What do you guys think the ideal worlds alliances will look like? Im predicting an alliance made up of a really fast stacking passive bot that can get about 12 cones paired with a slower stacking active robot that can get high stacks (probably around 15-18) and stationary? Do you guys think there will be a lot of passive bots at worlds or has the hype died down…
The competition’s gonna be cutthroat at the division level. Remember, all those teams (for the most part) have won at their state/provincial/regional championship to get to Worlds. Honestly, I think anything’s up in the air for now. It’s just a matter of who’s gonna stack the fastest in the match, in my opinion.
Think it is quite straight forward when comes to looking for the first pick - the seeded teams will be looking for another robot that will complement its scoring, eg. the good outfield (that can’t do matchload that well) will look for another robot that can do matchload, etc.
But since most teams from the same school/club/organisation will be spread throughout the different divisions, scouting will be very important. You can’t just rely on the usual “we-have-always-been-practicing-together” logic anymore.
And teams/robots complementing each other will also include the autonomous routines. Autonomous bonus is worth 2 highest stack bonus. So it will make a difference during the elimination.
And my guess for the 2nd pick will be a defensive-bias robot. May or may not be totally defensive robot, but one that can play defence really well.
I really don’t think we will be seeing a lot of high scoring games in worlds, simply there won’t be that many instances that the teams will be left untouched or unharessed to do the scoring. So there will be a role for the defensive-bias robots.
I have to disagree on the defensive robot part. We went through our entire season without a defensive robot interfering. At Indiana states not a single defensive robot made it to quarter finals.
Arizona elimination rounds were mostly a hot mess of defense, despite no hint of major defense from good teams (teams that have any other choice) throughout the season. Highest score was 10 points lower than what we had gotten in January, and only because the alliance opposing the first seed did not play much defense for some reason. No dedicated defensive bots did well, mind you, but there was plenty on display from the offensive bots.
Most of the top teams in each division will all be really great at stacking on and off the loader. I think the deciding factors in alliance selection will be autonomous and defensive capability.
+1
+7682
I don’t think there will be any bots with pure dedication to defense, but I think we’ll see offensive bots using defensive strategies, like using one’s adjustment arm to entrap a mobile goal or plowing opponents mobile goals into a corner and then defending them.
Earlier in the season, I thought worlds would end up being clear fields in a minute and people being able to take their time with driver loads, like in NBN.
Now, I’m not sure what’s going to happen. Defense is probably a must. A robot made for defense would probably do better on defense than a normal stacker that decides to play defense. A good stacker would probably be captain and maybe the best defensive robot as first pick and then a normal stacker as second pick, with the defensive bot being in all matches.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see someone who uses like a 6 mtr torque drive with a 1 mtr cage that kidnaps 2-3 mogos and then goes and stacks itself.
I am pretty sure Indiana must be one of the outliers then.
From what I heard and saw, in most regions, we encountered defensive plays regularly.
I actually think that Indiana has had its fair share of defense this year. Defensive robots were certainly in play, although @jonathan1115 is correct that I didn’t see any primarily defensive robots in the eliminations. I think that was because many teams thought offensive designs were a better play towards states.
In the Middle School division at States, defense was certainly prevalent through the semi-finals.