The Noodle Agreement

[Chinmay]

These things are throwable. After a half hour of practice I can throw 30-40 feet semi reliably (50% on 20 throws)

http://youtu.be/vyboSYt6J8I

Some example throws. The far edge of the key is 31 feet from the sideline

[sanelss]

Originally Posted by Chinmay

These things are throwable. After a half hour of practice I can throw 30-40 feet semi reliably (50% on 20 throws)

http://youtu.be/vyboSYt6J8I

Some example throws. The far edge of the key is 31 feet from the sideline

those are pristine condition noodles. you can forget about them being anything like that on the actual game field.

[Chinmay]

Originally Posted by sanelss

those are pristine condition noodles. you can forget about them being anything like that on the actual game field.

one of the team members tied it into a knot before I tried this... lol they're pretty pliable and can be returned to semi straight before throwing... idk give it a shot with yours

[matthewdenny]

FIRST could also color code the noodles. Red team throws red noodles, and only get 4 points for red noodles in the blue zone. I'm sure there are more details to work out, but I've only had the manual for a day.

[jtrv]

Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb)

Actually I think you will end up having no choice but to trust in this agreement since if most people are doing it which they probably will, you will be penalized by not getting the points. As Frank said, they won't be announcing wins and losses until the final rounds. The game isn't about winning, it's about having the highest average score possible.

Not really. If theres one SINGLE team that doesn't want to do it, the enemy alliance gets punished for trusting them.

Lets say red team 1 doesn't want to do it, red2/3 and blue1-3 want to. All teams drop the noodles on the ground on their side so the enemy team gets +40. Both red and blue get +40 at this point.

Well, red1 doesn't like this. They pick up the noodles and put them in containers or in the landfill. Now blue isn't at +40. Probably +32 or +28, while red stays at +40. Now you're in a bit of a problem if you're on blue.

[Sparkyshires]

You have to admit though, this is a fair point. Personally, I think my team has already decided we're not going to. It's not very graciously professional, and you leave yourself too open to have bad blood created between teams that could last a lifetime. Instead of risk someone backstabbing you and just overall not going the FIRST way, it'll be better to just not do it.

HINT TO THE GDC HINT HINT: I very much think the rule should get changed to a normalizing thing, for ex if blue alliance has 7 on the floor, and red has 4, instead of adding 28 to red and 16 to blue, normalize it so that it's comparable to blue has 3, and red has 0, and then only add 12 to red's score. This does minimal change to the rule's, and totally nullifies the noodle agreement dilemna.

[Grim Tuesday]

This "Noodle Coopertition" was apparent to a number of members on our team as well. Is it possible that the GDC totally missed it (a la 2011 spring powered minibots) or is this another coopertition aspect? The GDC is made up of extremely intelligent and talented individuals and this is a pretty huge flaw (if it is indeed one) for them not to have noticed. Personally, I really enjoy the idea of the highly strategic gameplay it brings.

To anyone who says this is "not GP," that's a whole argument in and of itself, but with this game especially, the goal is for both alliances to score as many points by themselves as possible at a time. There is not semblance of this being a real sport (like Breakaway, where 6v0 was very controversial because of the soccer roots). TNA is the epitome of coopertition, if pulled off correctly, and any bad blood created will be well deserved.

There are problems with making noodles -4 and -2. All scoring in this game is based entirely on what your alliance is able to do. Making noodles a negative changes your score based on the actions of the opposing alliance. This messes with the entire scoring and seeding system for this game. If the GDC does choose to "fix" this, then I think the best solution is red and blue noodles, though you do lose the aspect of accidentally littering your side of the field.

[alopex_rex]

Originally Posted by Sparkyshires

HINT TO THE GDC HINT HINT: I very much think the rule should get changed to a normalizing thing, for ex if blue alliance has 7 on the floor, and red has 4, instead of adding 28 to red and 16 to blue, normalize it so that it's comparable to blue has 3, and red has 0, and then only add 12 to red's score. This does minimal change to the rule's, and totally nullifies the noodle agreement dilemna.

YES.
please.

TNA seemed cool at first, but the more I think about it the more it seems like it would just be annoying for everyone. It's an exploitation of the rules, that doesn't even have anything to do with robot functionality. If rankings were heavily affected by who did or didn't go along with TNA, it would give the entire competition an air of illegitimacy. Events should be tests of robots, not large-scale experiments in game theory.

[Rangel]

Originally Posted by jtrv

Not really. If theres one SINGLE team that doesn't want to do it, the enemy alliance gets punished for trusting them.

Lets say red team 1 doesn't want to do it, red2/3 and blue1-3 want to. All teams drop the noodles on the ground on their side so the enemy team gets +40. Both red and blue get +40 at this point.

Well, red1 doesn't like this. They pick up the noodles and put them in containers or in the landfill. Now blue isn't at +40. Probably +32 or +28, while red stays at +40. Now you're in a bit of a problem if you're on blue.

Well of course there is always that risk but I think the vast majority of teams wouldn't want to be part of a controversy where they went against the wishes of the alliance without telling them. Really it's not much different than coopertition. If everyone does it, then there is no benefit to it. Of course people can promise to do coopertition with you and secretly decide not to but these cases are rare and few. Statistically, people are going to honor the decision much more often than not. Now come eliminations, that might all change.

[Trey178]

Such a passionate discussion, and it's only day 1! But this trust dependent loophole seems to have caused some headaches. I'll bring it up with my team but they may very well leave it on a back burner because there are other elements to design around.

[Pretzel]

I think the Noodle Agreement is interesting in that it can provide an extra coopertition bonus during the qualification rounds, but I'm not sure how I feel about it being used against specific alliances in elimination rounds. While I can see the side of the argument that says it merely helps to even the playing field against what are potentially the best two robots in the competition, I also feel that the best team should win regardless of if the others band against them with Noodle Agreements.

Perhaps a scoring change for elimination rounds to get rid of the ability to "gang up" on one team and deny them Noodle Agreement points, while still retaining the bonus coopertition points in qualification rounds? Something along the lines of the noodles removing points during eliminations and adding the points to the other team during qualification rounds would work to accomplish this, but there are probably more elegant solutions (if a change is made at all).

[Jared Russell]

FIRST should give the red alliance red noodles and the blue alliance blue noodles. UNPROCESSED LITTER bonuses can then only be given to noodles of the opposite alliance's color. Problem solved.

[Jacob Bendicksen]

Ignoring whether it's graciously professional for a moment, I do think it's a fascinating version of the iterated prisoner's dilemma. There's a lot of trust and potential gain involved, and once a team defects, they won't be trusted again. I agree with the previous posters who say that a tit-for-tat approach will be the best: watch the human player across the field, and when they put one in, you put one in. It minimizes losses, and increases trust.

[John]

Originally Posted by matthewdenny

FIRST could also color code the noodles. Red team throws red noodles, and only get 4 points for red noodles in the blue zone. I'm sure there are more details to work out, but I've only had the manual for a day.

I think this is the best solution, if FIRST decides to prevent this situation via a rule change. No points are awarded to RED if BLUE drops its own noodles its side. RED only receives points for getting its own (red-colored) noodles to the BLUE side. The color allows referees to easily determine which noodles originated on each side.

A variation of the agreement still would exist, where each team agrees not to remove the noodles that the other team throws across the field, but this is less of a problem (because it is harder to throw the noodle ~35 feet over the opposing alliance's LANDFILL ZONE than to just drop the noodles on your side).

The one side effect I can think of for this change is this removes the "penalty" (not really a penalty, a bonus to the other side) for accidentally dropping one of your noodles and failing to remove it. I don't think this is a particularly important component of the game though.

[Mike Marandola]

Originally Posted by Chinmay

one of the team members tied it into a knot before I tried this... lol they're pretty pliable and can be returned to semi straight before throwing... idk give it a shot with yours

This would be illegal per G16.