Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EricH
To some extent, you're right, the field is self-balancing. However, this is only to a certain extent. Some teams have perfected drives that work really, really well. They didn't use those this year because they couldn't. But, given a chance to use them to optimum effect, they will. Same with arms/lifts. Same with ball collectors. It's not totally balanced, because those teams have the experience, but they are willing to share that experience.
|
You're right, but for all intents and purposes wouldn't it be slightly impractical to try to take away a veteran team's advantage of experience.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EricH
The common element between the games included is that they all have multiple types elements to control.
[...]
Oh, and do you a) do the winning strategy or b) do a complementary strategy that will get you picked? In 2004, my team could team with any of a particular class of robot (not our class) and do really well. But if you paired us up with a team similar to us, we'd most likely lose. We had a winning strategy. But we picked complementary strategies given the chance. I've explained in some of my previous posts in this thread how the balancing works in this kind of setup.
|
Didn't the three different types of game pieces count as different elements?
I also thought that there were complementary strategies used this year as well.
By the way, thanks for mentioning the other games. I need to look up what some of them were.