View Single Post
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-01-2015, 22:30
dellagd's Avatar
dellagd dellagd is offline
Look for me on the field!
AKA: Griffin D
FRC #2590 (Nemesis) #2607 (The Fighting Robovikings)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: PA
Posts: 890
dellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond repute
Re: qualifying or eliminations style robots

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuggetsyl View Post
I disagree but I guess we will find out.
I think this brings up something that's a pretty common debate on my team.

As a team plays matches through an event, or rather really conducts 'scoring trials' with two other partners, they are in competition not with the opposing alliance, but with every other team at the event. Therefore, there is not much motivation to stop your opponent from scoring. Your own actions in a single match won't affect your opponent's ranking much, and as such couldn't boost your own ranking very much. The result of this competition is a final ranking, which is used to be seeded.

Into playoffs, individual teams don't matter anymore, and there are now only 8 competitors in the competition, as apposed to 37. Now you have the ability to greatly effect 1/7 of the competitors (all matches of 1/7 of the alliances) in the quarters, 1/3 in the semis, or 100% in the finals. This is apposed to barely effecting all the competitors in the quals, which would be hard to draw a direct improvement in ranking from.

The question is, "Which one should we design for?" Its a tough one, but this has generally been my reasoning: It's best to control your own destiny, because if not, you're forced to hope that others will control it well for you. And in a competition, that's a very hard decision to justify. As such, you want to rank well to be an alliance captain, and that means you have to perform will in the quals, which means designing for the quals.

Not to mention that if you seed very well, your own team shouldn't do to shabby in the playoffs either. At that point its up to good scouting for who wins, and if you're relying on other teams who rank well to do good scouting in order to pick you, well, I can assure you of one thing: Many teams do not do good scouting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuggetsyl View Post
Stacking robots and RB placers are what they are. But IMO what people do in Auto will be what wins this years game. From what I am reading most teams do not understand the math of the game. The difference in qualifying or eliminations style robots will be auto and that will have to be built into the design. Qualifying will focus on yellow bins and elimination will not.
*touches nose and points*
__________________
Check out some cool personal projects in computers, electronics, and RC vehicles on my blog!

2016 MAR DCMP Engineering Excellence Award
2016 MAR Westtown Innovation in Control Award
2016 MAR Hatboro-Horsham Industrial Design Award
2015 Upper Darby District Winners - Thanks 225 and 4460!
2015 Upper Darby District Industrial Design Award
2015 Hatboro-Horsham District Winners - Thanks 2590 and 5407!
2014 Virginia Regional Winners - Thanks so much 384 and 1610, I will never forget that experience!
2014 Virginia Quality Award
2014 MAR Bridgewater-Raritan Innovation in Control Award
2014 MAR Hatboro-Horsham Gracious Professionalism Award
2013 MAR Bridgewater-Raritan Innovation in Control Award
2012 MAR Lenape Quality Award

Last edited by dellagd : 18-01-2015 at 22:33.