “nz will win world’s” thing is false. I watched most of nationals, and I found that there were some GREAT robots, but there were also some not so great robots. I would have to say that the NZ talent is not much better (if that) than many U.S teams. 2915a had an amazing robot though