Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Coopetition Ramp (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99471)

nuggetsyl 08-01-2012 09:01
Coopetition Ramp
 
Would like to see your thoughts on this part of the game.

Billfred 08-01-2012 09:05
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
I say bring it on. Work together, and you both seed better. Makes for a nice challenge in qualification matches.

tim-tim 08-01-2012 09:05
This ramp will be key. I have a feeling a lot of teams won't review the ranking system this year and it will bite them at their first event. You will see a top 8 much similar to that of 2010 (BreakAway)

Koko Ed 08-01-2012 09:12
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuggetsyl (Post 1099223)
Would like to see your thoughts on this part of the game.
I think teams that are used to working with one another (like you guys and 103 or 1114 and 2056) will be able to make this work out more often than not but I can't see pulling this off with any random team. It's gonna be hard enough getting on your own ramp with your own alliance teammates much less your opponents who you may not have had a chance of brokering a deal with. it does require some co-ordination to pull this off.
I like this Coopetition MUCH better than last year where most teams just chose to ignore it and even some competitions didn't bother with it.

the man 08-01-2012 09:25
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
I'm not sure yet, we'll see.

dodar 08-01-2012 09:28
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Does this ramp become an alliance ramp in eliminations? Meaning, in the eleimination rounds does this ramp mean nothing or can like the 3rd red/blue alliance member use it to get 10 points?

nuggetsyl 08-01-2012 09:42
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
No the coopetition ramp has nothing to do with the playoffs.

pfreivald 08-01-2012 09:56
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koko Ed (Post 1099230)
I think teams that are used to working with one another (like you guys and 103 or 1114 and 2056) will be able to make this work out more often than not but I can't see pulling this off with any random team.
You think? If one robot drives on, tips the ramp down, lets the other hold it, drives back and locks into place, the other robot should be able to drive on and balance -- keep one stationary, let the other do the balancing (probably with accelerometer assist).

It won't be easy per se, but I don't think it requires any amazing pre-ship coordination between teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koko Ed (Post 1099230)
It's gonna be hard enough getting on your own ramp with your own alliance teammates much less your opponents who you may not have had a chance of brokering a deal with.
That's what makes this true coopertition -- you have to talk to your opponents before each match to coordinate who is going to balance with who, and how. The fact that you can't talk to each other while trying to balance makes the beforehand communication absolutely critical.

I think it's pretty ingenious.

ToddF 08-01-2012 10:37
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
We tossed out some methods for on-field communication in this thread:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...threadid=99428

Jay H 237 08-01-2012 10:52
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Teams that have operational previous year robots should practice balancing robots on a ramp copy of this years piece. We are looking at doing this just to see how hard it will be to coordinate with another driver in achieving the balance and get some training in on it.

AlexD744 08-01-2012 12:19
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
While we're on the subject of ramps, did anyone else notice the little note from the GDC that said:
"As the level of competition at the FIRST Championship is typically very different than during the competition season, the Game Design Committee will possibly alter the value of balancing at the FIRST Championship within the range of 5 to 15 points per Robot."

They kind of are trying to give themselves a get out of jail free card if the point system turns out to not work.

Ernst 08-01-2012 12:23
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexD744 (Post 1099381)
While we're on the subject of ramps, did anyone else notice the little note from the GDC that said:
"As the level of competition at the FIRST Championship is typically very different than during the competition season, the Game Design Committee will possibly alter the value of balancing at the FIRST Championship within the range of 5 to 15 points per Robot."

They kind of are trying to give themselves a get out of jail free card if the point system turns out to not work.
This refers to the alliance bridges, not the Coopertition bridge.

RayTurner1126 08-01-2012 12:26
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
i think the coopertition bridge really is exactly what the spirit of FIRST is about, working with your own alliance members becomes just as important as working with the opposing alliance. i like it, it's an interesting twist.

on that note, i feel it might be important to have us share information regarding our weights and centers of gravity prior to a regional here, so that teams can adequately match up who can balance who, etc. i feel like it'd be useful.

Cyberphil 08-01-2012 12:46
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
This idea is a very unique and ingenious way to promote Coopertition that I hope the GDC puts into use for years to come. I think you will see more Coopertition this year than ever.

Last year at the events I attended I only saw a few cases of Coopertition (sharing minibots for those of you who don't know) and in most cases it was in eliminations within an alliance. The problem, in my opinion, with last year was if you shared a minibot with another team who was not on your alliance you risk eventually loosing to them (if you did not take the minibot away from them when you played against them).

This years Coopertition eliminates that problem by making it relatively useless in the finals (unless you are trying to win the award), and only beneficial in the quals.

I see what you did there GDC...

davidthefat 08-01-2012 12:53
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
Anyone have any answers about the legality of hooking onto alliance member robots on the bridges? Hooking onto opponents are clearly off limits, but never mentioned alliance members.

NJEchoAlpha 08-01-2012 12:54
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidthefat (Post 1099429)
Anyone have any answers about the legality of hooking onto alliance member robots on the bridges? Hooking onto opponents are clearly off limits, but never mentioned alliance members.
The rule has no exemptions, so hooking onto alliance members wouldn't be permitted as well I guess.

sanddrag 08-01-2012 12:54
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
If I'm interpreting the rules correctly, cooperation is HUGE in this game. If balanced, it's as good for your rankings as playing and winning a whole additional match.

davidthefat 08-01-2012 12:59
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJEchoAlpha (Post 1099430)
The rule has no exemptions, so hooking onto alliance members wouldn't be permitted as well I guess.
I guess G26 clears that up... I was just looking at G27

Ernst 08-01-2012 13:01
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidthefat (Post 1099429)
Anyone have any answers about the legality of hooking onto alliance member robots on the bridges? Hooking onto opponents are clearly off limits, but never mentioned alliance members.
The robot-robot interaction rules (G26-G30) disallow extending within an opponent's frame perimeter:
Quote:
[G27]
Deliberate or damaging contact with an opponent Robot inside its Frame Perimeter is not allowed.
They say nothing about deliberate contact with an alliance robot inside its frame perimeter.

Grim Tuesday 08-01-2012 13:01
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanddrag (Post 1099431)
If I'm interpreting the rules correctly, cooperation is HUGE in this game. If balanced, it's as good for your rankings as playing and winning a whole additional match.
There are two end results to this: We see a lot of lower level teams, but those who can balance, end up high in the rankings.

Or the high end teams realize the importance and get really got at it.

Cyberphil 08-01-2012 13:02
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
5.3.3 Qualification Score (QS)
Qualification Points are awarded to each team at the completion of each Qualification Match and are dependant on the final score:

Each team on the winning Alliance will receive two (2) Qualification Points.
Each team on the losing Alliance will receive zero (0) Qualification Points.
In the event of a tied score, all six teams will receive one (1) Qualification Point.
Additional Qualification Points will be awarded to each team on an Alliance equal to any Coopertition Points earned.

The total number of Qualification Points earned by a team throughout their Qualification Matches will be their Qualification Score.
Quote:
[G41]
If a Robot from each Alliance is balanced on the Coopertition Bridge when the final score for a Qualification Match is assessed per Rule [G37], each Alliance earns 2 Coopertition Points. If the Coopertition Bridge is not balanced, but a Robot from each Alliance is fully supported by the Coopertition Bridge, each Alliance will earn 1 Coopertition Point.
I figured this would be useful to the people here. This means that 2 coopertition points is equal to winning an additional match, and 1 is equal to tying an additional match. To say the least, it is extremely significant! Also considering the score is added to every team on both alliances it might be worthwhile to send a not-so-great team to the coopertition bridge at the 45 second or 30 second mark. It is just that important in quals.

Richard Wallace 08-01-2012 13:12
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZehP (Post 1099439)
The robot-robot interaction rules (G26-G30) disallow extending within an opponent's frame perimeter...

They say nothing about deliberate contact with an alliance robot inside its frame perimeter.
Nor about deliberate contact with a opponent's robot outside its frame perimeter. So maybe opponents can interlock with each others' extended hooks while attempting to balance on the center bridge? Hmm....

davidthefat 08-01-2012 13:14
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
[G26]
Strategies aimed at the destruction, attachment, damage, tipping or entanglement of Robots are not in the spirit of the FRC and are not allowed.

the man 08-01-2012 14:29
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Is coopertition worth to much? Do you guys think the 2 seeding points awarded it too much? I think one would be more reasonable. If you end up matched against teams that cant balance, unlikely but possible, you would be out a lot of seeding points.

JaneYoung 08-01-2012 16:52
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
From the fans in the stands point of view, this is going to provide one of the most exciting moments in FRC's history. The first time they see the two alliances attempt this, there will probably be confusion and quiet. The first time they see it accomplished, there will be a deafening roar. The roar will be one of awe and inspiration with, perhaps, an aha moment or two thrown in. The term, bridge, is a beauty.

It will be like this throughout the season and off-season. I can only imagine what the Championship event will be like. Or IRI.

Love it.

Jane

Apeace 08-01-2012 20:25
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
I know it says you can't attach robots to others, but what if you extended a ramp they could drive onto?

Hallry 08-01-2012 20:29
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneYoung (Post 1099680)
It will be like this throughout the season and off-season. I can only imagine what the Championship event will be like. Or IRI.
Especially if the GDC imposes the G40 clause that would allow them to change the value of the bridges between 5 and 15 points (per robot) for Champs. Of course, the IRI planning committee can change it however much they want =P.

Ninja_Bait 08-01-2012 20:31
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
I think the ramp is legal, if you can extend a 14" ramp that will make it easy for robots to drive up over your bumpers and onto the bridge.

Madison 08-01-2012 21:24
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
I like the idea, but I think it has potential to make people very angry with one another.

Free wins are too important to let slip by, so I think most matches will see both alliances agree in advance to attempt a coopertition balance. Top-tier teams will have machines that leave little to chance and make this balance -- even among teams that can't communicate well -- very reliable. The idea is that everyone gets a little bit of seeding help from the coopertition bonus.

In reality, though, the team that is losing the match is the one that will determine whether or not the coopertition "bonus" really helps them and whether it's worth pursuing. If you're competing against an alliance that is seeded higher/will seed higher in your estimation and you're losing only by a small margin, I think it'd be wiser to use your third robot to win the match than it will be to attempt a coopertition balance. The end result is that you receive +2 QP and they'll receive +0, closing the gap between you and them.

Am I missing something? Close matches between teams vying for high seeds -- the people most likely to succeed at the task -- disincentivize attempting it because a win with no coopertition bonus (+2 QP gain on your opponent) is better than a loss with a coopertition bonus (-2 QP gain on your opponent).

So, in reality, maybe this means that capable teams will take advantage of less capable opponents to leap even farther ahead in the standings; a bit of a win more situation.

Maybe I'm missing something tremendously important about this. I've been looking at CAD for 10 hours.

Thoughts?

davidthefat 08-01-2012 21:26
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1100027)
I like the idea, but I think it has potential to make people very angry with one another.

Free wins are too important to let slip by, so I think most matches will see both alliances agree in advance to attempt a coopertition balance. Top-tier teams will have machines that leave little to chance and make this balance -- even among teams that can't communicate well -- very reliable. The idea is that everyone gets a little bit of seeding help from the coopertition bonus.

In reality, though, the team that is losing the match is the one that will determine whether or not the coopertition "bonus" really helps them and whether it's worth pursuing. If you're competing against an alliance that is seeded higher/will seed higher in your estimation and you're losing only by a small margin, I think it'd be wiser to use your third robot to win the match than it will be to attempt a coopertition balance. The end result is that you receive +2 QP and they'll receive +0, closing the gap between you and them.

Am I missing something? Close matches between teams vying for high seeds -- the people most likely to succeed at the task -- are disincentivized from attempting it because a win with no coopertition bonus (+2 QP gain on your opponent) is better than a loss with a coopertition bonus (-2 QP gain on your opponent).

So, in reality, maybe this means that capable teams will take advantage of less capable opponents to leap even farther ahead in the standings; a bit of a win more situation.

Maybe I'm missing something tremendously important about this. I've been looking at CAD for 10 hours.

Thoughts?
Exact same idea was brought up at our meeting. I think that would be more prevalent during the last half of the matches and not during the first.

DjMaddius 08-01-2012 21:29
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
How about touching the ground while you are still on the ramp at the end of the match, is this allowed? Having something touching the ground yet still being within 5 degrees. Or would we not get our points?

davidthefat 08-01-2012 21:30
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DjMaddius (Post 1100041)
How about touching the ground while you are still on the ramp at the end of the match, is this allowed? Having something touching the ground yet still being within 5 degrees. Or would we not get our points?
Nope, unless your robot is FULLY supported by the bridge, nope.

DjMaddius 08-01-2012 21:32
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidthefat (Post 1100043)
Nope, unless your robot is FULLY supported by the bridge, nope.
Ah, alright, so no cheating then and just balancing it by pushing off the floor. Glad to hear that.

Madison 08-01-2012 21:33
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidthefat (Post 1100043)
Nope, unless your robot is FULLY supported by the bridge, nope.
Section 2.2.5 reads, "A Bridge will count as Balanced if it is within 5° of horizontal."

Is there anything more in the manual that defines "balanced"? If not, at this point, it does not appear to require that robots be supported only by the bridge.

DjMaddius 08-01-2012 21:35
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1100052)
Section 2.2.5 reads, "A Bridge will count as Balanced if it is within 5° of horizontal."

Is there anything more in the manual that defines "balanced"? If not, at this point, it does not appear to require that robots be supported only by the bridge.
That could be good news for some teams, if they see this advantage they will get the points every round. Otherwise, they risk not getting the points.

Kellen Hill 08-01-2012 21:41
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
The bonus qualification points are huge! A team that is 0-10, but completed the coopertition bridge every match, could actually rank above a 10-0 team that never once did it. Improbable but possible. It's also a much much much better way to boost yourself in the rankings compared to 'fixing' the match score in ways such as scoring for the opponent as has been done in the past.

I can also imagine a role of a third bot during qualifications to balance the coopertition bridge for the set of bots on top of it. Of course this would involve a 10 point tradeoff (not having 2 bots on your own ramp). But the tradeoff may be well worth is as you would still get the 2 qualification points if the bridge is balanced. If those 10 points lost didn't cause your alliance to lose the match, then you get the 4 qualification points for the match. This strategy may prove helpful during qualifications to boost your ranking, but becomes rather useless in the eliminations unless you skip on the idea of getting all 3 bots up and just get the 2 up and balanced. The perfect bot for this strategy would simply have an assembly to hold the bridge in the 'balanced' position once the two bots are on top.

Thoughts?

And in regards to if robots can be touching the ground for a balanced bridge, there is poor clarification at this point, and I am expecting it to be clarified in an update. This is what I expect, but I could very well be wrong. We shall see

pfreivald 08-01-2012 21:56
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1100052)
Section 2.2.5 reads, "A Bridge will count as Balanced if it is within 5° of horizontal."

Is there anything more in the manual that defines "balanced"? If not, at this point, it does not appear to require that robots be supported only by the bridge.
Correct so far, but I'm willing to bet a rules update will say so... We have to read these rules as engineering guidelines and with common sense, and not try to 'lawyer' them -- chances are very good that this one will be explained away.

As to the discussion on whether or not to do the coopertition ramp, the answer is yes in all situations save one: if you have a choice of only doing your own ramp (or something else to score points) or the coopertition ramp, and doing that alternate thing will likely result in a win, it is to your alliance's seeding advantage to do that alternate thing instead of the coopertition ramp.

Billfred 08-01-2012 22:00
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1100027)
Am I missing something? Close matches between teams vying for high seeds -- the people most likely to succeed at the task -- disincentivize attempting it because a win with no coopertition bonus (+2 QP gain on your opponent) is better than a loss with a coopertition bonus (-2 QP gain on your opponent).
Assuming the other four robots are capable of balancing on their bridges, there's no downside to attempting the Coopertition Bridge that I can see.

If you win without the bonus, the delta is +2 QP over the opposing alliance. (You get 2, they get 0.)
If you win with the bonus, the delta is +2 QP over the opposing alliance. (You get 4, they get 2.)
If you lose without the bonus, the delta is -2 QP over the opposing alliance. (They get 2, you get 0.)
If you lose with the bonus, the delta is -2 QP over the opposing alliance. (They get 4, you get 2.)

With the bonus, you are both +2 over All Those Other Teams Not In That Match.

Put your top two balancers on getting your alliance bridge balanced, let the third get Coopertition. Done.

LafondaOnFire 08-01-2012 22:10
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Don't forget that <G41> also states that:
"If the Coopertition Bridge is not balanced, but a Robot from each Alliance is fully supported by the Coopertition Bridge, each Alliance will earn 1 Coopertition Point."

A free tie on top of the final outcome of the game is not to be discounted. It seems like even the effort to balance the Coopetition Ramp is worthwhile, even if not feasible.

BJC 08-01-2012 22:18
Re: Coopetition Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billfred (Post 1100101)
Assuming the other four robots are capable of balancing on their bridges, there's no downside to attempting the Coopertition Bridge that I can see.
/Snip
This is not a good assumption to make..

Mr V 08-01-2012 22:20
Re: *Coopertition* Ramp
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyberphil (Post 1099416)
This idea is a very unique and ingenious way to promote Coopertition that I hope the GDC puts into use for years to come. I think you will see more Coopertition this year than ever.

Last year at the events I attended I only saw a few cases of Coopertition (sharing minibots for those of you who don't know) and in most cases it was in eliminations within an alliance. The problem, in my opinion, with last year was if you shared a minibot with another team who was not on your alliance you risk eventually loosing to them (if you did not take the minibot away from them when you played against them).

This years Coopertition eliminates that problem by making it relatively useless in the finals (unless you are trying to win the award), and only beneficial in the quals.

I see what you did there GDC...
To me that was the beauty of last years coopertition that if your playing in the true spirit of it you may come up against your own machine. If we had advanced past the quarter finals last year in Seattle we would have went up against our own minibot. I would have loved to see our minibot go up against our minibot in the semis or finals.

Like last year, coopertition points are only awarded in quals. But you are right there is no risk involved as there was last year.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57.

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