With all this talk about fairness...

[DanLevin247]

This year, the game seems amazing, I can't wait to see it played.


But with the way some rules are as of now, it seems like a lot of teams are planning on exploiting the rules of the game far to much. My point is, you don't talk to the opponent of the game you are about to play to "plan a tie" or any other intentional outcome in any sport ( wrestling doesn't count ), and FIRST shouldn't be a place where that happens. In the past, to my knowledge, no teams have used "cards" to notifiy their drive team about what they can't see....and there have been plenty of situations where you haven't been able to see what is going on.

Please guys, as one of your peers, I say...let's make this game fun, exibit the gracious professionalism that we are pleaded to uphold, and make this year great, and FAIR for all of us.

[1337 /\/\4573|2]

Originally posted by DanLevin247
...make this year great, and FAIR for all of us.

I would like to point out this game wasn't intended to be fair. Also, how is participant/opponent collaboration unfair?

[DanLevin247]

It is also designed to be more of a spectator game this year. Who would want to watch a bunch of "opponents" work together?

[p373R L1a0]

well i still dont understand the REASON that they would make it so that there is no third round! is it so that they can save time or something? someone please explain i for one feel that it would save a whole lot of trouble just to make it a three round thing again

[Gadget470]

Originally posted by DanLevin247
... and make this year great, and FAIR for all of us.

I think this should have been stated to be "and as fair as possible for all of us" rather than fair itself. It can't be fair because it is a game which does not have a pre-determined outcome.


[quote]Originally posted by 1337 /\/\4573|2
Also, how is participant/opponent collaboration unfair?

The words opponent and collaboration. The rules of any game are basically to attempt defeat of your opponent by a margin to achieve a greater rating for you or your team.
That rating be.. money, points, score, seeding, wins, contracts, etc.. (for any game).

By collaborating with an opposing alliance you are taking the term alliance, poking it with a stick, throwing it away, and in my opinion cheating.

I saw teams last year (I won't mention which because I don't want this to be a flame), that had an alliance of poor-quality rookie teams vs high-quality veteran teams. (The fact of Rookie v Veteran not being a factor). Members from the veteran teams spoke with the rookie opponents and -suggested- that the rookies mess around then go to their home zone while the veterans control the score.

The final score was a very high score for both alliances.. but it was a mostly planned score. In this situation, both alliances came out better than they would have. i.e. the rookie team, which may have had say.. 25 QP average got 60 or so points, thus raising their averages. But the veteran teams got 180 points or so... greatly raising their averages to almost guarentee a seeding.

The above description in my opinion is not gracious professionalism. While some might say 'yes it is, they gave the rookies a fighting chance by raising their QP average'
I say 'No' to this. The intent was to garuntee seeding for the veteran team, which would have both been sure-shot alliance picks.

I really hope I don't see a repeat of the actions I saw this year. Some rules can be bent, others broken.. but the question remains.. should they be?

[p373R L1a0]

does anyone know why they changed it? o_O

[Ken Leung]

Originally posted by p373R L1a0
well i still dont understand the REASON that they would make it so that there is no third round! is it so that they can save time or something? someone please explain i for one feel that it would save a whole lot of trouble just to make it a three round thing again

If you look at the past when they did 2 win out of 3, it always happen this way:

Robot 1 and 2 win match 1
Robot 1 and 3 lose match 2
Robot 1 and 2 win match 3

Best robot: #1 play 3 times
2nd best: #2 play 2 times
last partner: #3 play once.

As long as you have 1 good pair, you will pretty much win the game without needing your 3rd partner to be as competitive as you other partners.

This year, you have to play two games, and even with a best robot, you have to play like so:

Robot 1 and 2
Robot 1 and 3

This force you to have a strong overall alliance that will do well no matter which two robots you have out in the field. Or else, you risk having your weaker pair lose a match, and risk losing the whole round.

[1337 /\/\4573|2]

Originally posted by Gadget470
The rules of any game are basically to attempt defeat of your opponent by a margin to achieve a greater rating for you or your team.

It is possible to win the entire competition through tying your opponents. Think about it. If you tie every match with a rather high score (say 100 each so 200 qp), then you can do better than other teams who are smashing their opponents (say 150 to 8 , which is < 200 qp) which will allow you to win (hypothetically of course)