2013 ACTUAL game hint!!!

[Phyrxes]

Another consequence of four team alliances is the size of some regional events and number of teams that four team alliances would have in eliminations. Even if you assume a "largish" regional that has 60 teams would have half to 2/3 of the teams in the eliminations if you include those robots placed on standby as replacements, I agree scouting would be a nightmare.

[JJackson]

Also at Waterloo where there are only 30 teams signed up you couldnt have a 4 vs. 4 elimination bracket with 8 alliances.
If Waterloo does fill up and they went with 4 vs. 4 there would only be two teams not in eliminations

[Gregor]

Both the Waterloo and Western Canada regionals have 30 teams registered. Neither could support 4v4 eliminations with 8 alliances.

[orangemoore]

The 8 alliance elimination system could be downsized to just 4 alliances.

[gabrielau23]

Ah whoops. Traditionally our team only does Chesapeake and DC, so both of those are usually filled to 64. Wasn't aware that some only had 30.

[wilhitern1]

Originally Posted by gabrielau23

Although it would make scouting a nightmare.

If there's one thing that I love, it's a good scouting challenge!

Neal

[maddog175]

Back to the hint (#3): The hint poem can be anagrammed into: "rearrange letters, showing message hiding inside, kiddos" - so that the hidden message is that there's a hidden message - and so is circular - and so relates to pi - or is just a red herring.

[ReapersRule]

Originally Posted by Gregor

Both the Waterloo and Western Canada regionals have 30 teams registered. Neither could support 4v4 eliminations with 8 alliances.

As someone has mentioned previously, who says the 4v4 would be continued into elimination matches? It could easily be 4v4 for qualifications then drop to 3v3 or even 2v2 for elimination matches. Dropping to 2v2 for eliminations would have the added advantage of lowering the number of teams which qualify for Championships.

[CLandrum3081]

2v2 would be so much less fun for alliance selections!

Seriously. The last ones are always so suspenseful...Well, except one off-season I was at this year. Only one of the teams had accurate scouting data and that alliance just crushed everyone else because the others picked robots that (no offense) just danced around the field the whole match.

Point is, I would appreciate if FIRST would stick to 3v3. Yes, I realize with more regional competitions it makes filling up space for champs...interesting...but I think there are other ways FIRST can deal with this. I'll leave that for other threads, though.

How we came to this from a bunch of numbers in pi code amuses me so.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by ReapersRule

As someone has mentioned previously, who says the 4v4 would be continued into elimination matches? It could easily be 4v4 for qualifications then drop to 3v3 or even 2v2 for elimination matches. Dropping to 2v2 for eliminations would have the added advantage of lowering the number of teams which qualify for Championships.

I doubt it would drop down to 2v2 again. The first and second alliances would have a ridiculous advantage over the lower seeded teams.

[Bryce Paputa]

Originally Posted by Gregor

I doubt it would drop down to 2v2 again. The first and second alliances would have a ridiculous advantage over the lower seeded teams.

What if the 8th seed picked first? Would that work?

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

What if the 8th seed picked first? Would that work?

Only if FIRST wants teams to play qualifying matches with the goal of seeding eighth. I wouldn't want that.

[Peyton Yeung]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

What if the 8th seed picked first? Would that work?

That would make a lot of teams not to be in the first 4 positions.

[dodar]

If FIRST moved to 4v4, why not just take the picking lineup that IRI uses?

[ReapersRule]

Originally Posted by Tubatroopa

That would make a lot of teams not to be in the first 4 positions.

What if instead of picking the third alliance member in order, they did it one of 2 ways.

A) draw numbers from a hat to determine picking order, or
B) Choose in the order 1,8,2,7,3,6,4,5.