View Single Post
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-01-2014, 00:24
MooreteP's Avatar
MooreteP MooreteP is offline
Zen Archer
AKA: Senor Mas
FRC #0571 (Team Paragon)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Windsor CT
Posts: 810
MooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond reputeMooreteP has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [FRC Blog] Kickoff Broadcast and Game Hint Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
Speaking of missteps...

--2001 (Diabolical Dynamics) was 4v0, not 2v2.
--Bonus balls were +points for whichever robot(s) got their balls on top of the goals--each robot had its own color. That part was just about right.
--The bridge was distinctly different from coopertition bridges. Namely, it tended to tip to one side or the other, not return to center. Also, you got points for balancing on it.
--And finally... That wasn't "extra points" for the E-stop. That was a multiplier. How big was it? Depended when you stopped all 4 robots, but it was between 1 and 2 if memory serves, with tripping it in 30 seconds or less being the highest multiplier. This particular year is the single reason that the manual clarifies that the use of the E-stop will not affect match score or duration--and has done that every single year since 2002.
That cooperation bridge also had a "flat spot" in the middle. It could be balanced like in 2012. Teams that could manipulate it were useful in the final endgame balance.
It was 2v2 as the color of the large bonus balls determined who got that multiplier.
I was trying to keep the description simple. Bonus multiplier = extra points.
I felt that describing actual scoring metric would have obscured my intent to recall the first instance of co-opertition.

Thank you for the clarification.
Reply With Quote