Score Approximation
 

Every year I like to ask people to come up with what they think the scores will be like. This is a fun exercise but it is important to be realistic when building and designing a robot.

Week 1 Highest Seed Qual Average 120
Week 3 Highest Seed Qual Average 150
Week 5 Highest Seed Qual Average 180
Champs Highest Seed Qual Average 230
Week 1 Playoff Win 200
Week 3 Playoff Win 220
Week 5 Playoff Win 240
Champs Win 350

Re: Score Approximation
 

Slightly different than yours but not by much. I think people are, like most years, greatly underestimating scoring potential.

Re: Score Approximation
 

IMO, the scores will actually be lower this year because in past games, a scored game object would be final, while in this game, scoring is dynamic, and week 1 events will be fraught with tragic accidents of robots bumping totes off of scoring platforms.

Week 1: 120
Week 3: 170
Week 5: 175

CMP Average: 200

Einstein finals: 280

Re: Score Approximation
 

I'll throw my hat in one this one. I've been pretty good about predicting outcomes in the past, so I'll let that run come to a screeching halt here.

My numbers are significantly lower because a stack of 6 with a RC and litter is worth 42 points. That's a lot of work for 42 points. Some of the earlier posters are suggesting that it will happen multiple times on average in the first two weeks. I don't think that's the case.

Week 1 Highest Seed Qual Average: 70. Much more conservative than others, but I believe that a team's performance on the field will largely be determined by driver experience. We can probably expect a lot of scores to be in the 10-30 point range for the first two weeks. Of course, there will be teams that complete their robots on time or build two identical machines to give their drivers experience.
Week 3: 85. By this week, an "ideal strategy" will have emerged and teams will be replicating that as much as possible.
Week 5: 95.

Week 1 Playoff Win: 100. There is a large difference because alliances will be tailored so that the teams work well together. Qualifying rounds have the capacity for one-dimensional alliances, Elimination rounds won't have that same problem.
Week 3: 120. Again with the "ideal strategy".
Week 5: 135.

Einstein Finals: 220. Ideal strategy coupled with teams that can score with impunity.

Also, I fully expect 469 to build something that shocks the world like they did in 2010. We'll see them on Einstein barring some catastrophic failure.

Re: Score Approximation
 

'Also, I fully expect 469 to build something that shocks the world like they did in 2010. We'll see them on Einstein barring some catastrophic failure.'

4 Recycle Bins from the step in AUTO in autozone!? :) that's going to be very usefull at Einstein.

Re: Score Approximation
 

I have been thinking the same thing about 469 since kickoff. I'm going to feel so dumb...like always(:

Re: Score Approximation
 

What happens when teams play tug of war with those containers in autonomous? I'd hate to be pulled onto the other side of the field.

That said, I bet there will be at least one team that grabs four green containers in autonomous mode, and they'll be a desirable pick at a competitive event.

Re: Score Approximation
 

With co-op stacks being 40 points for one of the easiest tasks in the game, I think week 1 events will see lower scores in playoff matches than in qualifications.

Re: Score Approximation
 

I want to say that the coopertition points (and the removal of them from later matches) points to the GDC wanting to keep the numbers closer to consistent. It might be that they think 40 points is the average point difference between qualifications and eliminations. This would be used for analyzing game health though. Either way FRC games tend to live fast and die young. Now that I think about it I don't know much about the GDC. I know they design games but what goes on behind the scenes with all the data available after the competition closes is a mystery to me. Maybe they review it, maybe the GDC is also a secret paper mache society that prints out all the data and uses it for amazing sculptures.

Re: Score Approximation
 

[quote=Dan Petrovic;1427605]I'll throw my hat in one this one. I've been pretty good about predicting outcomes in the past, so I'll let that run come to a screeching halt here.

My numbers are significantly lower because a stack of 6 with a RC and litter is worth 42 points. That's a lot of work for 42 points. Some of the earlier posters are suggesting that it will happen multiple times on average in the first two weeks. I don't think that's the case.

Week 1 Highest Seed Qual Average: 70. Much more conservative than others, but I believe that a team's performance on the field will largely be determined by driver experience. We can probably expect a lot of scores to be in the 10-30 point range for the first two weeks. Of course, there will be teams that complete their robots on time or build two identical machines to give their drivers experience.

Are you trying to say that one robot scores 70 or is this an entire alliance? Because that does seem low.

Re: Score Approximation
 

Given that I work with IDB and know that he comes from a game design perspective, I take what he says seriously. I also think that we will see low scoring games to begin with; probably in having an average match score of 100 will be enough to place top eight.

Re: Score Approximation
 

That will be the average score for a Week 1 #1 Seed, so yes, that would be the entire alliance score.

Thinking about it, a stack of 6 Totes is only worth 12 points. Sure, placing a RC on top of that stack triples its value, but imagine the amount of caution that teams will be using in order to avoid knocking these stacks over.

Like I said, a team's on-field performance will rely heavily on the drivers' experience, possibly more than any other game. Teams in the early weeks will have great robots, but not every team has the luxury of being able to build a practice 'bot and many teams complete their machines with barely enough time left in build season to give their drivers practice.

Yes, it may seem low, but you have to remember that this is an individual ranking system in a team game. The #1 seed may average 60 points by themselves, but I wouldn't put it too far off base to say that their alliance partners will only average 10 points.

Re: Score Approximation
 

I certainly hope you are both mistaken about scores for winning the championship. Some quick addition suggests the highest possible score for an alliance would be ~380, so a score anywhere near this means the championships are completely one sided - if one alliance is scoring with 7 recycling containers, then the other alliance is scoring with, at most 3.

I suspect Dan's numbers are more reasonable, although perhaps a bit low for early regionals (I think the coopertition points will bump up things a bit, 70 points without coopertition seems extremely plausible for a 1 seed though).