Will The GDC Change Climb Points?!?

[JohnSchneider]

Originally Posted by JesseK

On the contrary, floor loading is still very useful outside of autonomous. Heavy defense being played at midfield? Just pick up some discs around your pyramid for a cycle. There's a good chance the defense will be baited to chase you, leaving mid-field open after the 4 discs are done.

I think you misunderstand. I meant it as "another" meaning that you still lose some usability (picking up during "the storm") even if you retain some. It's not all or nothing but is definitely a hit. Just like increasing climb points would be.

[Grim Tuesday]

There are two different questions people are answering here:

1. Should climbing be worth more points?
2. Should the GDC change climbing to be worth more points?

To me, these questions have different answers.

[pfreivald]

I'd like to see them increase the 30 to 40, leave the 20 at 20, and reduce the 10 to 5.

[JohnSchneider]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

I'd like to see them increase the 30 to 40, leave the 20 at 20, and reduce the 10 to 5.

You must be a climber

[dellagd]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

I'd like to see them increase the 30 to 40, leave the 20 at 20, and reduce the 10 to 5.

I'd Agree if we were with the GDC back before Jan 5th (Well, earlier than that, but you get the point), and I do feel that 10 is so easy to get that 10 is a little gracious.

[PayneTrain]

I feel like most people making earnest pushes for point changes are either bad strategists, not strategists, or apologists for their team's strategists.

Choosing to designate a strategy that revolved around your team building a robot specifically for field motion and climbing and not getting the result you wanted out of competition is tough, but it's just that... tough, not unfair, or unbalanced, or un-GP, or un-whatever.

The current point balancing has not broken the game in the way some could say it was in 2011 (the likely reason for this provision), the game is just somewhat deviating from the way FRC games have historically been played, with higher teleoperated scores across the board.

Changing the points now looks like a shameless attempt to prop up teams that decided on their own to box themselves in to one dimension of play.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by akoscielski3

I guarantee you that if the 30 pt climb was worth more then 30pts more teams would have designed and built a robot to do the 30pt climb, however since the pts weren't as high, less teams did so. It would be very upsetting to a lot of team if they were to change the amount of pts awarded to a level 3 climb.

I agree completely. Many teams develop a strategy based around how the game is scored. They look at things like transit time, loading time, climbing time, and shooting time to evaluate trade-offs in different avenues of design.

Changing one of those metrics by 25%, or by about the amount you'd get with a transit of the field and a volley of 4 frisbees would drastically alter the model of the game, and invalidate a lot of the planning that went on to design the robots.

[Gary Dillard]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

I feel like most people making earnest pushes for point changes are either bad strategists, not strategists, or apologists for their team's strategists.

So if a team chose a design that limits their points without a change, they're bad strategists and it's tough but not unfair if no change is made. But if you chose a design that can't take advantage of a potential change in points that has been in the rules since day one and the GDC does make the change, then you're a good strategist and it's tough and unfair?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..............

[Cory]

A change would be stupid. This is the most balanced game in years. Absolutely no reason to change.

People are looking at the trees instead of the forest. The game is playing out in an exciting and dynamic manner. Why would the GDC want to change that just to appeal to a small minority who think that 30 pt climbing should be worth more?

At any rate, if they did increase 30 to 40 or decrease the 10 pt climb (really dumb idea) it only serves to make the strong unassailable. Most teams who climb for 30 can't do so in a timely fashion, which limits their effectiveness regardless of how many points it's worth.

[MooreteP]

I was thinking about posting a fake team update yesterday, but time and tide worked against me, so here it is.

In order to level the playing field for the pyramid, the following rule changes are being implemented for the remaining competitions as well as the Championships.

1) The third level of the pyramid is now worth 40 points.
2) The three point goal is now worth one point, and the one point goal is now worth three points
3) The two point goal scores will be doubled for the left goal in odd numbered matches, and doubled for the right goal in even numbered matches.
4) There will be a deduction of $20 from your AndyMark First Choice account next year for each belay from the third level at Championships.
5) Any additions to your Robot after alliance selections will be assessed a technical foul for each match.

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by animenerdjohn

You must be a climber

Nope! Shooter with a 10-point hang.

As for strategy etc, we've known since kickoff that the point change is a possibility. Anyone who didn't plan for that didn't plan for all the variables they could have... That doesn't make them stupid or poor strategists, it just means that they took different risks than others.

[MikeE]

Earlier thread on the same topic

If your primary intent is to score as many points as possible, and you can't climb above a 10-point hang, then it makes complete sense to decry any change to the current points.

If your intent is to score as many points as possible and your team has a full-pyramid climber and you are attending the Championship, then it makes sense to hope for the GDC to increase the current 30pt climb to 40pts.

If your intent is to encourage an exciting spectacle then it also makes sense to increase the points for a full pyramid climb.

What I don't understand is the argument that making an adjustment which has been explicitly listed in the Game Manual since Kickoff is "unfair". Why is the blue box in section 3.1.5.2 any less "fair" than other parts of the game design?

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

I'd like to see them increase the 30 to 40, leave the 20 at 20, and reduce the 10 to 5.

Good - even more reason for 10-point hangers to freak climbers out by keeping them away from their pyramids late in matches. A 10 hang is worth less, might as well go push a climber across the field. Be careful what ye climbers wish for!

Greater potential score at the top means an equally greater incentive to deter it - BRING ON THE D.

[RyanShoff]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

might as well go push a climber across the field. Be careful what ye climbers wish for!

Bring it on. See you at Crossroads.

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Greater potential score at the top means an equally greater incentive to deter it - BRING ON THE D.

Yeah! I love me some quality D!