|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Quote:
|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Well, I mean, at most events there arent many more than 5 or 6 truly dominant machines...
|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Quote:
(I had this worded correctly in my head before...but I can't remember how I wanted to say it. So it might be confusing/not making the point I was getting at) |
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
i agree with not always picking the "standout" team, it is more about what makes you alliance complete. In this game you would look for 2 hurdlers and 1 lap/defense bot. Last year for us in Boston, the stars aligned and we had stellar performances in the elims. 126 and 125(us), were able to each cap up to 5 or 6 times a match, 69 would cap 1-3 in a match, and then deploy their huge ramps at the end. (It ended up that 69 would stay close to the home zone and put up a colum and then play d or get back and deploy ramps, and 126 and 125 would blitz the other side of the field and put up as many tubes as possible, we scored over 200 pts a few times, once in quarters and once in semis i think)
|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
No matter how nicely you put it denying an alliance selection is the equivalent of having the most popular girl in school tell the meek class valedictorian that they "just want to be friends". It still has the same painful effects if she simply snarled "I wouldn't date you if you were the last man on earth" and slapped him.
I remember a few years ago a team was turned down by a more established team from their area at the championships and we were sitting nearby the rejected team. The kids were miffed and hurt. It's legal but there is no real pleasant way to do it. Just say no thanks and move on. |
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
KoKo is right here.
There is no nice way to do it, but it is definitely a feasible option that teams should consider in certain situations (ie: Newton '06) |
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Quote:
Our team has discussed using this strategy multiple times before. I believe we were the ones who suggested this course of action to 176 on Newton in '06 (since they had already informed us that they intended to pick us). Is there some reason we should just roll over and let a "super-alliance" be formed that we know full well that we can't beat, when we have a valid, fully rules-compliant option to prevent it? |
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
This actually happened in the recent Bayou Regional. One top 8 team, seeded #3, picked I believe the #5 or #6 team. The latter denied the request, for they had already planned their personal strategy and wanted to remain an alliance captain. The status of the #3 alliance: went on to the semifinals and lost in the third round due to a penalty that was not called on the opposing team in a situation that needed a second look. The other team competed and also lost in elimination, unfortunately with damage to their innovative design. It's all part of the Game!!
|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Quote:
|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
In Philadelphia we were seeded number 6.
5 picked us, and we declined their offer. We then picked team 7. We based our decision on a lot of things, and one of them was that Team 7 had a better average for hurdling than Team 5 which we wanted in an alliance partner at the time. We tend to scout an individual team throughout the course of a competition, and not an alliance, nor will we pick a team just because they are ranked higher at the end of qualifications than another team. 2 places in the rankings can make a big difference. (Even if it's in a negative direction.) So basically, we've done this before with success, and will do it again if the need arises. |
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Quote:
|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Serpentine alliance selections certainly make it more appealing for a low seeded team to decline an alliance from a higher seeded team. Lets say it's a wash between who you think will be left to be picked, and the team asking you to be in an alliance, by leading your own alliance you are getting a better third team.
Sure there will be some hurt feelings, I blame them on the inability of the seeding system to accurately rank teams. |
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Quote:
Our strategists saw the 34 & 1902 combination would not have been good for either team and we feel 34 did better without us. Both teams lost in the semi's we lost to the #1 team who eventually won and 34 lost to the #2 alliance. Our team 1902 felt really bad about declining. We had bonded with team 34 hosting a dinner with them and team 34 had even given us a "best design" award. So it was a controversial call by our team. Many in the crowds communicated their surprise. Again it was nothing against a team who had earned a top stop but more of having a partnership taking both of us to the top. Thank you again team 34 for picking us, please do forgive us for not saying yes, it was not easy for us. |
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Having been on both sides of this, I can say that it does hurt when you know you will be declined, but that shouldn't discourage you from "breaking" up that "super alliance". On the other hand, if you have an idea that your robot will work better with someone else who has not yet been picked, then you should exercise your right to decline. This is all part of the game and can make the picking very interesting :)
|
Re: Denying an Alliance Selection
Quote:
One of these days we're going to team up with you guys! Maybe next year? :) |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi