Author Topic: A Fractured Stock Showcase (Read 64815 times)

Scrap Daddy · « **Reply #200 on:** November 13, 2011, 09:59:42 PM »

Nice job

R0B0SH4RK · « **Reply #201 on:** November 13, 2011, 11:26:17 PM »

Very nice job.

Naryar · « **Reply #202 on:** November 14, 2011, 05:47:49 AM »

must drain it's batteries quite fast...

Real nice and clean setup though. If I am right you have only 6 20cm rounds on there.

Fracture · « **Reply #203 on:** November 14, 2011, 06:16:43 AM »

Five; four plus one to to push the drive farther back. I did have the weight for a sixth extender though, but I used it on a bigger chassis. :P

Fracture · « **Reply #204 on:** November 27, 2011, 11:27:10 AM »

Popup thingy

DSA 2 blacks 4 razors

I thought Exo would be a nice name for it, but a certain someone has already taken that name...

Sage · « **Reply #205 on:** November 27, 2011, 11:50:12 AM »

very nicely put together! you're getting much better fast...

Clickbeetle · « **Reply #206 on:** November 27, 2011, 09:52:31 PM »

Too narrow IMO. Very good space management and setup though.

Also, it's always better to have a chassis wedge under your ram plates so you can still fight without them.

Fracture · « **Reply #207 on:** November 27, 2011, 10:04:59 PM »

But that would add weight! And make it more generic! And chances are if it's screwed enough to get both its ramplate knocked off, it'll probably die even with a chassis wedge anyway! Also it gives the opponent more chassis area to hit at the front and front-sides!

What's the problem with being narrow? The chassis, you mean, because if I had (the weight for) the HP Z-teks next to the blacks, the bot as a whole would still be just as wide; the only thing that would be wider is the chassis.

Sage actually praised one of my bots that has red extenders? MY EXISTENCE HAS BEEN VALIDATED

Clickbeetle · « **Reply #208 on:** November 27, 2011, 10:17:33 PM »

It's bad to be too narrow because it makes it easier for spinners to hit your sides, which makes it difficult to get under them. It doesn't ruin the bot but try fighting some spinners and you'll see what I mean.

And lots of popups don't even have ram plates (Pyscolone popups) yet can still beat some spinners, so if you have weight it's good to have a chassis wedge as backup.

And I don't think Sage noticed the red extenders. :P

R0B0SH4RK · « **Reply #209 on:** November 28, 2011, 02:27:43 AM »

Ramplates on wedges are rarely worth the weight investment in sub-HW Stock bots (although there are exceptions), and you should always, always, ALWAYS have a chassis wedge when building Stock wedges. One good hit from a spinner on a ramplate, even if it doesn't hit your chassis, and your bot will be entirely useless. Remember that Stock ramplates only have 1000 hp, so they don't offer great defense.

But Sage is still right, it is very nicely put together. Excellent space management, although the overall design isn't particularly great.

Sage · « **Reply #210 on:** November 28, 2011, 07:03:54 PM »

Quote from: Clickbeetle on November 27, 2011, 10:17:33 PM

And I don't think Sage noticed the red extenders. :P

I turn my computer to grayscale before entering the showcase section.

Fracture · « **Reply #211 on:** December 03, 2011, 10:32:21 AM »

Rebuilt my old Juggler.

Wedges really aren't that good WHY

I thought they would be better because of the weight of the Z-teks and weapons being placed on the SnapperII at the front this time. Would the bot lean back because of the back stuff being anchored at the front, or what?

That Robot is a Spy! · « **Reply #212 on:** December 03, 2011, 11:25:33 AM »

Damn, you're getting amazing at Stock.

Jack Daniels · « **Reply #213 on:** December 03, 2011, 12:04:12 PM »

I run into that problem with wedges as well when I design bots. In real-world physics you would think that weight distribution like that would positively effect the wedge capabilities of the bot. But, alas, in RA2 physics this does not seem to be the case. I keep falling for it over and over without thinking things through. It seems that traction trumps weight distribution when it comes to wedges, mainly because of the way that wheels react to the driving surface. By my observations, it seems that four wheels spread out has a more positive effect on a wedge then 2 wheels lined-up, or even four wheels lined-up.

Because RA2 physics are unfortunately grossly inaccurate in comparison to Real world physics... You have to think of the bottom of your bot as a suction cup. The traction rating for the wheels determines the amount of pull toward the floor and where you place them determines how much balanced pull to the floor you have.

I think this is, ultimately, why 4 wheel drive bots with shinies (in stock, hypnos in DSL) is incredibly common and also seems to have a good success rate with their wedge.

smashysmashy · « **Reply #214 on:** December 03, 2011, 12:21:56 PM »

This is news to me, thanks for being incredibly awesome again JD =D

Naryar · « **Reply #215 on:** December 03, 2011, 12:30:52 PM »

Quote from: Jack Daniels on December 03, 2011, 12:04:12 PM

I run into that problem with wedges as well when I design bots. In real-world physics you would think that weight distribution like that would positively effect the wedge capabilities of the bot. But, alas, in RA2 physics this does not seem to be the case. I keep falling for it over and over without thinking things through. It seems that traction trumps weight distribution when it comes to wedges, mainly because of the way that wheels react to the driving surface. By my observations, it seems that four wheels spread out has a more positive effect on a wedge then 2 wheels lined-up, or even four wheels lined-up.

(Image removed from quote.)

Because RA2 physics are unfortunately grossly inaccurate in comparison to Real world physics... You have to think of the bottom of your bot as a suction cup. The traction rating for the wheels determines the amount of pull toward the floor and where you place them determines how much balanced pull to the floor you have.

I think this is, ultimately, why 4 wheel drive bots with shinies (in stock, hypnos in DSL) is incredibly common and also seems to have a good success rate with their wedge.

?? I thought the opposite was true, but maybe I am wrong.

I should test more accurately wedge efficiency.

Fracture · « **Reply #216 on:** December 03, 2011, 12:38:09 PM »

Agh but what about these guys

Jack Daniels · « **Reply #217 on:** December 03, 2011, 12:40:54 PM »

Quote from: Naryar on December 03, 2011, 12:30:52 PM

?? I thought the opposite was true, but maybe I am wrong.

I should test more accurately wedge efficiency.

I didn't state it was fact. It is mostly my observation. There are so many variables to take into account. But, I think that wheel traction and balance plays a huge role in wedge efficiency.

Accurate testing, of course, would be awesome. :D

smashysmashy · « **Reply #218 on:** December 03, 2011, 12:43:14 PM »

Beats R4? D:

ty4er · « **Reply #219 on:** December 03, 2011, 12:44:48 PM »

oh shhh that isnt useful

Anyway, i think it's because you have shinies on whereas those 2 have rubbers. Then again RA2 is rather dodgy with this stuff :P