Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55542)

GaryVoshol 18-03-2007 06:46

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by E. Wood (Post 599588)
I, for one, really dislike this game. It relys so much on team work that if the other robots on your alliance cant do anything or if the break down that the alliance has almost no chance no matter how good the other robot is.

Isn't that the point of alliances?

Quote:

Also the ramp bonus is too much. It almost completely defeats the main objective of the game, which is scoring on the rack.
Says who? I think FIRST deliberately made the ramp worth a lot of points so teams would build them. Up to 25 points on a fixed ramp last year were ignored by many teams. They had to make the lift points high enough to make it worthwhile. 60 points is a lot in a 8-2 game. But some teams have demonstrated the ability to score a complete circle for 256 points, and many have managed 5 in a row.

The only thing that may be a surprise to the GDC is that there are so many ramp-only bots. I'm sure they envisioned there being more "hybrids", robots that would at least attempt to score a ringer or two, and then go deploy the ramps.

Travis Hoffman 18-03-2007 07:47

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GaryV1188 (Post 599763)

The only thing that may be a surprise to the GDC is that there are so many ramp-only bots. I'm sure they envisioned there being more "hybrids", robots that would at least attempt to score a ringer or two, and then go deploy the ramps.


It's all about defense and net advantage. If the opponent ain't scorin', you don't have to score them yourselves. The only real disadvantage ramp-only bots have is the inability to play the spoiler. Then again, if you're playing good defense, the opponent won't have any rows worth spoiling....

sovierr 18-03-2007 11:09

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
I like the game and I like the scoring...for the most point. I agree with other posts that the complaints about ramps counting too much are probably from teams that thought it would be easier to score on the rack. Our team had some some lengthy discussions/debates about the ease of scoring in terms of defense and the shaking spider legs. In the end we made a hybrid. We all had time to envision the way we thought the game would be played out. I think our team hit the nail on the head, and perhaps yours did not.

The complaint that this game lends itself too much to the alliance is backwards. A good team will get picked up in the elimination regardless of who they were matched up with in their qualifying rounds. Although, it does place an emphasis on teams ability to scout well.

One thing I might have liked in terms of points is a different weight placed for ringers in the middle and on top. Since each level up increases the difficulty (well maybe the middle is not really much more difficult than the bottom, but the top is) maybe they could have rewarded teams that score up high.

That said, I think the GDC did a really nice job. I think this game is exciting and complex. I love strategy over brute force anyway...I guess that's why I'm a fan of baseball's National League.

E. Wood 18-03-2007 11:28

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
[quote=GaryV1188;599763]Isn't that the point of alliances?

Yes it is. But is it really fair when an alliance only has two robots agianst three because the other team does not come. This is what happened to my team 4 times out of seven matches. The times when we had three robots the game was much closer but still not as good as it could be. Maybe FIRST should come up with a system to make sure that an alliance always starts with three robots. Say assign a replacement robot at random to play if a robot is not inspected or something.

ALIBI 18-03-2007 11:28

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
After week three is almost complete (New York Finishing Today), Rack And Roll is turning out to be a pretty good game. The whole point is team work and to not have the finals simply be the top twenty four teams. Scouting has never been more important than this year. You never know before hand exactly what will happen in a match. Will it turn offesive or defensive? You have to change your strategy on the fly as the match unfolds. Quick thinking and changing strategy during the match as an alliance really matters. Last year, many times, you could pretty much come out of auton and know who would win. This year with only two points for a keeper and very few spoilers being used, auton is a lot of work for a little benefit. About the only improvement I could see to Rack And Roll would be to make a keeper a doubler or a tripler for any row that uses a keeper and to allow multiple doublers and triplers if more than one keeper were in row. Just try and keep track of that score during the match! You could also, instead of calling it a keeper, call it the doubler or tripler and allow it to be spoiled. All in all, a big thank you to the GDC for a great game!

Daniel_LaFleur 18-03-2007 11:35

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by E. Wood (Post 599588)
I, for one, really dislike this game. It relys so much on team work that if the other robots on your alliance cant do anything or if the break down that the alliance has almost no chance no matter how good the other robot is. At chesapeake, My team played one bot short for 4 out of 7 matches (we managed to tie one and win one but only because the other alliance was unable to score or ramp well). In these matches we put 5 tubes up each time, but the combined team work of just one ramp at twelve inches and a ringer would tie us and a second ringer or elevated robot would beat us. We were one of the top scores at both of our regionals but ranked low because of our unlucky drawings in the seeding matches. In my eyes FIRST should design a game that allows good robots to rise to the top even if they are on bad alliances every time (and im talking about an alliance who only have one robot moving for 4 out of 7 matches). In this game, it is fifty percent luck of the draw and fifty percent skill. Also the ramp bonus is too much. It almost completely defeats the main objective of the game, which is scoring on the rack. When all two robots have to do to socre 60 points is drive up a ramp while it take six tubes in a row ( not easy to do) to get more it makes it that much less valuable to be able to score well. They key to this game is a good defense, and a good simple ramp bot. I dont beleive this is what FIRST intend the game to be but this is how it turned out. Please i ask the GDC to change the sorting program and to make a game that is doesnt rely so much on luck of the draw.


PS. I dont mean to insult any teams who won or did well with out scoring on the rack. You guys all did well and played well and figured out how to win something that is not easy to do. Good job to every who played this year.


To start with, please read my post (2 above yours).

Now on to your post.

FIRST wants to promote teamwork, why else would they have alliances? If other robots on your alliance cannot function then you will lose the match, but match seedings this year are not as important as a good showing. Scouting is more important this year.

Now on to ramp bots. Ramp bots are the ultimate alliance robot. If their alliance robots cannot climb a ramp then there will be no 'bonus' points. At the BAE GSR we won 5 seeding matches, and in 4 of them we had partners who could climb our ramp. We also lost 3 seeding matches in which in 2 our partners coulf NOT climb our (or any) ramp. Think about this ... if a ramp bots alliance partners cannot climb a ramp, how many points do you think a ramp only bot will score (0).

It is my belief that many teams (like yours) undervalued the 'bonus' points when evaluating the game, and now that they are seeing that several teams are able to get the bonus points easily want the 'bonus' points to be changed and are calling the 'bonus' points unfair.

P.S. What makes you think that the main objective of the game was scoring on the rack? I feel that the main objective of the game is to add value to your alliance, be it scoring on the rack, lifting at the end, or playing defense.

JMHO

Cowmankoza 18-03-2007 12:15

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sovierr (Post 599828)
Since each level up increases the difficulty (well maybe the middle is not really much more difficult than the bottom, but the top is)

If anything the top seems to be easier to score on. It may not seem that way in the beginning, but if a teams arm is long enough, the top section moves significantly less than the other 2. My $.02

StephLee 18-03-2007 18:33

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur (Post 599840)
To start with, please read my post (2 above yours).

Now on to your post.

FIRST wants to promote teamwork, why else would they have alliances? If other robots on your alliance cannot function then you will lose the match, but match seedings this year are not as important as a good showing. Scouting is more important this year.

Now on to ramp bots. Ramp bots are the ultimate alliance robot. If their alliance robots cannot climb a ramp then there will be no 'bonus' points. At the BAE GSR we won 5 seeding matches, and in 4 of them we had partners who could climb our ramp. We also lost 3 seeding matches in which in 2 our partners coulf NOT climb our (or any) ramp. Think about this ... if a ramp bots alliance partners cannot climb a ramp, how many points do you think a ramp only bot will score (0).

It is my belief that many teams (like yours) undervalued the 'bonus' points when evaluating the game, and now that they are seeing that several teams are able to get the bonus points easily want the 'bonus' points to be changed and are calling the 'bonus' points unfair.

P.S. What makes you think that the main objective of the game was scoring on the rack? I feel that the main objective of the game is to add value to your alliance, be it scoring on the rack, lifting at the end, or playing defense.

JMHO

I'm on 1629 along with E. Wood, and although I disagree with him a good bit about the game (I personally love it), I have to point something out: we had a ramp and a platform good for two 12-inch lifts. The ramp was 17.5 degrees, a nice shallow slope that almost every bot could climb (with the exception of wide-orientation bots, the ramp was a bit too narrow for them). Our team strove for versatility, and we think we achieved it quite well.

The problem is, as you said, if your partners can't climb your ramps, you don't get the bonus. If our partners aren't prepared enough to come to the matches and at least attempt to play, we don't get the bonus. Scoring 5 tubes in a match by ourselves isn't enough when we're trying to beat two other competent scorers or a good ramp bot, especially if we're being defended.

I'm not trying to trash anyone here, just pointing out that we did not underestimate the ramp bonus. We made every effort to be able to accomodate and work with any alliance partner...we just needed the alliance partners in the first place. I dislike not being given the opportunity to do as well as we can.

So what did we learn from this? An idea suggested for next year was to personally ensure that each and every team at our regionals passes inspection by the end of Thursday. It's unfair for a team to not have a full alliance, but it's equally unfair for a team not to be able to compete in a competition they've paid for. If everyone passes inspection and makes their matches, it turns out better for everyone involved.

How many other teams who typically pass inspection quickly would be willing to help out with that? I know it usually happens on its own, but an organized effort to do so seems like it would be more effective.

Daniel_LaFleur 18-03-2007 19:00

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by StephLee (Post 600186)
I'm on 1629 along with E. Wood, and although I disagree with him a good bit about the game (I personally love it), I have to point something out: we had a ramp and a platform good for two 12-inch lifts. The ramp was 17.5 degrees, a nice shallow slope that almost every bot could climb (with the exception of wide-orientation bots, the ramp was a bit too narrow for them). Our team strove for versatility, and we think we achieved it quite well.

The problem is, as you said, if your partners can't climb your ramps, you don't get the bonus. If our partners aren't prepared enough to come to the matches and at least attempt to play, we don't get the bonus. Scoring 5 tubes in a match by ourselves isn't enough when we're trying to beat two other competent scorers or a good ramp bot, especially if we're being defended.

I'm not trying to trash anyone here, just pointing out that we did not underestimate the ramp bonus. We made every effort to be able to accomodate and work with any alliance partner...we just needed the alliance partners in the first place. I dislike not being given the opportunity to do as well as we can.

So what did we learn from this? An idea suggested for next year was to personally ensure that each and every team at our regionals passes inspection by the end of Thursday. It's unfair for a team to not have a full alliance, but it's equally unfair for a team not to be able to compete in a competition they've paid for. If everyone passes inspection and makes their matches, it turns out better for everyone involved.

How many other teams who typically pass inspection quickly would be willing to help out with that? I know it usually happens on its own, but an organized effort to do so seems like it would be more effective.

Please accept my apologies if I offended anyone.

If teams are doing their homework (scouting) then your team should have been picked up. Sadly, that does not always happen :( .

The problem, as you pointed out, is that not all teams can make it to the field for every match. This problem is made worse by the scheduleing algorithem that matches the same teams together for multiple matches. We cannot just 'pass' every team because safety is a real issue.

You make a good argument for bringing back 'placebo'

StephLee 18-03-2007 19:03

Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur (Post 600222)
Please accept my apologies if I offended anyone.

If teams are doing their homework (scouting) then your team should have been picked up. Sadly, that does not always happen :( .

The problem, as you pointed out, is that not all teams can make it to the field for every match. This problem is made worse by the scheduleing algorithem that matches the same teams together for multiple matches. We cannot just 'pass' every team because safety is a real issue.

You make a good argument for bringing back 'placebo'

No apologies necessary, I was just clarifying.

We did, in fact, get chosen for the 2nd ranked alliance...unfortunately, our partners had some radio issues in the quarter finals which, once again, prevented us from playing a match to our full potential with good and fully functional alliance partners. We're still not sure if the radio issues were on the robot or field end, but what's done is done.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:03.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi