View Single Post
  #65   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-05-2011, 14:46
J_Miles's Avatar
J_Miles J_Miles is offline
FiM Referee
AKA: Jared Miles
no team (EngiNERDs)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Posts: 128
J_Miles is a splendid one to beholdJ_Miles is a splendid one to beholdJ_Miles is a splendid one to beholdJ_Miles is a splendid one to beholdJ_Miles is a splendid one to beholdJ_Miles is a splendid one to beholdJ_Miles is a splendid one to behold
Re: IRI (CONTEMPLATED) Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by IKE View Post
The bottom row needs to be worth more. Currently they is very little incentive above bragging rights for that row. I would go with 2 pts, just like the middle.
I couldn't agree more. I think two points is sufficiently valuable to make that bottom row plenty worthwhile, but not overpowered, and it will really count to separate the great alliances from the good alliance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IKE View Post
Minibots need a winner. Otherwise it looses a lot. It however does not need a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. In the grand tradition of first, let's reward the winner, and give the others a nice concellation. As far as point values go, I would award 2nd - 4th 10 points.
I won't really suggest specific point values, but I think that there needs to be more balance. With the current system, if an alliance were to take first and second in the minibot race, their endgame score would yield a 25-point advantage over the other alliance (assuming the other alliance were able to score their minibots 3rd and 4th). I don't think that awarding 1st place a higher score and then assigning uniform values to 2nd-4th would be ideal; however, there should be more parity between 1st and 4th. I think that, if an alliance takes first and second in the minibot race, there should not be more than a ten- or fifteen-point swing if the other alliance was able to successfully score their minibots as well. To make the race still exciting, there needs to be different values for each place, but if all four towers were activated, the point margin, in my opinion, should be significantly smaller than 25 points. To me, ideally, the scoring would play out like (<1>+<2>)-(<3>+<4>)<=10 points. This way, an alliance could come from behind with the endgame in a tight match, but, coupled with increased value for the bottom row and decreased margin for victory in the endgame, strategy would be more critical to alliances because it would no longer be imperative to score the top minibot or top two minibots in each match that might be remotely close.
__________________

Reply With Quote