<G14> during eliminations

[Bob Steele]

We recently submitted the following question to QA

Default G14 penalties
During elimination rounds, if an alliance has a penalty for scoring more than 2X the opposing team's score, will the penalty be 3 supercells or 1 supercell in the next match?
In regular team non-surrogate team play, each team would receive a 1 supercell penalty in the next match. This would seem to indicate that during the elimination rounds this would result in 3 supercells being lost in the subsequent elimination match. Can you please clarify how G14 will be used during the elimination rounds?

Thank you for your help
*********************************
GDC response:
Rule <G14> is applied in the same way during the Qualification Rounds and the Elimination Rounds.
*********************************
The way we read this...

If you had a terrific alliance and outscored your opponents in the first round of quarterfinals 3X You would lose ALL of your supercells... 2 per team X 3 teams in your alliance... for a total of 6 lost supercells (I didn't ask the question if this would carry over to the next match.

I can see an interesting strategy in which an alliance who has won the first match and seems to be losing the 2nd match dumps balls into its own alliance in order to gain the supercell advantage in the third match of the elimination.

I wonder how anyone is going to keep track of this during the qualifications...maybe they should have some kind of white flag they put on robots to identify them for future matches. A "2X" flag and a "3X flag" goes into your flag holder at the end of the match if you transgress.

Your have to "wear" this badge of "dishonor" until your next match...

Or maybe they should just put a big 2x or 3x on the forehead of the commanders for the teams that will have disobeyed the rule...

[Vikesrock]

Originally Posted by Bob Steele

I wonder how anyone is going to keep track of this during the qualifications...maybe they should have some kind of white flag they put on robots to identify them for future matches. A "2X" flag and a "3X flag" goes into your flag holder at the end of the match if you transgress.

Your have to "wear" this badge of "dishonor" until your next match...

Or maybe they should just put a big 2x or 3x on the forehead of the commanders for the teams that will have disobeyed the rule...

The GDC has already answered this question (I'll be honest I don't feel like looking up the quote). The field control system will be keeping track of <G14> penalties from match to match.

[Andy L]

I don't understand the big drama with <G14>, it seems to me like a rule people just aren't willing to give in that it's a rule.

Have you ever been the team that is brutally beaten by the #1 alliance? It's not the best feeling, getting completely wrecked in the QFs. It's a handicap that the GDC saw needed, trying to dodge this rule is completely un-GP in my eyes. If you're about to double their score, stop scoring? Or make yourself look good to the scouts and get a 2x or 3x G14 penalty. I think I'd be looking for a bunch of G14s in my alliance partner pick.

I think people are over reacting to G14, and just move on.

My two cents

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by ANDY L

I think people are over reacting to G14, and just move on.

I think there a lot of people who'd agree with you on that. That said, for people who build a new robot and play an entirely new game year after year, we're incredibly resistant to change. Who'da thunk?

Originally Posted by Andy L

Have you ever been the team that is brutally beaten by the #1 alliance? It's not the best feeling, getting completely wrecked in the QFs. It's a handicap that the GDC saw needed, trying to dodge this rule is completely un-GP in my eyes.

That's not quite true. Dave has said that <G14> does not exist to level the playing field. I don't think anyone's trying to dodge <G14>. Some people are actively campaigning against it, while others are content to sit back and watch the show.

[smurfgirl]

Originally Posted by iCurtis

I think there a lot of people who'd agree with you on that. That said, for people who build a new robot and play an entirely new game year after year, we're incredibly resistant to change. Who'da thunk?



That's not quite true. Dave has said that <G14> does not exist to level the playing field. I don't think anyone's trying to dodge <G14>. Some people are actively campaigning against it, while others are content to sit back and watch the show.

Notice how we've all been having discussions of its dynamics and how it will affect matches and game strategy? Hmm... did anyone ever think that might be the reason it's here? To make us think harder, to add a new level of complexity to the game? Different teams are going to take different approached when dealing with <G14>, and I predict many interesting matches because of it.

[Bob Steele]

I think that perhaps somewhere the GDC is smiling after reading the last two posts.......if they read this sort of thing...

[Joe Ross]

I think the strategy of making sure you get blown out in the 2nd match would be not unlike a strategy used in the eliminations in 2003.

That year, there were only two matches in the eliminations. They used the same qualifying point formula as the qualifying matches (that year it was 2x opponents score + your own score). The alliance that had the highest combined qualifying point score between the two matches advanced. It was to your advantage that if you were losing, you wanted to minimize your own score so that you minimized your opponents qualifying score. If you look over the elimination rounds at the championship's scores (http://www.usfirst.org/community/frc....aspx?id=9304), you generally saw either a very close score, or a blowout. You would often see a team descoring their own boxes, or pulling off the ramp at the last second to minimize their own score.

One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

I think the strategy of making sure you get blown out in the 2nd match would be not unlike a strategy used in the eliminations in 2003.

That year, there were only two matches in the eliminations. They used the same qualifying point formula as the qualifying matches (that year it was 2x opponents score + your own score). The alliance that had the highest combined qualifying point score between the two matches advanced. It was to your advantage that if you were losing, you wanted to minimize your own score so that you minimized your opponents qualifying score. If you look over the elimination rounds at the championship's scores (http://www.usfirst.org/community/frc....aspx?id=9304), you generally saw either a very close score, or a blowout. You would often see a team descoring their own boxes, or pulling off the ramp at the last second to minimize their own score.

One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

I called that the scorched earth scoring system. I'm gonna knock all of the tubs out of all of the zone (mine and theirs) just to play it safe!
What a crazy year that was.
There is no controversy in FIRST that will ever match 2003's "Collusion" controversy. Where teams protected their stacks by brokering deals with the opposing alliance so that no one's stack would be knocked down and both alliances would score well and seed well no matter who won or lost. This <G14> stuff is a trifle compared to that.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

Doh! You gave away a secret! I laugh every time I think about this strategy. The audience will be so confused!

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by JesseK

Doh! You gave away a secret! I laugh every time I think about this strategy. The audience will be so confused!

Comedy gold just waiting to be mined!

[smurfgirl]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

That year, there were only two matches in the eliminations. They used the same qualifying point formula as the qualifying matches (that year it was 2x One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

I would like to see it happen at least once, I think that would be a really crazy match to watch. I can imagine some very confused audience members.

[Mr. Van]

I wasn't concerned about <G14> until now.

For those who don't think that supercells will make much difference, recognize that each supercell is worth 7.5 moon rocks. Three tosses from your human player and you've got 45 points! This will be very important in low scoring matches.

Imagine the pre-supercell score is Red 30 - Blue 20, and both alliance have 4 supercells. Do you throw the supercells? How many?

Suppose Blue begins to toss a supercell in the last seconds, so Red throws one as well. If blue misses, and Red scores, Red wins 45 - 20. Red alliance - all three teams get a <G14> handicap. Red has to toss the cell, or Blue can win the match...

I am certain that in elimination matches, alliances will play the game -that is try to win the tournament - by making their scores low if they feel that they are loosing. Imagine a mistake is made by Blue - two empty cells are dumped into a robot, and they are scored in a trailer early in the game, for example. This puts the alliance with a potential 40 point disadvantage. They are certain they can't win against super Red alliance, so Blue begins to play ineffective defense and stops scoring, hoping to get a <G14> advantage in the second match.

Blue stops scoring with 16 points. What does Red do? (Blue still has two supercells...) If Red takes their score up to 30 points - so as to not get the <G14> handicap, then Blue can win with a last second supercell toss.

Any ideas on how coaches can deal with these situations - especially when two of the alliance human players are far from the coaches?

-Mr. Van
Robodox

[Rick Wagner]

A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. I'm inclined to win the current match and not worry about G14. It would be ironic to be worrying so much about G14 and then to lose a match that you won't need to worry about it any more.

In the qualifying rounds, the effects are diluted, and by the time you get to the eliminations, the scores will be higher and there should be less effect. Until I have some match experience behind me, I'm not going to worry much about it.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Mr. Van

Any ideas on how coaches can deal with these situations - especially when two of the alliance human players are far from the coaches?

-Mr. Van
Robodox

A solution is already implied above: score in your own alliance's trailers when necessary.

The other solution is to not let on that you're about to dominate the score, then blindside your opponents with alot of orbit balls of all types in the last 20 seconds. This is a high-risk since it's impossible to know where your opponents will be in the last 20 seconds.

The best solution would be to only depend on moonrocks every single time, with supercells for last-minute assurance for victory.

[Rick Wagner]

As super cells will only be available in the last 20 seconds, and only in the corners for PS throwing (probably not enough time to feed attack robots), the implied defensive strategy is for robots to head to the mid-crater and keep moving. Should be an awesome sight.