Chief Delphi - Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136360)

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1465776)

It's unfair to 254 to say that the scores are also high at PNW.

The scores aren't even as high as 254 at PNW. Furthermore, they're higher than previous weeks because it's a DCMP with selection going into the event (you see the same thing in Indianna right now).

254 is doing a 20 point auto, and often 4 stacks. That's more than entire alliances at PNW (evidenced by 254's solo score, not their QA, is higher than the QA of any team at PNW). Their partners are helping some, but really 254 is solely responsible for their insane QA.

They're just really darn good, nothing else to it.

Yeah, 254 is just on a different level today. http://i.imgur.com/9ETrLFB.jpg

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

A new top combined score of 464 at Silicon Valley Qualification 88. 60 pts higher in total than the next top combined score.

Red - 220pts- 971, 846, 1678
Blue- 244pts- 5677, 254, 3256

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by forbes (Post 1465830)

A new top combined score of 464 at Silicon Valley Qualification 88. 60 pts higher in total than the next top combined score.

Red - 220pts- 971, 846, 1678
Blue- 244pts- 5677, 254, 3256

Too bad they didn't get a extra 20 points for a 6 stack CO OP. Good job!

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Love that stacking from the landfill, turn around can steal, as it heads off to place the stack, then back for the same stolen can to build another stack from the ramp. That is cheescaked to the absolute max now 254! Added the best elements of original 254, 1114 w/ the tethered ramp, and many others all into 1 supremely cheesecaked super performer. That 200+ QPA was earned. As will the usual CheesyPoofs position be at the top of the heap.

Things are definitely "Heating Up" across the board in Week #6! Can't wait for those Championships to begin.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Not on the topic of high scores, but the match reset time seems tons better than it was last year at SVR. I'm pleasantly surprised, especially given how much more complicated the reset is this year compared to last year.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by waialua359 (Post 1465734)

I thought 1114 had the fastest tote pickup, and then RoboStang 548. Looks like 254 gets thrown in the mix.
With Week 6 showing off some high scores at various regionals, looks like Champs is going to much much better than I thought.........by a mile.

The interesting thing here is that these penultimate teams now have a greater likelihood of going against each other than with each other with the additional 4 divisions. After seeing 1114 in action first hand, I was positive that no one could beat the robot/driver combo, now I'm not so sure. With the one seed usually picking the two seed there's enough very good teams to make for a great playoffs at both the divisions and Einstein. I can't wait. I didn't think this year was going to be too exciting...and, I was wrong again.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

I am not sure but I believe 254 scored 254 at least two times at SVR. thier average qualifier was 200. Next highest was ~150 by 1678. Difference was a 6 stack vs a 5 stack. Ended up 1 and 2 vs 3 and 4, and camps and finalists were pretty much as expected. It still was exciting. I think at least one finals match had six bin capped stacks. Champion alliance 254, 1678, 5027. Finalists 2085, 971, 649.

All are Nationals qualified. 5027 was modified to be a bin grabber for the last semifinal and 2 final matches. They got two in the semi, at 1 in the first final, but even though they lost a tug of war with 971, that 'bin got stuck on 971's arm, and slowed them up for the rest of the match.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

254 is so good they can score 254 points at will.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ubiquity (Post 1466021)

254 scored 254 twice, once in quals, once in elims (both with 1678, maybe we can score 1678 points at CMP?). Also our average was 170 just fyi. 5 vs 6 wasn't the difference in average, the difference was that 254 grabs a can off the step in teleop, we don't so we just run out of cans after 3 stacks. The ~30 point difference is about the value of one stack.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by LDiDomenico (Post 1465664)

I think it is fitting that 254's alliance put up 254 points in Qual 53 at SVR.

They also did so in the final match of the day for the WINNER Blue Banner! Very fitting indeed.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

We need to petition the Snack Bars at the Edward Jones Dome to sell "Cheesecake by the slice for a super reasonable price!"

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ginger Power (Post 1466023)

254 is so good they can score 254 points at will.

They didn't seem to throw any litter, so it seemed like they were gunning for the 254 score. Poetic.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

My question is what are the rollers on the ramp and how does the ramp not slide very much during the match or bounce when it is tipped over. Does anyone have a good picture of it?

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Nishimura (Post 1466034)

They didn't seem to throw any litter, so it seemed like they were gunning for the 254 score. Poetic.

In one match they just stopped at 254 points and sat waiting for the clock to run down.

254's ramp looked like it used ball bearing rollers. I would have been more impressed if they hadn't totally ignored rule T6. They just had one guy carrying the ramp separately. I guess if the rule doesn't have a penalty it doesn't exist. There was one time that the ramp ended up with its outer end back at the wall. I didn't see if it fell wrong or got pushed. 254 didn't even try to get the totes off it, they just mined the landfill.

Another thing I wondered about was the stack(s) the tether was touching at the end of the match. You can't really see it in the videos. The refs weren't checking if the tether was supporting the totes. Judging from the blue box in the game manual the stack(s) should have been de-scored. They definitely weren't doing that. If they did, it could really hurt 254, as it is tough to control such a long tether.

Still, the Poofs were way ahead of of everyone else. 1678 couldn't do as many stacks and probably messed up more often. 971 had a jamming problem getting totes from the human player. 368 had a lot of trouble with their 3 tote autonomous, although they seemed to get it working in the later matches. They also had problems with mis-fed totes. 846's ramp tended to jam and they had a lot of problems with stacks falling over.

Our own robot (670) amazed me with its reliability. We improved more since the CVR than 254 did, with about 3x the scoring. The only real blemish was when the drive team decided to try to do a six stack with bin instead of our usual five stack in the semifinals and it fell over because it was too heavy. They really should have tried that on the practice field first... We were only fighting over 3rd vs. 4th place anyway. We were too slow to make it into the finals.

Re: Astronomically High Scores at Silicon Valley

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven670 (Post 1466360)

In one match they just stopped at 254 points and sat waiting for the clock to run down.

Because we didn't want to risk knocking over any stacks just for another 12 points. With 6 full stacks and 15 seconds left on the clock going for another 6 totes when the landfill and HP stations are both almost empty is just asking for trouble.

Quote:

254's ramp looked like it used ball bearing rollers. I would have been more impressed if they hadn't totally ignored rule T6. They just had one guy carrying the ramp separately. I guess if the rule doesn't have a penalty it doesn't exist.

The blue box on T6 clarifies this quite well, they put the ramp inside the robot when no one was carrying it so it definitely fit in transport config. Several other teams also transported their robots pre-assembled. Refs have been told to encourage teams to do this to speed up field reset times.

Quote:

Another thing I wondered about was the stack(s) the tether was touching at the end of the match. You can't really see it in the videos. The refs weren't checking if the tether was supporting the totes. Judging from the blue box in the game manual the stack(s) should have been de-scored. They definitely weren't doing that. If they did, it could really hurt 254, as it is tough to control such a long tether.

A stack is scored if it is supported completely by only the scoring platform, if their tether was supporting the stack it wouldn't be scored, but it would be pretty apparent when their tether was under it as the stack would get knocked over when they tried to drive away from it. I trust the refs that they were well aware of this.

Quote:

Our own robot (670) amazed me with its reliability. We improved more since the CVR than 254 did, with about 3x the scoring. The only real blemish was when the drive team decided to try to do a six stack with bin instead of our usual five stack in the semifinals and it fell over because it was too heavy. They really should have tried that on the practice field first... We were only fighting over 3rd vs. 4th place anyway. We were too slow to make it into the finals.

No need to put down others when applauding your own accomplishments. 254 went from 2 stacks at CVR to hitting 4 stacks plus co-op with time left over at the end of every match reliably; bumping their qual average from 104 to 200 since CVR. If that's not impressive improvement I don't know what is.