Robotics Question of the Day!

[z_beeblebrox]

Originally Posted by CalTran

If you are 100% sure you can score 2pts in the end game, but have the possibility (~50%-65% chance) of scoring 3pts if you skip the end game, which should you choose?

This was something that we had to ask ourselves back in 2010 nearing the end of season on debating whether to add the hanging mechanism.

Depends on whether the extra point is needed to win.

[CalTran]

Also bear in mind, for discussion on cd, that 2010 was year of the horror ranking system. But for purposes of the op's post we can throw that out the window since rookies are highly unlikely to understand (I sure didn't) the system.

[z_beeblebrox]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Also bear in mind, for discussion on cd, that 2010 was year of the horror ranking system. But for purposes of the op's post we can throw that out the window since rookies are highly unlikely to understand (I sure didn't) the system.

How did the 2010 ranking system work?

[CalTran]

9.3.4 Match Seeding Points
All teams on the winning ALLIANCE will receive a number of seeding points equal to the penalized score (the score with any assessed penalties) of the winning ALLIANCE plus 5 additional points for winning the match.
All teams on the losing ALLIANCE will receive a number of seeding points equal to un-penalized score (the score without any assessed penalties) of the winning ALLIANCE.
In the case of a tie, all participating teams will receive a number of seeding points equal to their ALLIANCE score (with any assessed penalties).

The seeding system led to the infamous Curie Match 100 where Simbotics catapulted themselves, legally, into first seed.

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by CalTran

The seeding system led to the infamous Curie Match 100 where Simbotics catapulted themselves, legally, into first seed.

By losing the match, I might add. Props to them though, playing the metagame is just as important as playing the game.