Effective way to rank minibots?

[XaulZan11]

Several people have said they are keeping track of the place of the minibot. I don't think that is the best way to do it as it is highly dependent on the other robots. A 10 second minibot could get 1st if there are no other minibots while a 5 second minibot could get 4th is they are with really fast minibots. Over the course of 8 matches, I don't think things will average out.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

Several people have said they are keeping track of the place of the minibot. I don't think that is the best way to do it as it is highly dependent on the other robots. A 10 second minibot could get 1st if there are no other minibots while a 5 second minibot could get 4th is they are with really fast minibots. Over the course of 8 matches, I don't think things will average out.

I <3 Michigan
11-12 matches

But anyway, I think placing is going to be worth just about as much as an estimation. Both will be somewhat off, but I think placing will work just as well with all minibots, whereas estimation won't work as well with the fastest (but perhaps better with the worst).

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Basel A

but I think placing will work just as well with all minibots, whereas estimation won't work as well with the fastest (but perhaps better with the worst).

Thats a good point. I think you get to a point where minibots are "fast enough", especially at the regional level. Is there really a significant difference between 1.55 second and 2 seconds? Or 2 seconds and 3 seconds? I don't think so, especially considering there are many factors that prevent teams from deploying at the exact same millisecond.

Thus, I think it is important to rank the lower end minibots, which may range from 8-14 seconds. That time difference is probably more significance.

[GaryVoshol]

You might also want to keep track of rule violations which cause the TOWER to be disabled. A 2.7-second MINIBOT isn't of much value if they try to squeak it to 2.3 seconds by DEPLOYING too early, earning a disablement.

[talijf]

I'd say the best way to scout minibots would be for the scouter to write down the time on the timer when the minibot hits the top. That way, it's totally objective and doesn't depend on the other minibots/what place this particular one got in the minibot race

[Chris is me]

By far the best way in my opinion is to write down the time on the clock when the minibot reaches the top. This factors in everything - deployment speed, minibot speed, whether or not teams get to the tower early enough.

[gyroscopeRaptor]

My ideal mental system?

Climb percentage success, then average the successful times.

Optionally, set a non-finish time at 5 secs more than the regional's slowest time.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

By far the best way in my opinion is to write down the time on the clock when the minibot reaches the top. This factors in everything - deployment speed, minibot speed, whether or not teams get to the tower early enough.

We may have to steal this. One downside to this is if a team knows the other opponent doesn't have a minibot and thus places a final tube before deploying at the last second.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

We may have to steal this. One downside to this is if a team knows the other opponent doesn't have a minibot and thus places a final tube before deploying at the last second.

If you're guaranteed first place, and you go to hang a tube.. Well, I don't like that strategy. It's thirty points! Make sure you get it!

[Loremispum]

That's a cool bro way to rank it.

[donnie99]

All you would have to do is keep track of where the minibot places, and the number of points scored, the one with the most points is usually the most beneficial, and how fast they make it to the top

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by donnie99

All you would have to do is keep track of where the minibot places

This doesn't actually tell you anything other than relative score. It's analogous to looking at a team's average score to figure out if they're a good pick for your alliance. It gives you a general picture of what ballpark they are in, but it doesn't actually tell you how good they are, only that their opponents were better or worse.

[thefro526]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

By far the best way in my opinion is to write down the time on the clock when the minibot reaches the top. This factors in everything - deployment speed, minibot speed, whether or not teams get to the tower early enough.

I like this.

Teams with the fastest minibots, or at least those who understand their worth in the game will be prepared for deployment at least 5 seconds prior to the end game. Once the towers go live at 10 seconds they should start deployment. From there, I'd imagine the fastest minibots will reach the top at 8 seconds or so with other minibots being slower from there.

[Zoughtbaj]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

Several people have said they are keeping track of the place of the minibot. I don't think that is the best way to do it as it is highly dependent on the other robots. A 10 second minibot could get 1st if there are no other minibots while a 5 second minibot could get 4th is they are with really fast minibots. Over the course of 8 matches, I don't think things will average out.

This is actually why I chose to do it this way.

Instead of taking something such as the rank, it will translate that rank into an "I'm better than you" kind of rank. For example, If Min1 comes in first, what the matrix will do is take into account who he got 1st against; 2, 3, and 4. I've actually tried to steer away from using time, and instead am using kind of a "Who beats who" kind of thing. That's the wonderful thing I've found with this system: by squaring the matrix, if 1 beats 2 and 2 beats three, that squaring will tell the data that 1 technically beats 3.

The few problems are that it can't be weighted, and each participant has to play the same amount of times for it to be accurate, which is why I was wondering if there was something I could do to improve the accuracy of the system.