View Single Post
  #30   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-04-2005, 23:46
George1902's Avatar
George1902 George1902 is offline
It's a SPAM thing...
AKA: George1083; George180
FRC #0180 (SPAM)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 784
George1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond reputeGeorge1902 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 3 Teams Per Side Too Many?

Quote:
Originally Posted by M.O.R.T.
Although I do like the 2v2v2 idea.
This is the direction in which I'd like to see FIRST go.

Situations in where two weak alliances gang up on a third, strong alliance can be addressed with creative game design:

Quote:
Originally Posted by George1083
Imagine:

Three two-team alliances: purple, green, and orange. Three goals to score in: red, blue, and yellow.

The purple alliance's score is the total of the red and blue goals. The green alliance's score is the total of the blue and yellow goals. The orange alliance's score is the total of the red and yellow goals.

Yes, two alliances could team up on the third, but they would need to score all of their points into just one goal to do so. Also, they would have to defend two goals. The third alliance would be able to score in two goals and only have to defend one. They would be at a two to one disadvantage in terms of robots, but would be at a two to one advantage in terms of offensive and defensive objectives.
__________________
George

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."
-- Martin Luther King, Jr.