Level 3 Point Upgrade for Champs?

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by PVCpirate

Off the top of my head, 1114 has a VERY fast 30 point climber and 179 climbs for 20 and dumps colored disks, and they've both won regionals. I also saw 2 dedicated climbers be high seeds at GSR (213 and 61) with 61 making the finals as an alliance captain. Obviously I didn't hit all the good climbers, so I think climbing will definitely be playing a big role in matches come April.

I would also agree that hanging on the first bar is somewhat overpowered. It didn't seem that way at the start, but I realized that 3 10 point hangs just don't seem equal in difficulty to 1 30 point climb. I think it should be worth somewhere in-between 5-10 points.

179 has not won a regional. 125/4451/233 knocked them out in the semis in Orlando before they, in turn, were eliminated by 744/79/1772.

[PVCpirate]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

179 has not won a regional. 125/4451/233 knocked them out in the semis in Orlando before they, in turn, were eliminated by 744/79/1772.

Oh 79 not 179. Guess I was wrong on that one. Still, I think climbers have shown that they can be useful enough that we'll see at least one on Einstein.

[Travis Hoffman]

Hey I know - let's make all non 30-point climbers blindfold their drivers for the last 30 seconds of the match!

[pntbll1313]

I know many teams like ours had long discussions as to what aspects of the game were more valuable than others. Because of the small footprint our team decided it would be tough to fit both a 3rd level climber and a good shooter on our bot. We also, after much deliberation, decided we wanted to score 70 points by ourselves in order to give ourselves the best chance to win in qualifications no matter who we were paired with. (Based on the matches so far I think we did a great job estimating the score we would need). Because of those goals we decided on a strategy of 18pt auto, 10pt hang, and 42pt (13 disk) teleop. By the end of our regional we were able to accomplish very close to that exact goal, making it the correct strategy based on the game constraints. Now if the GDC were to change point values I think that would take away a ton of the strategies that many teams used in deciding how to build their robot.

By the way just because a climb/dumper can't outscore a good shooter doesn't mean they can't play defense for 1:30, then go climb and dump, and still be net positive of that great shooter because of how much they slowed them down. I'm sure that is the strategy of many of the best climb/dump teams that do not have a shooter.

[GBilletdeaux930]

So far, the averages work themselves out so that each part of the game accounts for a nearly equal amount of the points. Last I checked it was like 13 auton, 14 tele, and 12 climbing for an alliance. So in terms of separate parts of the game, the points are about on par. Good alliances (elimination alliances) can score 3x each of those points easily.

Now, the fact that auton and tele correlate much more than climbing with anything makes it seem like climbing got the short end. But while climbing relies on heavy mechanical skills that tele, auton relies on heavier programming skills then tele. I'm not saying they are directly a fair trade, but we have to remember that there is more to a robot than its metal.

Removing the 10pt hang would basically drop the climbing average to next to nothing since there seems to be < 5 30pt climbers at each regional, as opposed to half the robots on the field being able to hang.

I don't think the problem is in the scoring. I think its just in the faults of the robots themselves. If a robot spends the entire match climbing, that turns it into a 3v2 match essentially. A 50 or even 30pt contribution is much better than the average score (~41) divided by 3 teams (13pts). But when you spend 2 minutes to do just that, or worse, do it in 30 seconds but that 30 seconds happens to be immediately after autonomous, you hurt your alliance.

I personally don't think FIRST will change anything. The 3 parts of the game are about balanced. I think teams should just reassess their strategies if they are focused climbers. Focused climbers have the opportunity to be a *huge* contribution to a team. But if it only takes you 30 seconds or even a minute, that doesn't mean you spend the remainder of the match at the top of the pyramid. If you can prevent or slow down points before you go climb, that is essentially you scoring more points for your own alliance.

If you want a perfect example, look at 148 in 2008. Look at how their strategy changed from the first regional, to their strategy on Einstein.

[tinybob20]

Originally Posted by GBilletdeaux930

I don't think the problem is in the scoring. I think its just in the faults of the robots themselves. If a robot spends the entire match climbing, that turns it into a 3v2 match essentially. A 50 or even 30pt contribution is much better than the average score (~41) divided by 3 teams (13pts). But when you spend 2 minutes to do just that, or worse, do it in 30 seconds but that 30 seconds happens to be immediately after autonomous, you hurt your alliance.

I would disagree. I feel like that 30 points is more than enough to give you a advantage over the other alliance. And, it's *almost* un-defendable. I found that while other robots had to potential to score much higher, such as full court shooters, they were also much easier to defend against. Coming from a team who won a regional with a directly-after-autonomous climb, I felt the easy, safe 30 or 50 points guaranteed a repeatable and higher score. That being said, I also believe that without support from some good shooting/defending bots, a climbing robot will not be as effective.

[Grim Tuesday]

I think the 30 point climb is underpowered compared to its point value.

However, it was exactly the same way at the beginning of the season when everyone chose their strategy. It should remain the same but I would not be surprised to see it go to 35 or 40 pts. Given the fact the FMS doesn't display 200+ scores properly (they overlap the border) I think this game has much higher scores than the GDC anticipated. Maybe it's the consistent gamepiece. Maybe it's Robot in 3 Days. Maybe it's just teams generally getting better. Whatever it is I feel like climbing is unbalanced in its cost:benefit ratio but that does not mean it should be changed. It only means that teams who chose to make exclusive climbers made a strategic misstep.

[Vikingtech2054]

I personally feel that they should leave it as it is, if anything reduce it. When the GDC came out with the rule change on bag night about throwing white disk at the end i feel like this had made climbing more valuable against floor pickup robots. If they increase the point value the floor pickup robots will be at another disadvantage on top of white disk not being thrown at the end. I know that they had said at the beginning of the season they can change the value at championships but i feel the rule change on bag night is the special circumstance that make the GDC should consider to leave the point value the same.

[XaulZan11]

As only a fan/sepectator, I hope climbing to the top is prevelent during the eliminations at the Championship. We have already seen elite teams (like 118) forgo climbing because scoring discs resulted in more points. Since watching a team climb at the end of the match is so exciting and adds an extra layer of strategy, I hope it is valued enough that the top teams still do it. If that means adding more points to climbing or lowering points for hanging (aka, 10 point 'climbs'), then the GDC better do it. I think we all agree shooting and climbing is more exciting than just shooting.

I know MikeE already said this, but: Yes, it is true we were all given the same rules to base strategy and design decisions and changing the point values of climbing will change the game. But, those same rules given to all teams, give the GDC the ability to tweak the game. As always, those teams more prepared to adapt on the fly, will do better.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

As a spectator (we don't compete until week 5!!!), I like the game where it is (10-20-30).

I would also still like the game if hanging was increased to 10-20-40.

However, hanging is undeniably difficult and lessening the point values would be a disservice to the 30pt hangers and the spectators.
Either way is fine by me.

[AmoryG]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I know MikeE already said this, but: Yes, it is true we were all given the same rules to base strategy and design decisions and changing the point values of climbing will change the game. But, those same rules given to all teams, give the GDC the ability to tweak the game. As always, those teams more prepared to adapt on the fly, will do better.

That's a little unfair for teams that don't have the time and resources to adapt on the fly. The game is hard enough as it is. Don't make it even harder for those teams with unnecessary rule changes.

Besides, even elite teams can't always just adapt on the fly. Some of them are very close to the weight limit, so there's no way they can add a level 3 climber without making big changes to their original design.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by AmoryG

That's a little unfair for teams that don't have the time and resources to adapt on the fly. The game is hard enough as it is. Don't make it even harder for those teams with unnecessary rule changes.

Besides, even elite teams can't always just adapt on the fly. Some of them are very close to the weight limit, so there's no way they can add a level 3 climber without making big changes to their original design.

Then those teams need to go find the resources to adapt on the fly. But that's more a general opinion of mine. I stand by my claim that changing the points is unnecessary, this game has turned out to be quite a good one to watch and play and the points are quite balanced as is.

[Jared Russell]

I think the game is balanced as it is. Dedicated 50 point climber-dumpers will probably not be #1 seeds in their divisions at champs, but they will be a sought-after commodity in eliminations at all levels of play.

[rick.oliver]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Hey I know - let's make all non 30-point climbers blindfold their drivers for the last 30 seconds of the match!

My sentiments exactly.

If the value for hanging is eliminated or the value of climbing to level 3 and/or 2 is increased the result will be more intense defense on a robot which does not immediately start their climb. Not sure that is the outcome desired by the GDC either.