Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst
Wasn't the decision to switch Champs to 4-bot alliances mostly a logistical one? During elims it's a lot easier to call up a backup bot that already has a mobile pit and to let other teams pack up immediately to make load-out easier. Not every alliance used a backup bot before the change, and I'm sure not all do now.
|
I thought the choice was partially a response to the situation faced by the 2013 1986/1528/217 Championship Alliance.
For those that don't know, 217 was doing well at champs that year until they peter panned from the pyramid (like what happened to 2481 at Crossroads Regional) on the practice field not long before alliance selections, resulting in significant robot damage (again, like what happened 2481). Fearing an inability to contribute to an alliance, they told their field not to pick them, but the #1 alliance of 1986 and 1538 picked them as their second pick, banking on the highest seeded unpicked team (who would be the first backup to be called) being a competent replacement if things went south.
Great strategy on paper, but it proved to be their downfall. While they were able to get 217 running again, the stresses of Division level play caused 217 to break down. However, since backups cannot be switched back, they (based on what I've seen in retrospect) never found 217 to be broken enough to give up on as once they called the backup, they'd never see 217 on the field again during their run. Ultimately, they lost in the finals, which was a shame as 1538 was in a great position to pull a sweep, as they also won Chairmans that year. I mean great, as I'd argue 1986 was the best bot of 2013 and 1538 was also in the upper tier that year.
Had the current 4 team alliance rules been in place, the outcome would have likely been different, as the alliance in question would have had a backup that they could switch in and out as needed, allowing them to have the best of both worlds. Also, this could have permitted 217 to have been an earlier pick, as they would have been less of a gamble, due to the aforementioned reasons.
I'm sure logistics were also a reason, but to me, the change was to prevent this tricky scenario from happening again.