|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
| View Poll Results: Should FIRST adopt this as the new rules? | |||
| Yes, This is much better |
|
13 | 30.95% |
| No, Both this and FIRST are way off |
|
14 | 33.33% |
No, I for 1 like negative points
|
|
15 | 35.71% |
| Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
|
this is enough
read this post
they obviously want their to be negative points, it makes other parts of stack counting easier (like pyramid stacks) my question is WHY WOULD YOU EVEN WANT TO GIVE SOMEONE A NEGATIVE SCORE???? think, your qualifing points, the points that advance you through the competition, the good happy points everyone wants, is your alliance score plus two times the opponent's score.... you get 45 points, and give the other team, lets say -20 points, you get 45 + (-40) to get a QP of 5 thats bad, no one wants 5 QPs, and you could give your self much worse if you give them a lower score... you want their score to be as close to yours as possible without them winning... to quote dlavery, any team who gives their opponent's a negative score will get attacked with cheese so they never do it again... there is NOTHING else to be said about this topic, go build a robot or something |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Uniform rules and enforcers? | Ben Mitchell | General Forum | 31 | 12-01-2005 20:55 |
| Dilemma - Letter of the rules v. spirit of the rules | Natchez | General Forum | 27 | 03-04-2003 15:37 |
| What rules would you change? | tonyargote | Rules/Strategy | 3 | 05-02-2003 18:56 |
| Time for new rules! | archiver | 2001 | 11 | 24-06-2002 02:01 |
| Why change the rules? | archiver | 1999 | 9 | 23-06-2002 22:15 |