What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Ever since kickoff I have been racking my brain trying to figure out how to handle the coopertition bridge.

Do you talk to the entire opposing alliance before a match? Just the team you want to go on the bridge with?

Should it be the best bridge climbers on each alliance going on the bridge? The worst? Will teams say to the opposing alliance that one team will do it when another will do it?

Will teams say they wont do it unless the best robot on the other alliance does it, in order to give their alliance a better chance at winning?

I am glad that we are not competing in a week 1 event and will be able to see how this plays out, but I was wondering what teams' current thoughts are on this matter.

What is your coopertition bridge plan?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Best teams or climbers or balancers, coopertition bridge is worth a lot.

I believe u should talk to the entire other alliance if u plan on going for the coopertition bridge. Decide wat teams and when u go.

Now if u noticed, I said if u plan on going for it. I believe that sometimes in strategic moves that u dont allow the other team the extra two points. This would be from earlier collusion from a high placed team that might have said that they will pick u. While I dont believe this is in the nature of FIRST, dont be shocked when it happenes because im sure it will.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

You won't see clear pattern or plan to that bridge I think til the end of Practice on Thursday. By then you know what your and your competitors bots are capable of so you should have an idea of what to do.

And I can see the allies/opponents in the queuing lineup discussing this. And lots of last minute dealing and wheeling. This will actually mean all of those handshakes that make up the Seeding and Tourney play will be ongoing all through the competition rather then just through the Qualification matches.

I'll wait and see what A) happens at the scrimmages B) happens in week 1 and C) practice day at the regional I'll be at.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I think you always prioritize the Coopertition Bridge. Even if you are losing, if you can get the bridge, you would get the same amount of points as if you won and didn't get the bridge.

So co-ordinate before, and unless there's no opposition who's going to help you balance, go for the Co-opertition Bridge.

And get your best balancer.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

It also seems like poor form to say "no, thanks" when a team asks your alliance if they can balance the bridge with you.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Why? Maybe it's disadvantageous to give members of the opposing alliance two free QPs. I think saying "no" is a perfectly legitimate answer.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I think even if you plan with the other alliance to do it, its still going to become more of a last minuet/spontaneous thing where one alliance is going to get on the bridge and wait and hope that the other alliance notices and gets over to get on as well.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

The issue I'm seeing here is the size of the robots. When you have a large piece of machinery with 120 pound max (and I just KNOW we're going to have a lot of robots approach that limit) that is 28"x38", the balancing problem increases.
Simple communication with the team across the field will be difficult, but the largest problem is how would you pull down the bridge? You can't push down with the greater-than-120 pound force needed to push the other robot up, because your own bot would lift off the ground from the force of the mechanism. So unless you can coordinate driving, simply getting two bots on there won't happen.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

One robot is already on the bridge waiting for another robot to approach, when they see the robot coming they drive to that side of the bridge thus lowering that side to allow that team to drive up onto the bridge then both robots drive towards the other side of the bridge to balance it out..

Problem solved...

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

There the problem lies in communication. While running a mockup we noticed that properly coordinating to balance *quickly* requires effective communication, because you don't know how far each robot has to move to balance with each other, and if you do you have to communicate it with the other team. Since you'll be trying to align the robots while looking at them from the drivers' stations, that's not the easiest thing to do in the frantic last thirty seconds. Then again, I could be wrong, but we won't know until we're playing against another bot.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

For teams that want to win tournaments, this will not be the case...

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Not really because good teams will always get picked, yes get the added qualification points is fantastic but it will all equal out over the course of qualifications

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Good teams get picked, great teams want to do the picking...

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I understand that and your right to a degree, but you are 1 robot on a field of 6 there is only so much YOU can do. You can't force the other 2 robots on your alliance or the other 3 robots on the other alliance to do what you want.

Now I am not saying that the extra 2 or 1 point(s) depending on it being balanced or not isn't very important and that teams should just forget it or not try, it be stupid not to.

But at the same time if every match has a balanced coopertition bridge then the rankings are going to be the same if every match didn't have a balanced bridge.

Its a good strategy to know if the coopertition bridge is a valid option in EACH match, as Madison said its not always going to advantages to do it.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

The fact that I cannot control every aspect of the game to ensure that I rank as high as possible is the most frustrating part of the coopetition bridge and ranking system. If the best robots tend to not rank in the top 8 because less capable teams will not cooperate with them then the ranking system itself is flawed.

If my team is winning a match by a significant margin and we get on the coopetition bridge and tip it for the other alliance and they refuse to even attempt to drive on I have done everything in my power to try and cooperate to assist BOTH alliances in getting more qualification points. I tried to cooperate, I should receive some merit for that as I can not control the other alliance screwing me for spite or for ranking reasons.

This is just like 2010 where it was not always in your best interest to try and win the match.

So, back to the original argument, the coopetition bridge is key for those who want to do well in elims as it is worth the equivalent of winning a match. Good teams will get picked, but a great team as #1 seed will get the second best team, and the only way to be number #1 seed is to use that stinking bridge.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Well some teams are going to make their robot small enough that all they do is try to score on the balencing part which could be a good stratigie in the finals for that extra 40 points if u balence 3

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I feel like stirring up the pot a bit this evening ....

If we are competing against an alliance and they say, "no thanks" to the coopertition bridge, or they make no attempt to do the coopertition bridge in a match with us, they will go on our blacklist for eliminations selection.

I am not saying it is not GP, as I believe saying, "no thanks" is a perfectly legitimate part of the game. However, putting someone on the blacklist for saying, "no thanks" is also a perfectly legitimate part of the game. The reason you would say no thanks is mainly due to strategic seeding to give you the best chance to make / win in the elimination rounds. Just know this: if you say, "no thanks" to us, then you won't be in the elimination rounds as our partner:)

Paul

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Our plan is when we enter the place before beginning of the match before us, we ask each of our opponents who wants to cooperate with us on the bridge. Whichever team wants to join we will then discuss the times and places we will be at and how to get up there. We want to work with teams to earn this bonus whether we win the match or not.

We want to the THE team that cooperates, we want to be THE team that is on that bridge at the end of the match with an opposing alliance robot to show our FIRST coopertion and want to be the team that ends up in the top seed.

Aww man, please come back to FLR! We will never say no to you! haha

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

You seem to share our sentiment entirely. :) Although, I do think that teams deciding to go for the bridge just for the sake of making sure high power teams don't cold shoulder them during picking is far from what the GDC envisioned the goal of the coopetition bridge being.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

While it may not be a "blacklist", we will have a "List of discouragement" that lists the teams that did turn us down more than once. It can be one thing for an alliance to turn down cooperating for the sake of having our team or another team on our alliance to take on less Qualifying points, but its another thing if we find out there isn't any interest in it match after match.

In the Elims, you want to not just get with the best robots available, but also with teams that you can work well with. I'd (and this is me speaking) rather pick a team that shoots 50% less basketballs but has 50% more connection between drive teams than a team that shoots like crazy but doesn't work well between drive teams.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Our team was thinking about making a 3 sided sign on a long pole to communicate with the other team trying to balance with us on the coopertition bridge. One side would say stop one side would say forward and one side would say back if we needed the other robot to move. We were also thinking about getting one robot to center on their side of the bridge the best they can and the other to move back and forth until the bridge becomes balanced.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Or an LED message board could work too....

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I think it could be a slippery slope with this idea though because there are cases where it is in the best interest of that team to not cooperate with you and that needs to be taken into consideration in those cases but for the most part I do agree that teams should be aware when they say no to cooperating that they are removing themselves from the picklist of the team that is requesting cooperation.

I just don't understand why the GDC does these things. It doesn't help with the spirit of FIRST, it does the opposite. In 2010 when teams scored on themselves during a blowout to help their ranking scores, the result wasn't teams thinking to themselves that at least they had the points on the board that their opponents put up for them, it was embarrassing for their opponent to have scored more points for their alliance than they did.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

At least this year you aren't scoring more points, you are getting more ranking points and your opponents get a bonus along with you. The 2010 scenario helped only one alliance in the end - this year, both teams get a boost.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Dave hits the nail on the head here. This is a robotics competition, and the elimination tournament is based around the ranking system. There is an expectation that the ranking system does the best job possible at ranking the robots at how good they are at playing the game. Right now, the system puts, In my opinion, too big of a weight on the coopertition bridge at the end. If you win and cooperate, you double your qualifying points. If you lose and cooperate, it's the same as if you'd won without the bridge.

Look at the teams who consistently win: 67, 111, 217, 254, 1114 to name a few. The way these teams are able to do so well is because they are able to win matches no matter who their opponents and partners are, and by doing so they put themselves in a position in the rankings to select the best partner. The expectation is that the teams that win matches will rank high.

With this year's ranking system, we have a situation where a powerhouse team that wins every match (10-0-0), but only is able to get their opponents to cooperate with them in 4 matches, will score (4*4)+(6*2) = 28 qualifying points. Another robot, which is able to win 4 matches and goes 4-6-0, but is able to get all of their opponents to cooperate also gets (4*4)+(6*2) = 28 qualifying points.

While this may be an extreme example, it's not a wholly improbable one. We have a situation where a very very good robot was able to go undefeated and should probably be #1 seed by common sense, and yet there is a team who won less than half of their matches, and is in contention for the same ranking spot.


As far as strategy is concerned, I believe it is very simple:

Scenario 1: You are clearly losing the match, and going for the bridge balance is not enough to get the win (or your partners are already balanced on it).
Result: Go for the coopertition bridge. Worst case you get 0 ranking points, same as if you didn't go for it. Best case you get 2.

Scenario 2: You are clearly winning the match, and going for bridge balance points is not necessary to secure the win (or your partners are already balanced on it).
Result: Go for the coopertition bridge. Worst case is you win the match but no bonus, and get 2 points. Best case you get 4.

Scenario 3: The match is close, and going for the alliance bridge could get you the win, while not going for it will likely net you a loss (this assumes that your choice matters, ie that your partners are not balanced and cannot get the coopertition bridge).
Result: Debatable, but I would say go for the alliance bridge. If you win, you get 2 points and your opponents get 0. If you lose, your opponents get 2 and your alliance gets 0. If you go for the bonus and lose the match as a result, you'd get 2 and your opponents would get 4. Loosing the match either way leaves you 2 points behind them, but one has the ability to win you the match. Granted, there may be some situations given your ranking and who you're facing where you would rather get the 2 points no matter the cost, but I believe in general, winning the match is better than losing with the bonus.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Good point. I'm definitely on board with blacklisting a team that makes no attempt, especially if they said they would. In fact, if they didn't have a very good explanation after the match, I'd plan on having a long memory. As for a "no thanks" answer, can you clarify your rationale? It's certainly legitimate and I don't know that I disagree, but on the other hand, I'd like an elimination alliance that's conscious of the intricacies of strategy. Either way it doesn't seem very...Coopertit-ative...since they're either saying no to deny our alliance points or saying yes to gain their own or stay off the blacklist.

The GDC is so odd sometimes. At least this method encourages us to talk with our opponents, as opposed to the "no blowout" embarrassment that just happens.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

The first order sort for ranking is Qualification points. Whatever can earn you more of them is always better. If you would get 2 Qualification points all regional long from winning and skipping to coop you will be in first seed... just below all others that received 4 from winning and cooperating all regional long.

Plus what is the point in not cooperating with Powerhouse teams? Are you really going to risk getting 0 points for getting 2 points and a slight legup against that Powerhouse team in seeding? No! You'll want to get that 2 qualifying points so you don't fall behind.

Here is the real question: When will the two cooperating robots get on the bridge to ensure they get those points? 10 seconds left? 30 seconds left? With some, maybe with a whole minute left?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I think it's less about you beating them and more about somebody else beating them. If you have a favorite for some reason (someone you know will pick you, etc), stacking the Top 8 the way you want them to fall can have huge advantages in the elimination bracket.

Note: I am not advocating this strategy, nor do I have any intention of implementing it. Just doesn't sit right with me. That said, it's certainly not illegal.

If you're trying to beat them, then no, it's not a very intelligent plan.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

You do make a good point, but maybe I can clarify on my thinking. I'm not saying not to cooperate with powerhouse teams at all. My points is that, in a close match, I am not going to concede the match by going for the coopertition ramp if I think I can win by going for the alliance ramp. The scenario that my logic applies to ONLY occurs with I have to chose one or the other.

No good team is going to say "I could probably win, but I'd rather not risk it and get my 2 points for the loss". If that's the mentality needed to seed well, than the ranking system is even more broken that I originally imagined. I am going to try my hardest every single match to win, because I believe my team and robot is good enough to do so. Sometimes that means taking reasonable risks. In a hard fought match that's down to the wire, I'm going to take that risk unless I have a very good reason not to (ie last match and I need 2 points to get into top 8, and my opponents will not overtake me if I let them get the 4).

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I'm with Paul 100% on this.

There is one and only one situation where a decision not to go for the coopertition bridge makes sense, and that is if you are forced into a situation where doing something else will likely win you the game instead of losing it. That's it, that's the only one.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Well....

Eliminations.... ;)

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

As I've already stated there is nothing wrong with not doing the coopertition bridge. However my goal is to be #1 at every competition I go to and to do that I'm probably going to need to rely on the coopertition bridge at least 75% of qualification matches..

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

All this talk of blacklisting teams who don't cooperate should encourage all of us to educate the other teams at each competition! That's the GP thing to do and FIRST is counting on us to do just that. I know week 1 regionals will be quite interesting, but I hope by week 2 or 3, people get it, every qualification match has to have a balanced bridge, then the best teams will rise to the top and the coop points are a non issue. I know week 5 and 6 regionals will see the most coopertition and by worlds, it will be almost standard to see the coop bridge balanced at the end of every qualification match.

Also, if you haven't built your bridge yet, you better this weekend. Don't assume you know how the dynamics will work when two robots try and balance in a matter of 15 sec or less. While its definitely doable, it is a bit more complicated than I thought.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

So in a match where one of the robots on my side dies, and the match is very close, you would blacklist me if I said "no thanks" and instead balanced on my own alliance bridge?

Just curious. Because I'd rather go for the win than just give the Thunderchickens QP.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I can't speak for Paul, but I believe he's talking about pre-match strategy. Before the match, there is no reason not to go for the coopertition bridge unless you don't have 3 robots that are physically capable of getting on a ramp. His other case would be an alliance has 3 functional, able robots and purposely decides during the match not to go for the coopertition bridge. In both cases, the only purpose that it serves is for the opposing alliance to take a QP hit in order to deny the Thunderchickens QP.

The situation you are describing is the same as I mentioned, where you have a choice between going for a win or going for a loss with coopertition, due to a dead or otherwise incapable alliance partner(s). I hope that Paul would not blacklist a team that makes such a decision.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Here is how I see it:
1) Bot 1 gets on the bridge
2) Bot 1 tilts the bridge to Bot 2
3) Bot 2 climbs onto the bridge
4) Until Bot 2 is fully on the bridge, Bot 1 does not move unless additional space is needed to permit bot 2 to get onto the bridge.
5) Once bot 2 is on the bridge, it stops.
6) Bot 1 moves away from bot 2
7) when bot 1 gets to the end, it stops
8) bot 2 then moves to the center.
9) if the bridge tips too far, bot 2 moves to the edge.

At some point during steps 6-9, the bridge will balance, and both bots stop moving.

I'm guessing that once the bridge tips to balance, you are done. The double hinge system seems to compensate for a lot of change in the center of gravity when the bots go from tilted to flat (the fulcrum point shifts by 6").

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

:p

I believe that's the only appropriate response. :)

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

One thing my team thought of was that we have a light on our robot that when trying to balance (either on the Co-op bridge or team bridge) it would go green if we wanted them to balance and we would not move or red if we wanted them to stop and let us get balanced. What do you guys think?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Pre-match I would always plan on balancing the co-op bridge. I'd also let my opponent know what we'll do if one of my alliance robots dies (balance my alliance bridge), and that I would (probably) expect them to do the same (with no hard feelings).

Pauls post seemed a bit too ... absolute ... for my tastes. I meant no disrespect.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

None taken.

My post was meant to spark a discussion. It was also directed at teams who purposely don't do the coopertition bridge to reduce the amount of QP available in that match, given there are no extenuating circumstances (like dead robots or robots who just can't do it).

This is something that will be pretty obvious to differentiate (in my mind) and teams that do this will have a special place on our list . . .

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

What if your at a regional with two 'powerhouse' robots that are clearly better than all the other teams at your regional. Last match on Saturday, your playing one of the powerhouse teams, who is 2nd place and 3 points behind a rookie team box bot in 1st place. It's in your best interest that the rookie team seeds 1st and breaks up the ultimate alliance of the two powerhouse teams. Thus, similar to the 6v0 strategy in 2010, I would not go for the cooperation bridge to give myself the best chance at winning the regional. If I were the powerhouse team, I would be upset, but would understand and respect the team's motivation and would not put them on a blacklist.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I'm in favor of a light signal as long as it can be seen at the opposite alliance side and at the station controlling the bot on the bridge. I'd even go so far as to have an extension appendage with the signal on it to improve it's visibility. Or maybe two of them, one per side, then deploy the one best visible to the other drivers. Be sure to tell them about it while you're Q'd, whichever tactic you have for coordination.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

With the expectation that the rookie, as #1 seed, would choose one of those powerhouses, right?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Correct.

I just edited my previous post to be 'rookie team box bot' instead of just 'rookie team'. Not hatin' on all rookie teams, just rookie team box bots ;)

I do agree with Paul on the overal feeling that if your not willing to cooperate with a powerhouse team JUST because they are a powerhouse team and you don't want to see them win, I have no problem putting them on a blacklist or 'no pick list'. Who would want to play with a team who doesn't want you to win?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

So I guess you are saying that the powerhouse doesn't know what scouting is?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

No. The idea is that the rookie seeds #1 and breaks up the powerhouse alliance. We're talking two teams that are so powerful, if they get together they WILL win the regional. If they're not together, everyone else has a chance.

At that point, the powerhouses have to go to their #2 choice, who may not be the best option.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

What is going to make this interesting, is that three robots are on an alliance trying to get as many qualification points as possible.

I can imagine that on one alliance two powerhouses and one decent are against two powerhouses and one decent. The two powerhouse teams on both sides do not want to cooperate to ensure their place in the rankings. However, in the end, both of the decent robots from the two alliances Cooperate because THEY want the boost in points. Do the powerhouse teams bully the decent teams into not cooperating? Bribe them with "If you won't coop we will pick you as are second choice."?

If at all - that is the only problem I see with this ranking system. Otherwise, if you want to ensure that your powerhouse robot is actually as powerhouse you and everyone claims, you will have that robot coop every single match. If a robot that loses a bunch of matches ends up in first seed because they cooperated, that's the reward they get. If a robot can score 60 points in Teleop but can't get on that bridge at the end of the match, how "powerhouse" are they? Plus that helps in splitting the powerhouse teams anyway! I see that part of the ranking system as a Win-win. This is probably the reason Paul is talking about a blacklist, because to not coop for the sake in lowering another team's qualification score can really hurt their chances, so its very easy to say that a team will blacklist you and hurt your chances in the elims. I remember that line in the animation "Team will have to cooperate if they want to be successful." Regardless of winning or losing the match, someone in your alliance needs to cooperate or else 3 teams will have been "Disqualified" and 3 teams will have "lost" in one match.

In previous FIRST games, powerhouse teams just plain won. Sure they had to fight for it, but you could tell from the beginning of the match who would come out on top. In this game, the so-called powerhouse teams will have to prove they are and ensure they can follow the rules of the game by ending up on that bridge with an opposing robot at the end of the match - even if they have to do it 45 seconds left to go. This extra tension will not necessarily "level the playing field", but challenge the otherwise uncontested "powerhouse robots" to reach that number 1 seed.

And I mean come on - If you are a very low seed robot, and some teams like the Thunderchickens could possibly choose you as their second elimination selection simply because of your ability to balance with them on a bridge, why would you say no?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

What we're seeing is the competitive nature of homo sapiens filtering up through the ranking system. Despite concerted efforts to make a "fair" seeding system, a sort of pre-eliminations contest evolves in which placement in the seeding ladder is the goal. I don't have a solution, just noting the situation, is all. We probably wouldn't like it if seeding were random, or [shudder] judged, would we?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Bully on playground, " Let's cooperate. You give me your lunch money and maybe i won't punch you."

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Another thing I'd like to note about the coopertition bridge.

It's late in the qualifying matches and your robot has been doing decent, but is out of contention for the top 8 spots and possibly on the bubble of being selected for elims.

The Top 8 bots in elims want robots that know how to work together to balance their own bridge, not the coopertition bridge (for elims)

In any of the final matches, I - as a bubble team, would most likely put priority on balancing my own alliance's bridge just to show I can and I'm useful for that purpose.

(Obvious exceptions: playing against teams in top 8 that we want to pick us - don't want to get "blacklisted" by knocking them out of the top 8. And of course, if our alliance has multiple balancing robots, balancing both bridges is not a problem.)

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

It would probably be easiest to have a conversation with the opposing alliance prior to the game and agree to cooperate.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I would like to think that no FRC team would do that.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

It would be in the best interests of all involved for a coopertition balance to happen during the above match.

Even if one of the powerhouse alliances looses (which one of them will), it's still equiv. to a win (since you still get 2 QP's), and they're still the same distance behind the powerhouses they just played, but they're higher than the rest of the pack.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

It's this simple:

If you are ahead and you don't cooperate, then you give everyone who did, a chance to catch up or surpass you.

If you are behind and you don't cooperate, then you give those further behind a chance to catchup or surpass you and those ahead a chance to pull further away.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

^My thoughts exactly. Look at 1114 and 2056. These teams have won at least 10 titles (Regionals, Championship Divisions, Invitationals) together. I could see this happening throughout the seeding matches.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

My inclination is that the coopertition bridge should be attempted every time in qualification matches. For seeding purposes, being able to do the coopertition is just as valuable as winning. However, if the coopertition bridge becomes a task too difficult to complete and the probability of success is exceedingly low, then a team's resources would be better utilized scoring points to win the match.

If a team comes up with a method for doing the coopertition bridge that has a high probability of success, then that team would likely be the/a top seed.
(please correct me if my logic is incorrect) The problem then is how do you devise a fool proof method for balancing two robots on the bridge when you are only in control of your robot's actions. That gets me thinking that being 24" or less and having another robot use a bridge as a ramp to drive on top of you as one method. This would also help solve the problem of getting three robots to fit on the bridge in elimination matches. Am I missing a game rule or a law of physics that would prevent this?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Attempt only if we are the first robot on. With certainty someone will have their robot tipped over while getting on a bridge. Imagine this...an inexperienced driver is on the bridge and lowers it so you can get on; you are almost halfway on and the other driver get anxious quickly crosses the center, the bridge becomes a fulcrum and your robot is flung on its back.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Off course alittle. Does G-14, balls can't help or hinder balancing, mean that you better dump your balls or bridge balance won't count?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I see where you're coming from here. Despite the fact that such an action would be entirely out of the spirit of FIRST, 1114 and 2056 have together won every competition at the Waterloo and Greater Toronto Regional since Lunacy - when I joined FIRST. The only different was last year was that we had an East and West field at the GTR. 1114 and 2056 were split up so they aligned themselves with other very impressive second picks, and they both went to win in their fields. As much as powerhouse teams undeniably deserve to win, there has to be some resentment building up in other great teams who cannot stand up to the 1114/2056 alliance - and I would guess that this sort of event happens in the United States as well. I just hope that the competitions don't go to such a low that there is a clear alliance AGAINST powerhouses. Such an idea could be implemented as refusing to use the coopertition bridge with them, but watching it balance in every other match that excludes the powerhouses. They're as much as a team in FIRST as the rest of us are, and a plot to split them up wouldn't be in the spirit of FIRST, any day. Sabotaging teams just to win? Yeah, not so much.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

We could also see late close matches where powerhouse teams on opposing alliances go for the coopertition bridge to ensure they both get those two points, and leave the balancing points up to their two other partners.

The coopertition bridge is the closest we'll get to FIRST Roulette.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I'm not sure such an action would be entirely out of the spirit of FIRST. We're told to 'compete like crazy' and FRC is a competition. FIRST even allowed 6v0 matches in 2010 where teams would throw matchs just get gain more seeding points (and essentially a lower seeding points for your opponent that match). I view the situation I described above as very similar to the 6v0 strategy. Additionally, FIRST has done nothing to prevent teams from breaking up powerhouse alliances in alliance selections, either. It happens atleast once or twice a year.

I think we all agree that not cooperating with 1114/2056/217/111 in a match JUST because they always win and you don't want to see them win is wrong. But, in my example your not cooperating because you want whats best for your team, not that you want to stick it to the elite team. It doesn't matter if the other team has won 100 competitions or just a rookie team that build a great robot.

Well said Paul...

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I'm trying to decide if the "no thanks" is within GP...while I agree that declining a team during alliance selection is a perfectly legitimate part of the game, it seems to me that declining an opportunity to go on the coopertition bridge is on the same footing at purposely losing a match to affect the outcomes of the final rankings. To me, part of GP is going out in every match and doing your best to win and gain as many ranking points as possible, and let the final rankings fall where they may. Admittedly though, part of my reasoning is that I just hate to lose even if it may be in my best interest to do so.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Here's a further complication, let's say you are in a match where you've decided it's in your best interests to not balance, it would also be beneficial to convince the other alliance that you will balance but their robot has to go first. This would cause them to waste precious time and increase your chances of winning the match. In my opinion this is pretty far into the black part of our gray area, but it is just as defensible from a "compete like crazy" standpoint.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Blacklist for sure ...

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I agree. There is a distinct difference between lying and strategy. Lying is one line I just don't cross in pick lists. A team intentionally withholding information is perhaps not ideal for me, but understood in a competitive setting. Deliberately spreading false information is blacklist material to me though. It's self serving and arrogant - two things you DON'T want in an alliance partner, ever.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I also agree, and will add:

I don't want lying to become an accepted part of FIRST culture. I would like to be able to have an agreement with the other alliance so that if they say they are going to balance the Cooperitition bridge with us, they better actually make a serious effort to be at that ramp when we agreed. If there are going to be challenges of this sort in the future, we need to set the standard for what is acceptable this year so things like lying to the other teams does not become an accepted practice within FIRST.

Regards, Bryan

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

That would put them on my "permanent" blacklist. I wouldn't reconsider a team that would intentionally misrepresent themselves until every student and mentor on that team was no longer was associated with them. A culture like that poisons the whole organization.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Sometimes one or two key new influences can change a whole team around. I wouldn't hold a grudge after the season is over.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

There is at least one situation where a team could say "no thanks" to me, and I would definitely still consider them for an alliance pick list:

If a team came up to me, and told me to my face that:

1) their own win/loss/ranking made little difference towards alliance selections
2) were trying to manipulate the top 8 standings to give themselves the best chance to win, by denying us 2 qualifying points

(i.e. helping a really weak team maintain the #1 spot, so that powerhouses at the top will be broken up)

I would say they're playing smart, and really understand the game. Teams that put this much thought into the process are extremely rare, and if they're the best team available, I'd say this is MORE of a reason to pick them.

I've seen some of the best teams in the world do this by playing defense-only late in quals against powerhouse teams gunning for the #1 spot. It denied the powerhouse team precious ranking points, and kept a weak #1 seed in place that ultimately was declined by the other top powerhouses, thus breaking them up.

Honestly, a team that has the forethought to do this moves up on my list CONSIDERABLY.

Now how many teams do I expect to say "no thanks" for these types of reasons?

not many... and that's too bad.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Well, my plan would be to tell the other alliance that one our robots would try to balance with them, but I would not tell them which one. Additionally, if one of my alliance's robots tipped over/broke down, I would not go out of my way to cooperate, especially if it meant i might lose. My reasoning here is that we did not lie,it was our full intent to balance the middle bridge, but we were forced to change plans when one of our robots malfunctioned. I haven't considered whether I would say no or just not say, but if I did say I would not lie and say I would balance.

What if:
My alliance decides not to balance, even though I kind of want to, but I follow along and say no. Do you blacklist me, or all three of us?

My alliance says we will balance, not specifying a robot. All of our robots function correctly, and we fully intended to cooperate, but the team that we told to balance ignored us and didn't cooperate. Do you blackmail all of us? (what if I made up that story after the match)?

My alliance had full intent to send a robot to the coopertition bridge, but we miscommunicated and nobody went there, thinking that it was someone else's responsibility on the alliance. Who gets blacklisted?

Seems to me blacklisting will be a touchy subject and hard to implement.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

You folks seem to be not considering the possibility of a robot that can balance itself (and others)...now THAT will be a valuable trait for a robot to have!

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I'm going to try and revive this thread to see how teams approached the coopertition bridge strategy during week 1.

When did you talk to the opposing alliance? Was this before after or during when you talked to your own alliance?

Did teams try to pull anything like balancing with another robot instead of the one they agreed upon prematch, not even trying to balance even though they said that they would, or teams going way later than they said that they would?

Did you struggle to convince the other alliance too coopertate in some matches?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

The major difficulty in this balancing negotiation is finding the people with whom you can reliably negotiate. This may only happen while you are queued for a match. Other times you may be able to find members of your opposing or alliance teams BUT they are not able to discuss or commit to any strategy decision anyway. By the time your own team throws up its hands when they find this "too difficult" it may have already happened for one or more of those teams you want to consult.

As with any difficult activity, you have to be convinced that the effort you're using to do it is justified. I think a thorough explanation of the value of bridge balancing in both flavors should happen for all teams* before the robots are even un-bagged. If not done by then, I predict that those teams will be at a disadvantage and unresponsive to suggestions made by their eventual partners or opponents. It may even be a good scouting question that can distinguish those teams who have a good understanding of the value of balanced bridges. Eventually you will know which teams are bridge-savvy by their seeding ranks.

*and the more team members that know about this topic the better.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I really see that coopertition balancing is a way for any team to show a potential elim partner that they can balance with them. Our scouts would look favorably on a team that can balance with another robot It is an essential skill to show if you want to get picked. What better way to show that skill than by balancing with a robot from the other alliance?

Coop balancing is a great opportunity for a lower ranked team to show that they can do this.

I agree that teams could try to exploit this and put a high ranked team out of the top spot but I think that this is something that most teams would not choose to do.. they want to win... they want to score points...

That being said, our drive team will ALWAYS tell the other alliance that if the choice has to be made to win the match by an alliance balance or going for the coop... we will go for the win...

The reason for this is that the WIN is worth 2 points... and your are in control... your alliance is in control...

Yes you can get 2 points for the coop (or 1) but it requires loss of alliance control... you have to get cooperation..

We intend to go for the coop balance every time unless we MUST do an alliance balance to insure the win.

Our method... we will go to the side where the other alliance is and go to the side of the bridge...we will tip it from the side and hold it down so an opposing robot can get on it... when they are safely on the bridge we will let go and get behind them and push them up the bridge to a balance point.
the key is that they MUST not move up the bridge... they have to let us push them up...

If they go up too quickly we can get tipped over backwards before we are on the bridge...so this must be very clear...they have to let us push them up

Good luck to everyone!!!

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

One thing that we will be looking for on Thursday is if teams' Jaguars are set to brake or coast. If they're set to coast, falling off the bridge becomes more likely. We're pretty confident that even if robots are set to brake, we can still push them up a ramp.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Personally, I feel that it is in the best interest of both Alliances to ALWAYS go for the Coop Bridge. If you look at a lot of the week 1 events the teams that had the most Coop Points were ranked #1. It was very common at Kettering to go for the Coopertition Bridge at 1 min with the best bots from each alliance.

Going for your alliance bridge could get you the win but so can a last second shot by a human player or performing a 1-bot balance on the alliance bridge instead of a 2-bot.

-Clinton-

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

A problem I saw during week 1 was that too many teams had this mindset and also where the main scorer on their alliance while saying they wanted to be the team that goes on the coopertition bridge. When two good teams played each other this resulted in coopertition bridge just not being allotted nearly enough time. The thing I like about FIRST and particularly this game is that you can't do absolutely everything, at some point you have to give even the worst of other robots their role in your alliance. The teams that say they are going to do everything are getting nothing done as a result in this game.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

When we got an answer like this, we moved on to the next team in the alliance. We were usually the team that set up the bridge, so we took an extra couple seconds compared to our counterpart on the other alliance.

We set up the bridge for another team, and watched as they used the time to shoot in two extra game-winning three pointers, while we sat there and waited for them. We felt pretty taken advantage of, and from that point on, anything short of a definitive, emphatic "YES!" was considered a no.

I see it this way: if its close enough that not balancing might win it, I would still co-op balance. Either way, I get two points, though if I balance, I leave another team with a favorable view of me. If I leave that same team hanging, and beat them while they're holding the bridge for me, I leave them with an unfavorable view of me. If I'm getting beat by this team, I suspect they'll be more likely to be in a picking position than I am. If thats the case, I definitely want to be in their good graces.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I think that a big problen in this game is that teams only resond to a statement like that if it is coming from the 217s and 1114s. Teams don't realize that the best teams are watching and notice these things.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

Since I like writing things in bullet points today:

- Figure out where your team is in in "the rotation"; knowing whether you compete before or after your seeding rivals will drive some of your coopertition balance strategy.

- Opting to try a coopertition balance in early rounds is a risk because you don't know what your opponents can or cannot do well. You may lose the match because they score better than you'd expected or you may fail to balance because it's harder than you expected; or both.

- Be a trendsetter. If your team is the first to attempt and succeed at a coopertition balance, you force all of your seeding rivals to attempt it as well in order to keep up.

- Your robot needs to be able to balance a bridge with two robots on with almost NO action from the other team. If you can't do this, you're in trouble.

In Texas, we were only refused a coopertition balance in only one match -- and in that match, by all of the teams we approached. It was the right call for them, so I don't begrudge them doing so at all. I was impressed by it, actually, as it showed a keen awareness of how the tournament is played that we don't often see.

We always approached the team that we thought was most likely to succeed with the balance. I made clear that our expectation was that we were making an agreement with that team and that we would not balance with their teammates unless there was some sort of mitigating circumstance that prevented them from balancing.

I'll admit that the schedule in San Antonio made it so there was very little risk for us to attempt coopertition balancing as many times as we could. I can see how, though, a different schedule might've made the decision for the teams involved a bit more nuanced.

I wonder if the GDC or FIRST HQ is cognizant of the distrust this element of the game creates among competitors, though. It sure doesn't seem like it's working out entirely as they expected.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

So after watching several matches from week 1 (it was the first time we did not compete week 1 in a very, very long time) I have not really changed my opinion of how I will feel about a team who does not cooperate with us. However, the reason I have the same feeling has completely changed.

If you look at the numbers, in almost all cases, you have to be completely ignorant of how this game works if you do not agree to do the coop bridge. If you went 0-X at every event, except KC, but did the coop bridge every match then you would have made the top 8. That is a huge statistic.

In this game, there is really only one bad scenario: not getting any QPs at all.

So 217 won't blacklist you because you made us angry. We will blacklist you because you are ignorant.*;)


* - There are very rare cases where it is strategically to your advantage to not do the coop. In these rare cases we will respect you strategically and probably not black list you, but no gaurantees

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

This cannot be emphasized enough!
Why were there not more of these occurrences is beyond me, regardless if its a week 1 event.
If teams demonstrate they can balance 1,2 or 3 robots on their bridge, especially during eliminations, they certainly could have done it during qualifications.
If my opponent(s) dont want to cooperate, that's fine.
Good luck when we play against you during eliminations.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

During the Greater Kansas City regional most teams would talk to the opposing alliance as they were queuing. We would figure out who would we should co-op bridge with and at what time they wanted to meet there. This allowed us to have enough time to get on the bridge and adjust till we got it balanced.

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

This whole thread is beginning to gel as a must-read for my team. I hope I can get them to do that.

Arranging to co-op balance with one member of an opposing alliance leaves the other two opponents with no co-op activity of their own. I think this means that it will be frustrating to negotiate co-op activity with an opposing alliance that has not yet decided among themselves what they are going to do in a given match. Take this back a step, and your alliance for a match has to decide what you want to do before any of you discuss what your alliance wants your opponents to do. So your first question for someone approaching you about co-op balance seems to be "is this your alliance's decision?" The implication being you cannot put much faith in a unilateral negotiation.

It is also becoming obvious that a detailed and complex checklist is going to be required for a team's and an alliance's pre-match activities. Like other checklists, this will help prevent leaving out crucial things while under pressure. New thread? or here?

Re: What is your cooperition bridge plan?
 

I'm afraid that I have to disagree. My alliance could tell my team that they had to do something inappropriate. That doesn't mean that we will do it.

We have numerous strategies. All but one allows us to support the cooperation bridge. We'll use the one that best supports the alliance's strategy but doesn't hurt us. In almost every situation, not having someone from our alliance on the cooperation bridge hurts us. So if that is what the alliance dictates, then they've got a surprise coming...

So my disagreement is this, when my team makes a contract, it holds water. Unilateral or not...