But in putting in the effort to have a consistent auto and trained drivers, you can be prepared to widen that gap. You might say that’s not a lot less, and it’s not. But even if they were 100% consistent at this, that would only be an expected 15 points per match (which is less than 18). A lot of robots had difficulty getting through the match, onto the tower grounds, and climbing. On the other hand, that year a team could climb in the end game for 15 points. 90% x 20 points is an expected 18 points per match. Let’s say for the sake of argument that they were only 90% consistent. A lot of teams that have learned to prioritize Auto got these consistently. In 2016, (Stronghold) robots got 10 points for crossing a defense and 10 points for scoring in the high goal in auto. TODO: fill this in a little more once we get the game for 2019 Notes: Every year there has been a way to score points for your alliance by just moving In the past, auto has been the first or second tie-breaker A consistent auto is worth more than an if-y end game. If your robot: Is easy to code for auto Has the software architected so that auto coding is simple Has driver’s that are practiced You have a mountain of potential to do well.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |