![]() |
Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Much similar to last week’s thread this one is based on similar things except these are all different questions. The point of this "series of 7 threads" if you call it that, will be reviewed upon to help understand the game even better. To sum up what Dave said during the Bayou Regional Friday night, this game is on a totally different level than games in the past because it makes teams think ahead of whom they will play with and against and will make teams cooperate very closely to get their task completed efficiently.
How do you think that the flow of the games was? How did you guys think the flags were called and how penalties were handed out? How was regional coordination and the flow of the regional itself was? Also, what do you think about what you saw over the past week compared to the first week of regional? What do you think are the keys to scoring and how easy or hard is it to stay consistent with scoring from what you have seen and what do you think about scoring and how it has played out so far, including spoiler, keeper, and ringer usage? Finally, what do you think are some debatable calls by referees? |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
**Warning, this post is pretty much just how I feel gameplay needs to change from what I have seen.**
Overall, gameplay has improved a bit from week 1, as is the trend from year to year. Here are some things that I think a lot of teams need to improve on. It is just my opinion take it as you will. Strategize strategize strategize. Have a cohesive gameplan going into a match. Each match is different so strategies may or may not vary depending on the type of bots involved. Make every cap count. Make sure ramps (if available) can be attained and not just are not just a waste of effort and time. I have seen so many instances of poor decisions by coaches in the past two weeks. Oh, coaches: the drivers are YOUR hands. YOU make the calls, THEY do the work. They are the link between you and machine. In a good drive team, drivers should not have to think, just react. I have seen a lot of great defense being played and only a little bit of pick and roll. If the situation fits, help a bot out. One last thing: I saw a little more of this here in week 2, but still not enough against the power houses....OFFENSIVE DEFENSE!! All coaches go home right now and play connect 4. Thats all I have for now, -Henry |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
in one of our qualifying matches, there was a tube on the ramp, our robot drove up and landed on the tube. our interpretation of the rule was that if the elimate of the field was taken in out, would the robot in question still be on the ramp? so we thought it wouldn't b a problem. we lost that match because of that rule. if someone really knows this rule well, would they please give us a clarification. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
The end game reminds me too much of Stack Attack. Teams could work thier butt off all match long and the other teams don't have to do much of anything and if they have a ramp can steal the match in the end. Thyey should have made it 15 per robots for 12 inches instead.
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I agree with the ramp points. 30 points is way too much. Mainly for the reason listed above. It's dumb for a team to just shove you all over the field for a min and thirty seconds, and then to just climb a ramp, or be lifted and get thirty points.
Other than that, the game seems to flow pretty well. However, the scoring of refs is questionable...but i'll leave it up to someone else to fill in the blank about that one. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
, which doesn't exactly match your scenario. However, IMO (which is worth nothing) if, by transitivity, a Robot supported by a robot supported by a Game Piece - is supported by a Game piece, then, also by transitivity, a Robot supported by a game piece supported by a Robot - is supported by a Robot. You should ask the Q&A if they agree. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
Thomas H. Huxley English biologist (1825 - 1895) PS: Just copy paste this as my opinion of the game in the following weeks. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I dont mean to break ice here or anything... but Great Lakes was AWESOME, knowing that the full potential of the game was realized as the days went along.
Progressively from friday to saturday, the matches got more rigorous, and the competition increased. It just so happened that the one time our team lifted for 45 points, the other alliance had a row of 6 for 64, that was the caliber of competition, it was amazing. That said, the system for choosing qualifying match alliances NEEDS TO CHANGE, PERIOD!!! I love the FIRST people for what they do, but my Lord, they screwed up big time with that. With 59 teams, 80 matches, we shouldn't be paired up with the same teams twice. From there, I really cannot wait for nationals, by then they should have the kinks in the 'randomization' figured out and fixed, and the dynamics of the game should be fully realized. Good luck to everyone in the next few weeks. :cool: -Joe |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
Way to many points that cannot be defended against during a match. As a driver, it is painful to watch a team load two robots onto another and know that there is nothing you can do to stop them from getting another 60 points. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Matches are getting a lot more aggressive. Some folks are saying the ramps are worth too much, but as the game goes on, the tubes are worth more and more. In week 1, until late Friday and Saturday, it seemed like most matches had 5 tubes on the rack. We're starting to see the racks get a lot more full. High scores are attained with tubes, not the ramp.
In my opinion, by the time Atlanta rolls around, we'll see consistent bonus points, where you don't win by getting on a ramp, instead you lose if you can't get onto a ramp (or make up for it with a valuable tube) |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I'm not too sure about Week 1 regionals, but after getting inspected on Thursday night and seeing the board of inspected teams, there were still quite a few (like more than half) left to be inspected Friday morning. I'm just curious was the issue that teams were just not finished repairing in time, or were there just many teams that failed inspection the first time around?
I also agree with the chance winning of the game being based around the ramps. I remember seeing several matches tied with ringers, or even with more ringers than the opposing alliance, but then having that all crushed because the other alliance got at least one bot up 12". -No L |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
on thursday when we weighed our robot it was a whopping 20 lbs over weight. so we spent the whole day shedding weight. we passed our inspection minutes before our first match.
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
They should've seriously made a requirement that before any robot from a single alliance can score by bonus points, they must atleast score one ringer for their alliance (or two), in order to qualify for bonus points. This way If an alliance of all three ramp bots can't just pick and choose a ramp before the match, defend via one-on-one defense, and then just ramp up to win.
Requirements, and Qualifying for bonus points. my two cents. Rameez |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I think a whole alliance that works together well, and has done a lot of pre-match planning is key. From what I've seen, almost any combination of robots has a chance of beating almost any other combination of robots with a very detailed and well thought out and played out strategy.
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
Too bad FIRST can't do anything about it now...or can they? :rolleyes: |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
It cracks me up hearing people complaining that the ramp points are worth too much this far into the game. The GDC did a great job designing a game with two different scoring options and weight constraints that make it hard to do both well. My hats off to them.
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I don't see the big problem with how many points you get for being lifted. If you hate it that much then you should have built a ramp bot. There was 6 weeks for you to make a decision.
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
In that situation...If three ramp-only robots got paired with each other during qualifying matches, they automatically have lost. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Ramps are really a difficult feat to do well, as we found out, and watched... I mean, just look at the photo titled "Whoops!" in CD Media. That scenario came up either exactly or close to coming up for every round ramps were attempted.
I sort of compare it to hanging back in 2004... that proved to be difficult for some teams to master, but if done, 50pts to them. It became a deciding factor along with the 2x multipliers. Thus: 2004's hanging == This year's lifting 2004's 2x multiplier removal == This year's spoilers placement. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
Looking forward to Buckeye! |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I believe the game started maturing to show its full potential this week. Attending GLR, i saw great changes happening from Thursday to Saturday.
In the beginning, the game was merely a race to the rack and whoever could put the most ringers on it would win. Ramp and spoilers were ignored, and the closest teams got to "strategizing" together was some alliance's coordination to put all their ringers at the same level. Saturday saw a great deal of changes: two matches in particular illustrate that point. Quarter finals 1, match 1 (alliance 1 with the two best scorers of the competition, a.k.a. 67 and 1114) saw the 8th alliance almost beat those everybody already saw as the winners of the competition. How did they do it? they placed their ringers in an intelligent fashion so that they prevented any 6, 7 or 8 rows and hoped their ramp would be enough to win. Why didn't they win? One of their robot fell of the ramp at the last minute and their spoiler attempts was unsuccessful. Either of those attempts succeeding would have guaranteed a win. Perhaps more interesting is Finals - match 3. Team 503 and their alliance were clearly less efficient at scoring ringers (no offense), and i believe they realized that. To counter balance this, they put together a great strategy. All three of their bot scattered ringers, preventing anything but rows of 4. Although they were successfully spoiled, it did not really matter as they were not relying on ringers but on a final lift. This lift did occur, and a penalty due to 1503 entering the home zone for a fraction of a second brought the score to 4 - 72 for the alliance everybody thought would lose. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I'd also like to add that after seeing this game played out live, my opinions completely changed. When it was released, I thought it was fairly simple, almost too simple, and that the whole rack would be at least half full by the end of the match. I thought that ramps would be thought of as too difficult and not considered at all, so it wouldn't be a major factor in the game at all. Boy was I wrong!
Now, after watching a few matches again and reflecting on experiences this weekend, I can safely say that Rack N' Roll is hard! Especially once defense comes into play. We all knew that strategy would be key, but there were some strategies that I was amazed with, like putting tubes on someone else's ramps. The ramps were a big shocker too! I expected it to not make much difference with the full rack that I expected, but it ended up being the determining factor of the game. I'm ready for Vegas in Week 5 now...lets see what else changes. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Few Points about this years game that I saw (Sorry Pavan, I paved my own way)
1. It is a lot more exciting then I first thought it would be. I originally felt that it would be like Triple Play, but the more I watch the more I am falling in love with it. 2. Spoiling is helpful and is now no longer needed. Watching the way the winning alliance at GLR played, I saw a gameplan that eliminates the need for spoilers as well as scores points. 3. This is a team game, and the best alliance will win, it doesn't matter who your partners are as long as you have a great strategy and execute. 4. Ramps just win. Without ramps you have very little chance of winning an event. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I do agree that the thirty points for using a ramp might seem somewhat excessive to a team who is an excellent scorer. However, think of the excitement that this creates. If you have 3 ramp bots against three tube-handling bots in a round, those ramp bots will go back to get their 60 points no matter what since they have no other way to score. This means that if those three tube handlers can score 6 ringers , they win. They may even be undefended for as long as 30 seconds. While the 30 points may seem unfair, keep in mind how tough it would be to hold a great scorer to only one or two tubes. Every single ramp robot has to do just that and THEN hope that their opposing alliance doesn't score much more.
Now think that you are a ramp-only alliance. Imagine you're going against two top scorers and another mediocre one in the elimination rounds. You held them to only 4 tubes in a row in 1:45. Then you go back and get 2 robots up on your ramp in only 10 seconds. You're psyched because you think you just won. Then you look and see that those two great scorers needed only 10 seconds of undefended scoring time to put on two more ringers, give them a row of 6 and the match win. The GDC did an amazing job assigning point values for this game. The score can go from a blowout 128-0 to a close win the other way 30-16 in an instant with some strategic spoiler placement by one bot, and a 12 inch lift performed by the other 2. Everyone can argue that the way that they chose not to score is awarded too many points. If you are in elimination matches and you get beaten, there is a strategy in this game that can allow you to win. That's what I love about this game. As long as you have some way to score, you can win, no matter who you're up against. just my ¥2.35 (as of today) |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
I still say that the finals in Georgia will consist of cappers vs. cappers UNLESS one of the cappers is a ramp with good capping ability. The real problem is that statistically, there is almost always at least one ramp in an alliance which cannot cap. This means that many alliances during the qualifying rounds must rely on a ramp bot to win and this will ensure that MANY OF THE TOP 8 SEEDED TEAMS WILL BE RAMP BOTS. This will make it difficult to have three cappers on an elimination alliance, UNLESS A CAPPER IS ONE OF THE TOP 8 AND HAS THE GUTS TO ONLY SELECT CAPPERS! That is where strategy and intestinal fortitude comes in!!!!!! |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
Pavan. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
The requirements can be made for full point bonuses, actually. Say if no tube is scored for the ramp bot alliance, then they recieved a reduced point bonus, such as only 1 - 15pt bonus allowance per robot on top of the ramp for 12 and 4 inches so 30pts (ramp) can be won over by 32 (5-ringers) which I feel is a lot better. Fighting, very hard, for 5 ringers just to over come a ramp deficit, against a very reliable ramp alliance, fighting very hard to defend the placement of five ringers. Each alliance would really have to fight for their win, and that's an exciting match. Oh well, I still LOVE this game :) GDC does a great job every year, so it's not a problem to me really. It's just a thought for next year. Imagine a game where you had requirments for scoring, and a task accomplished means more scoring?! Makes it a lot harder, and possibly encourages more innovation, and competitiveness. :cool: just a thought Rameez |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
So I see all this discussion about ramp bots. With ramp bots you can only get up if you have enough traction and clearence. What about lifters? ;) Wouldnt they be harder to beat?
-John |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
You could look at the issue of awarding points for elevated robots from a marketing perspective also. When people watch athletic events, they want to see action, with offense and defense, and through all of that action, eventually a winner will prevail. Consider the most popular spectator sports, they are all like this. Think of other sports, ones that are really not so popular, often ones that people only pay attention to around Olympics time. Examples being swimming, diving, skiing, speed skating, track, etc. There is no offense versis defense there. Is it a coincidence that they are relegated to being popular every four years? You need the Olympic Spirit stuff to make people interested, otherwise most really would not care.
So, yes I agree that there are too many points awarded for elevated robots, and I think the above perspective should be considered by the First Administration. Know your customers. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Well, the way i look at it:
1. saying that the point values are not as good as they could be after thinking about it even for as much as 3 hours is a shame. I think that for us to say the TONS of hours put in by the GDC deciding point values are wrong takes some serious guts (maybe even some gall). Are you sure that you want to take on the entire GDC? ( i wouldn't, they work hard and i've talked with some OCCRA planners. Deciding point allocations is hard, and the commitees come up with the game They want) 2. The use of spoilers skyrocketed. Some will say that alliances like the one my team made (using ringers to limit rows) will be more effective, but if we had put the spoiler on we would have won. Think about that for a second. Also, the more you argue that spoilers aren't big, the more i point to 1596. They.were.sweet. They capped spoilers a lot, especially in the elims. It was hot watching that shiny black tube going on, no matter what. They played smart and i was surprised to see them lose out eventually. Props go to them as one of the best spoiler placing teams so far this year. 3. Week 2 owned week 1. No offense, but dang. That was a big step up. 4. You already know my concern with the randomizer, inspection, and other faults. (sorry if i already posted some of this. My brain keeps thinking about it. And if anyone has video of QF1 at GLR, let me know cuz it rocked. Edit: If you think you can come up with better scoring, make your own game for vex or something else. Put your ideas to good use! |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
with our dual lifting platforms, when one platform was unstable or had a problem, we could always abort that lift with the simple press of a button. and we'd still get the 30pts from the other lift :D anyways, LA was great. With our "hybrid" design and some great strategy (as what sanddrag mentioned a while back) we were able to win every single tournament match up until the finals when we were annihilated by 330/254/4. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
I was at GLR saturday only, so I didn't see the qualifying match-ups, though I read that they were slightly better than before.
I truly think the best solution to this is to generate a list of matches for every number of teams possible at a regional and draw team numbers out of a hat to match them with the random slots. (For a better job describing that, see the thread about the "random seeding") While it's very easy to say the ramps are worth too much (I generally agree), I did realize at GLR that there was definite potential for teams to easily overcome the ramp points with sufficient ringers. As mentioned previously in this thread, however, strategy does an excellent job negating the full ringer potential. GLR would have kept seeing 100+ scores throughout elimination but for this. If points were to be downgraded, I wouldn't make it much... maybe to 20 points. I would say we should consider whether the GDC accurately predicted the number of rampbots, but I think that's irrelevant. I think the "two scorers, one rampbot" alliances in the finals are almost universal and would probably have been predicted accurately enough for the GDC to decide it's scoring rules. I like the game. :) |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Re: ramp points. Onboard ramps are new this year. I'm sure the GDC made a decision to make sure they were worthwhile to build. It's what differentiates a tetra scorer from a ringer scorer. (That, and about 6-8 pounds of field element weight out on the end of your arm.)
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
SO many people have said that 2 ringer scorers and a ramp bot that can play their fair share of D is the best.
Wrong. All three robots should be able to score, and one needs to have ramps. Defense is not needed if you play proactively and eliminate the possibilities of long rows (QF 1 GLR was a good example of how close it can get you) . Pushing power isnt bad, but i think its best when used to help alliance partners up the ramp. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
To those that are complaining about the score for ramping: You all knew these points when the game was announced. Now that you are seeing that some teams are ramping easily you want to penalize them because you overestimated your ringer capability and underestimated the ramps. I say we all have to live with the design decisions we made.
This game (more than any other I've seen in FIRST) is an alliance game. Very few times can a single bot beat an alliance. Ramp bots are the ultimate alliance robot, but they are only effective when: 1> Their alliance partners can score ringers. 2> They are able to play strong defense. 3> Their alliance partners are able to climb their ramp (both designs must be compatable) When the alliance partners are compatable with the ramp bot, the ramp bot becomes devestatingly effective. If they are not compatable, the ramp bot generally loses big time. I know this because we built a ramp bot and we were part of the winning alliance at BAE GSR (along with our wonderful partners 175 and 501). During the seeding rounds we won many matches due to our partners climbing our ramps and lost many matches because our partners couldnt climb a ramp. As I said, this is an alliance game and to win you must bring value to your alliance. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
Get that 128, and I'd bet that the other team would have been too busy trying to stop you to get 64 and then the ramp. But, because of a slight deficiency in excellent scorers (how many alliances in the elimination rounds have autonomous scorers? not all. see the point? :) ), two scorers and a ramp is much more common and still rather effective. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
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. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
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.... |
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. |
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. |
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!
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
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 |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
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. |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
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' |
Re: Week 2 Impressions of Rack 'N Roll
Quote:
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