Quote:
Originally Posted by FIMAlumni
Can you explain to me why you would split the RCs 2-2? If I have the faster can grabbers, I'm going to grab all 4 to lower your alliance score even if I can only score two of them. This elimination structure is brutal and 1 bad match by 2 teams in the QFs (from my alliance stealing the RCs) is two less teams I have to beat to move on. By splitting the RCs, you may move on to the SF while I'm stuck trying to find a good seat for the next round.
|
It all comes down to not being able to guarantee that you are faster. Fast can grabbers are a relative game, if .25 seconds is the mean time that we are using for reference and every alliance has 2 robots that can do it that fast, how often will you
KNOW that you are going to get all 4.
Assuming your team can use all the cans look at the point potentials
Code:
step cans Points (all 42 point stacks)
0 126
1 168
2 210
3 252
4 294
I would rather bet on getting 210 pts in a match carrying me forward than risk 126 and know I will be out.
Now this is only in the situation where winning the can race is in doubt. If you know you will win, you never agree to this deal, as it lowers your scoring potential for no reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woolly
It will be less of an agreement, and more of an alliance deciding to take the cans they know they can get with their faster can theft device that happens to be attached to their best stacking robot, because they don't want to risk said stacking robot. Spending half the match or more tied up in some can battle disaster can kill your alliance much more easily than not having 7 cans to use.
|
This brings up another point. I say you always put your 3rd robot (cheese caked or organic) with whips up against the best scorer (with whips) on the other alliance. In the chance that they do get caught up the impact could be huge regardless of who gets the cans.