Originally Posted by Carol (Post 600697)

I agree with that. Hanging a keeper has little or no effect on the final score, especially as compared to last year. Many teams didn't even bother trying to design an autonomous program this year. Is the GDC deliberately trying to level the playing field by de-emphasizing autonomous? It's another aspect of the game that can make it interesting, IMHO.

Originally Posted by freestylemotox (Post 600734)

The ramp bonus is making this game more defensive, because teams can go and push and pin the scoring teams until the last 30 seconds then get on a ramp and win. We have all seen this happen time after time.

Originally Posted by T. Hoffman (Post 600762)

What about pushing the pushers? Some of the best rushing offenses in the NFL have great fullbacks lead blocking for them.....

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery (Post 600538)

It is very interesting to see the complaints about heavy defense and ramp bonus in the Week 3 thread. UTC is always defensive, and 25, frankly, should have been prepared. I am not surprised that they were shut out twice during the finals and encountered heavy defense. Detroit is a little more interesting, but defense is often common in smaller regionals, as the quantity of proficient offensive bots is lower, allowing for defensive teams to take a more prominent role (despite the powerhouse offensive machines).
At Chesapeake (and apparently at Peachtree as well) we saw a whole new game. It might have been, in part, due to the lack of very many quality ramp bots, but isn't the only explanation. The winning alliance at Chesapeake scored a TOTAL (yes, a TOTAL) of ZERO bonus points. 293, 75, and 203 won through the rack and the rack alone. 293 and 75 scored early and quickly on the top level of the rack, a place few other bots could effectively challenge them, and managed to create several long rows (5-7) capable of outweighing any bonus points the other alliance might have gotten. Much like the NJ regional, if the other alliance retreated to score bonus points, 75 and 293 would extend their row long enough to outscore them. 203 played enough defense to prevent the other alliances from creating longer rows beneath. The opposition even resorted to spoilers, but the one time it was placed on a long row, 293 actually removed it (and almost placed it over an opposition ringer). Judging from the reports and pictures I have heard about Peachtree, it was much of the same.
There are several explanations behind this. One is the lack of quality 2@12" ramps. They were few and far between, but even when they did play, they didn't mean a guaranteed win. Another is the stricter reffing at Chesapeake. More penalties were called than at other regionals, but even this didn't fully discourage defense (and it was still very common and quite intense).
As the game evolves, I think we'll see these two styles of play meet somewhere in the middle. Most of the complaints in this thread originate from a New England regional, and a regional with less than 30 teams, both of which create defensive regionals. But Peachtree was a very defensive regional when we attended in 2006, but the winning alliance (as shown here) managed to score 260 points on the rack alone. At the Championship, the quantity of powerful offensive machines will be high enough to create a game between these two realms. Well executed driving and multiple offensive machines will allow for scoring on the rack, while smart placement will prevent many long rows (resulting in lower rack scores, which keeps ramp points important). Spoilers will continue to play a prominent role, especially when larger rows do form, but the value of removing them will also increase. The value of autonomous will definitely be shown as well. Not only are keepers protected from being spoiled, but autonomous essentially represents 15 additional seconds to score (and a keeper is essentially an extra ringer). Because of the exponential scoring, an extra ringer doubles the points of the row (duh), as well as cuts your opponents possible score on that row in half. Imagine now if an alliance can score 5 rings on a purely defensive alliance. Without a keeper, they might lose 60-32 because of bonus points. With the keeper it's a 62-60 win. Now imagine when 2 or 3 bots on that alliance can score keepers.

Originally Posted by Corey Balint (Post 600778)

So far in this thread, I hear alot of whining, and not enough chatter about how to improve, how to make this game better.

I think this game is getting better as it progresses, still not the best FIRST has mad...by far. But its becoming a little better to watch. I actually saw a QF match this weekend that had half the rack full. I was astonished.

Originally Posted by Henry_222 (Post 600798)

...speaking of which:
It seemed to me that semi-final play was more fun to watch than final play.
The matches weren't blown out either. As you said Corey, there were many tubes on the rack from both alliances.
interesting...

Originally Posted by Carol (Post 600697)

I agree with that. Hanging a keeper has little or no effect on the final score, especially as compared to last year. Many teams didn't even bother trying to design an autonomous program this year. Is the GDC deliberately trying to level the playing field by de-emphasizing autonomous? It's another aspect of the game that can make it interesting, IMHO.

Originally Posted by burkechrs1 (Post 600871)

He said that as long as we have a keeper in our possession the other alliance could pin us against the rack as long as they wanted. I thought it was a wrong call but I didnt argue and ended up having to drop many ringers in the match to follow im order to get 190 to stop pinning us...

Originally Posted by burkechrs1 (Post 600871)

We lost, but props to 190, that was the most intense defense I have ever experienced in 3 years of driving.

Originally Posted by BoyWithCape195 (Post 600808)

Are you talking about any regional inparticular or just overall?

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery (Post 600538)

It is very interesting to see the complaints about heavy defense and ramp bonus in the Week 3 thread. UTC is always defensive, and 25, frankly, should have been prepared. I am not surprised that they were shut out twice during the finals and encountered heavy defense. Detroit is a little more interesting, but defense is often common in smaller regionals, as the quantity of proficient offensive bots is lower, allowing for defensive teams to take a more prominent role (despite the powerhouse offensive machines).
At Chesapeake (and apparently at Peachtree as well) we saw a whole new game. It might have been, in part, due to the lack of very many quality ramp bots, but isn't the only explanation. The winning alliance at Chesapeake scored a TOTAL (yes, a TOTAL) of ZERO bonus points. 293, 75, and 203 won through the rack and the rack alone. 293 and 75 scored early and quickly on the top level of the rack, a place few other bots could effectively challenge them, and managed to create several long rows (5-7) capable of outweighing any bonus points the other alliance might have gotten. Much like the NJ regional, if the other alliance retreated to score bonus points, 75 and 293 would extend their row long enough to outscore them. 203 played enough defense to prevent the other alliances from creating longer rows beneath. The opposition even resorted to spoilers, but the one time it was placed on a long row, 293 actually removed it (and almost placed it over an opposition ringer). Judging from the reports and pictures I have heard about Peachtree, it was much of the same.
There are several explanations behind this. One is the lack of quality 2@12" ramps. They were few and far between, but even when they did play, they didn't mean a guaranteed win. Another is the stricter reffing at Chesapeake. More penalties were called than at other regionals, but even this didn't fully discourage defense (and it was still very common and quite intense).
As the game evolves, I think we'll see these two styles of play meet somewhere in the middle. Most of the complaints in this thread originate from a New England regional, and a regional with less than 30 teams, both of which create defensive regionals. But Peachtree was a very defensive regional when we attended in 2006, but the winning alliance (as shown here) managed to score 260 points on the rack alone. At the Championship, the quantity of powerful offensive machines will be high enough to create a game between these two realms. Well executed driving and multiple offensive machines will allow for scoring on the rack, while smart placement will prevent many long rows (resulting in lower rack scores, which keeps ramp points important). Spoilers will continue to play a prominent role, especially when larger rows do form, but the value of removing them will also increase. The value of autonomous will definitely be shown as well. Not only are keepers protected from being spoiled, but autonomous essentially represents 15 additional seconds to score (and a keeper is essentially an extra ringer). Because of the exponential scoring, an extra ringer doubles the points of the row (duh), as well as cuts your opponents possible score on that row in half. Imagine now if an alliance can score 5 rings on a purely defensive alliance. Without a keeper, they might lose 60-32 because of bonus points. With the keeper it's a 62-60 win. Now imagine when 2 or 3 bots on that alliance can score keepers.