Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

I expect to see Titanium on Einstein play a 115+pt match.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

Better start tracking OPRs for human players!

If this plays out, those starved balls need to be turned into human thrown buzzer beaters.

What a way to decide Einstein... if both alliances decide to starve.

Both triple balance, and there's a wealth of balls in the hands of the human players with <30 seconds left...

P.S. I'll never get any work done... this thread has made me revise my pre-scouting pick list AGAIN... Alliances running this strategy only need to shoot twice the entire match: once in hybrid, and once near the end of the match before triple balancing. Strong hybrid, excellent ball-pickup, steady high-percentage shooters immune to heavy defense, fast triple balancing, and a human player who can make shots.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

I would have to say, that would be an uneventful Einstein if it were to happen, but this is the top level. Starving is expected to happen, but I would imagine an inbounder that is good at the cross barrier pass will be high in demand.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

Why can there be only one ball on the alliance bridge? I see no reason why robots can't "store" more balls on the alliance bridge... It may not be easy to do, but it is both legal and feasible.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

Ball density certainly effects how it is thrown. But I think most Einstein bots will have ways to compensate for the balls. Lower scores will probably be due to the robots tiring out or stress on the drivers part.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

I've also seen robots guard balls in their own alley. If an opposing alliance robot tries to take one, boom! <G25>.

Especially since teleop scoring is the 4th order sort for seeding, I could see this being employed on A,C,G, and N - not just Einstein. A strategy-minded, quick-balancing rookie could make a lot of noise this way.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

This whole ball starvation strategy is a red herring.

Human players are GOOD and getting balls back across the field under the assumption they're not under a time crunch. Yet bots on Einstein will be GOOD at making rapid shots (think about the 2056-1114 pair with their back-and-forth shots).

Here's a partial strategy from my playbook, codenamed "Bunker Buster Bomb":
Scenario: Ball starvation strategy, 5-6 balls behind each player station, other balls are scarce.
1.) Our human players slam our balls across the field in rapid succession
2.) Our alliance rapidly scores 6 balls from 2 bots, concurrent with step 1
3.) The 2 bots that scored split up: 1 bot goes for the balls that crossed the field, 1 bot blocks the opponent's throwing lane
4.) 3rd bot scores 3 balls, concurrent with step 4

Probable points in 20 seconds from a MSC/MAR-esque finals alliance: 24, plus penalties because the opponents didn't get balls out in time or had more than 2 balls/player.

I seriously doubt the bots will be hungry for long. The alliance that starts this sequence first has the upper hand.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

It's an interesting concept, but only a very select few robots would be able to pull off a bridge-hoarding strategy. How many bots are even setup to be able to place balls onto a bridge? Even if the hoarding is a success, wouldn't it eventually necessitate even more time for a bridge balance in order to clear the balls off the bridge first?

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

Not to mention it may be worth the 3 point penalty to tip an opponent's bridge just to get all of the hoarded balls off and to your own side.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

9 points. With the simple solution being to defend your own bridge and force G28s as well as G25s.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

Nope. The hoarded balls don't have to be on a balanced bridge.
Consider a robot, probably wide-body, facing its own bridge and tipping the bridge toward it while remaining on the playing floor. Its alliance can pretty much fill this "funnel" full of balls, and especially if the robot is in its own alley, the balls are untouchable without a flood of fouls.

When it comes time to balance, the robot simply backs away, and the other two alliance partners can balance unobstructed from the other side. The first bot can either traverse the bump or climb the coop bridge to the other side.

Even if the opposing alliance get those balls, they'll have to score enough to counter the 40-pt triple balance.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

I believe this would be considered controlling more than three basketballs at a time.

I believe the hoarding strategy misses something. The opposing alliance would control at a minimum 10 balls at the start of teleop, assuming you have a good autonomous.

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

Well, yes, there's that.

Minimum 10? Assuming all robots score all balls during hybrid, that's 6 (two from each team) plus the 2 on the alliance bridge = 8 balls. What did I miss?

Re: Possible Lower Scores on Einstein?
 

+ the two on their alliance bridge