Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeland1126
That's absolutely true, and I hadn't particularly thought about that to the extent I should have.
That said, I'm not 100% sure about that. If you have another robot on each alliance that isn't coopertitionating (that's a word now), then you have another robot for each alliance that can score or balance. If teams sent their best balancer/best robot in general to the co-op bridge (which would theoretically be the smart thing to do), then that robot is left to score for their alliance, potentially balancing things out. So, in theory, it would be a wash, or close to one. But that's just my guess. This will require further study 
Also, with the 20pt cap on balancing in qualification rounds, the addition of a 3rd robot solely for benefiting the alliance wouldn't be a super drastic change. Depending on the alliance, strategy and robot firepower.
But that's definitely a point I need to consider more next round. Thank you very much for pointing this out to me!
-Leeland |
From what I noticed on the field at Horsham, teams that consistently offered Co-op were already strong teams without it. A lot of teams, especially after the first few tips, were kind of nervous about the bridge. Most of the initiative came from good teams, as theyyou already understood the system and had confident/compotent drivers and good bridge lowerers. I wouldn't expect huge changes until later weeks.
Looking back, I had 4 agreements to balance in 12 matches (our allies had some as well). We always had to go second as we couldn't lower. 1 ended in the partner robot tipping themselves before we got there, 1 broke down, and 2 didn't go for unclear reasons.