View Single Post
  #400   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-07-2009, 12:45
Jared Russell's Avatar
Jared Russell Jared Russell is offline
Taking a year (mostly) off
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs), FRC #0341 (Miss Daisy)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,069
Jared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next Year's Game?

The fundamental problem with de-scoring is that there are very few types of games in which it is not as easy or easier to de-score than it is to score in the first place. The goal for each team is to achieve a low-entropy goal state. Increasing the entropy of the field state (knocking down bins, tipping goals, etc.) will almost always be so much easier than decreasing it that, in a minimax sense, optimal strategies will rely heavily - even exclusively - on de-scoring.

Spoilers in 2007, and ownership of the goals in 2005, are constructive de-scoring techniques - the total entropy of the field has been decreased, but the field state has been moved further from the other teams' goal. These are the only sorts of de-scoring mechanisms that I feel can be a part of the game without dominating the effective strategies for playing it.

I think I speak for (almost) everyone when I say - I don't want a game that can only be won by playing with a certain strategy. 2003 was such a game.

Last edited by Jared Russell : 23-07-2009 at 12:47.
Reply With Quote