Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Inspired by this quote from Boltman...

"Hey can someone there give us a summary of things you learned that you did not know going in... just an overall REAL vs theoretical breakdown. Like what was easier/harder, challenges and did human players have any significant effect."

In particular:

• Real field elements
• Real line of sight for drivers
• Real defense
• Taking real shots at the high and low goal
• Real damage to robots
• Real problems with the game
• Real fun parts

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Thought you said batman...

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Being you did not ask if I was really there. But I really did see several matches on the stream.
1. High goal seems hard
2 low goal seems hard
3 I did see HPs trying to communicate, not sure of the effects
4 teams were having good results with crossing, made up at least 1/2 the score for every game
5 very few have climbing down yet

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Something my team noticed when watching the stream was that very few alliances went for the rank point by breaching defenses. I thought this was not a good understand of the rules when teams went to go get 5 points during end game by waiting on the batter of their opponent's tower instead of using their alliances to open the one last door and get that rank point. If a team was winning by a large number of points, some alliances still didn't bother to get the rank point. Anybody know why this kept happening or was this not a complete understand to how rank points work?

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

My takeaways watching the streams... Just my far away observations

1. Low scoring for the most part (30-70), with most points via breaching defenses along the way
2. Lots and lots of dead, stalled stuck bots
3. Lots of penalties
4. Auto points disappointing, best seemed to be 3 crossing (30) very rare
5. Scaling rare and many tried and failed, only a handful of really good ones
6. Hard to crack 100
7. Very hard to Capture the castle (only happened in eliminations)
8. Lots of bots seemed "confused" and lots and lots of misses on goals.
9 Wheeled bots getting stuck on defenses
10. Bad time management at end many missed challenges (5 points)
11. Climbers can crash on bots below, and bad time management as running out of time to climb.
12. Not much defense played until Eliminations.

As a side note impressed by the bots that could score HG while being harassed..I was surprised by that since the defense driver has way better vision and "should" be able to knock a bot off course

In all it was well played considering it was first competition up, we compete next weekend so I'll give some firsthand insight after next week. Glad Palmetto gave us some insights.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

The low goal was surprisingly difficult for a lot of teams. Without any propulsion, the ball just kinda slid down the slope whenever teams would try to score there.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

You'd be surprised how many teams don't read the Tournament section of the rules.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

I was entirely amazed at how many robots didn't or couldn't challenge. Especially those on the lower end of the rankings. It seems like a surefire way to not be picked by an alliance who wants to capture the tower. Which as the weeks go by will be any eliminations alliance that is serious about winning their event.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Lack of defense in playoffs made scores higher in the playoffs then they should be.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Teams at Regionals seem to care less about where they're ranked. At a regional being top 8-10 is important for being an alliance captain, but there really isn't a difference between ranks 15-64. At District Events your rank affects if you go to DCMP, so more teams try to rank high. I did some math last year and found that WAY more teams did coopertition at District Events than at Regionals (even highly competitive Regionals were outdone by very weak District Events). If a team at a Regional doesn't expect that they'll be in the top 8, then why try for a breach?

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Of course if you don't try for the breach, you are sure to be out of the top 10.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

It's just not wise to avoid trying to improve your rank. Remember, you earn 5 points for crossing defenses the first two times you cross them. Therefore, it just comes down to common sense that earning 5 points from the batter isn't worth as much as earning 5 points for crossing the 4th defense AND earning one RP, assuming that you have the capabilities to do so.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

Well to add onto the point I made in this thread. A robot proving they can challenge is a highly desirable trait to elimination alliances when about half the robots don't/can't do it and might be worth showing off.

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

from what i observed from watching the livestream with a good amount of matches

• autonomous and climbing are easy points and would easily get you a good spot in playoffs
• the drawbridge and door are very hard and possibly a waste of time
• low goal is NOT really helpful
• breacher bot is a valid strategy
• shooter is hard and almost impossible without a vision tracking system
• hard to see where your going

the best defence is as follows statistically:

• cheval de frise
• moat
• drawbridge
• rockwall

Re: Real vs. Theory, Week 0.5
 

What do you mean by "best" defense? The best one to select for the other alliance? The best crossings? Curious the definition of best.