Level 3 Point Upgrade for Champs?

[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.

[MikeE]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

My primary complaint is the people that built solely hanging robots and complained that "we tried the harder challenge and aren't being rewarded like we thought we would be".

I'm not seeing (m)any posts like that.

What I am seeing is lots of posts from people who did not build a pyramid climbing capability into their robots and didn't read the rules completely now complaining that "we don't want any changes to rules which currently benefit us, so that they potentially benefit others".

And there is nothing wrong in that view until it gets wrapped up in self-serving and sanctimonious claims of "fairness".

I don't expect to see a change at the Championships. But as I stated earlier if there is a change I'd expect a moderate adjustment downwards for a level 1 hang rather than an increase in level 2 or 3 climbing.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by MikeE

But as I stated earlier if there is a change I'd expect a moderate adjustment downwards for a level 1 hang rather than an increase in level 2 or 3 climbing.

Why? I don't quite understand the rationale for lowering the point value of a 1st level hang.

[rick.oliver]

Originally Posted by MikeE

... "we don't want any changes to rules which currently benefit us, so that they potentially benefit others". ...

Did not do the math on the posts and don't claim to be able to read minds ... You may well be correct.

Being among those who chose not to go for climbing, I will admit that I did not consider the potential of reducing the level 1 bonus while increasing the level 2 and 3 bonus when we decide on our strategy and design criteria. I doubt that it would have changed our decision.

It would certainly change our strategy for match play; that is if we are fortunate enough to qualify for Championships.

Finally, I believe that the GDC recognized how much easier it would be to achieve a level 1 climb versus the other two. I think that the bonus for autonomous scoring and climbing balance well. I think this game was designed to force teams to make choices and find ways to build a robust alliance to accomplish all of the game challenges ... I really like it.

Hope they don't feel the need to tweak it any more.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by rick.oliver

Being among those who chose not to go for climbing, I will admit that I did not consider the potential of reducing the level 1 bonus while increasing the level 2 and 3 bonus when we decide on our strategy and design criteria. I doubt that it would have changed our decision.

We did consider it. And we modeled it. I don't have a horse in the game because we did our analysis. If they announce they are changing it at CMP so be it. We'll play that game. It'll be a shame since this game is all kinds of exciting and fun to play as it is.

I'm not playing the "fair" card. I'm playing the it's a great game, why screw with it? card.

[Tetraman]

I think the important thing to note, is that the GDC is not going to just randomly add points to climbing without finding the correct amount of points to add to each rung, if any, that would generate a balance between disc and climb strategies in an event with much more competition.

My fear, however, and one of the main reasons the GDC puts this option into the rule book, is to make sure that all teams have a chance at #1 seed. I would find it a tad suspect if the top 8 in each division didn't include a robot that could climb for 30 every match but did include a sub par shooter.

I think that the climb points are correct and if there was a change to make, it would be so small and strange (like 10, 23, 36) that maybe it wouldn't be worth it to the GDC at all. However I am very open to adding some points.

[MikeE]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

Why? I don't quite understand the rationale for lowering the point value of a 1st level hang.

Certainly, I'll explain my thought process for that position:

1. If there was to be a change in the endgame points, then the issue to address is the imbalance between the relatively easy task of hanging at level 1 vs the harder task of climbing to level 2 or level 3, i.e. my assumption is that there is an intra-endgame imbalance.
2. Adding additional points for level 2/3 climbing changes the balance between climbing and autonomous/teleop scoring, which clearly has a broader impact across all phases of the game.
3. Therefore reducing the points for a level 1 hang is a smaller change localized to the endgame.

I'll repeat again that I do not expect the points to be changed by the GDC.
More formally, p(GDC adjust points) < 0.5

Edit to add: Ultimate Ascent is a really good strategic game and could be seen as the best in the modern FRC era.

[Wayne TenBrink]

Regardless of what the GDC decides, I hope they make their decision and announce it soon. I hope they don't wait until the Championship or just remain silent on the issue.

Last year, did they ever annouce their decision that bridge points would not change at Championship? If so, when?

[cgmv123]

Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink

Last year, did they ever annouce their decision that bridge points would not change at Championship? If so, when?

Team update on April 17, or a week before championships. They said when they would in a Q&A, but the Q&A archive from last year doesn't have dates.

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

Team update on April 17, or a week before championships. They said when they would in a Q&A, but the Q&A archive from last year doesn't have dates.

We asked that Q/A last year. We asked it the last week of events (if I remember correctly), and it wasn't answered for several weeks. It was only answered a day or two before the update was released.

[Doc Wu]

Originally Posted by karomata

Hello Everyone,

It has become very apparent to me over the last few weeks that a level 3 climb, with or without scoring the colored discs, can easily be outscored. Many teams that can climb to level 3 dedicated their entire build season just to being able to climb due to its difficulty. There are a handful of teams that can easily climb and shoot, like 1114, 148, etc. but many non-powerhouse teams that climb can only climb.

Why? 1114 doesn't need the points If they can do it all, why should a team that spent all their efforts on one thing, climbing, be rewarded for skipping the rest?

One robot hangs at 30 points and negates any advantage of an entire alliance hanging for 10 points each. Plus their partners are still free to do either, hang or shoot.

Yes, hanging at the top is hard, but so is shooting 10 three-pointers. I think the points are just right.

[efoote868]

At the championship, I wouldn't mind if a level 1 hang was downgraded with respect to a level 2 or level 3 hang. I feel like 10-25-40 points is a nice balance between the climbs and rewards the more difficult and more time consuming tasks.

I don't want the level 1 hang to change in points, simply because the current endgame dynamic is fascinating. What should a team do in the last 15 seconds? Should they play defense on the fast and accurate shooter to try and prevent them from scoring another 12 points, or should they go hang for a guaranteed 10? Should they try and get another 4 disks and score another 12 points, or should they get fewer disks but leave more time to hang for 10?

Also nothing is cooler than a robot hanging for 10, and then shooting their remaining disks as a buzzer beater.