Stacking vs Capping vs ???

[IronicDeadBird]

From what I looked at in the game I think I found two roles on the field the GDC intended to have...
But with three robots that means roles overlap and that doesn't make sense all things considered.
Two scoring platforms
Two feeder stations
Two mid piles
Am I just crazier then I thought? Does this not add up to anyone else?
Am I wrong? (Am I wrong), For thinking out the box from where I stay?

P.S I just really quoted a pop song lyrics...

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

From what I looked at in the game I think I found two roles on the field the GDC intended to have...
But with three robots that means roles overlap and that doesn't make sense all things considered.
Two scoring platforms
Two feeder stations
Two mid piles
Am I just crazier then I thought? Does this not add up to anyone else?
Am I wrong? (Am I wrong), For thinking out the box from where I stay?

P.S I just really quoted a pop song lyrics...

Is one robot going to stack all 70 or so totes you're able to stack, while the other caps a maximum of 7 stacks?

There are 30 totes behind the feeder station, 28 totes in the landfill, and 12 on the step. Three robots at the highest levels will have difficulty scoring all of them, and then there are 7 containers you are able to grab.

And that doesn't even touch upon litter.

I can see all sorts of different alliances with different robots serving different roles being viable in Recycle Rush.

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

Is one robot going to stack all 70 or so totes you're able to stack, while the other caps a maximum of 7 stacks?

There are 30 totes behind the feeder station, 28 totes in the landfill, and 12 on the step. Three robots at the highest levels will have difficulty scoring all of them, and then there are 7 containers you are able to grab.

And that doesn't even touch upon litter.

I can see all sorts of different alliances with different robots serving different roles being viable in Recycle Rush.

So what roles do you see? Cause I'm pretty firmly stuck with a robot that creates a lot of stacks or a robot that tops with multipliers. This field gets cramped fast and having roles that overlap are innefficient. I'm thinking maybe a robot that only moves resources around... not even sure if that's viable.

[wesbass23]

Comparing this thought to previous years (2013 for example) you either scored disks, climbed, or were some combination of the two. There were enough disks too rarely run out and enough room on the pyramid to allow for all three to climb. This year there are enough game pieces (and enough variety) and enough space on the scoring platforms that you can have three robots playing the same role.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

So what roles do you see? Cause I'm pretty firmly stuck with a robot that creates a lot of stacks or a robot that tops with multipliers

Robots that are effective at picking up and scoring totes from the landfill (up to height xxx),
Robots that are effective at picking up and scoring totes from the feeder station (up to height xxx),
robots that are effective at picking up and scoring containers from the ground,
robots that are effective at picking up totes from the step and landfill and scoring them (up to height xxx),
robots that are effective at picking up both containers and totes from the ground,
robots that are effective at picking up containers from anywhere,
robots that are effective at picking up containers from the ground and totes from the feeder station,
ETC.

There are quite a few different roles, and different types of these robots work together better with each other.

[JamesCH95]

I bet there will be (at least) two classes of stackers: ones that can make small stacks very quickly, and ones that can make small stacks into big stacks, perhaps at a slower rate. Feel free to sub-divide these into 'from human station' or 'from landfill' or whatever.

Take any of the Ri3D robots, for example, and pair them with a team that can make stacks of 3 totes really quickly. The 'pick and place one tote/stack' sort of design common to Ri3D could make stacks of 6 with one or two (careful) maneuver(s) while the second robot cranks out stacks of 3 totes wherever they can manage to place them. A third robot caps these stacks with cans, maybe with litter.

This might be my ideal alliance...

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by wesbass23

Comparing this thought to previous years (2013 for example) you either scored disks, climbed, or were some combination of the two. There were enough disks too rarely run out and enough room on the pyramid to allow for all three to climb. This year there are enough game pieces (and enough variety) and enough space on the scoring platforms that you can have three robots playing the same role.

Pardon the typos cause I'm mobile right now but this is how I see it.
Recycle rush is a PvE based game where interaction between teams isn't as big of a factor as interaction within teams. This is due to it being based around resource management. The asymetrical field design ensures there are absolutely optimal areas for each scoring platform. There is the driver station scoring platform with a close driver station andd a far driver station. The obvious ideal is the close driver station. There is also the step scoring platform. Where you have two resource piles one closer one farther again optimal areas availiable. The sacrifice for running three stackers is that you don't really have an area to create stacks without causing traffic jams. So yeah you could triple up on stackers but then you restrict movement incase you get noodled. So yeah there is enough space on the platforms I don't believe there is enough driving space to support that. 2013 on the other hand is pvp you don't play tetris the same way you play chess

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

Pardon the typos cause I'm mobile right now but this is how I see it.
Recycle rush is a PvE based game where interaction between teams isn't as big of a factor as interaction within teams. This is due to it being based around resource management. The asymetrical field design ensures there are absolutely optimal areas for each scoring platform. There is the driver station scoring platform with a close driver station andd a far driver station. The obvious ideal is the close driver station. There is also the step scoring platform. Where you have two resource piles one closer one farther again optimal areas availiable. The sacrifice for running three stackers is that you don't really have an area to create stacks without causing traffic jams. So yeah you could triple up on stackers but then you restrict movement incase you get noodled. So yeah there is enough space on the platforms I don't believe there is enough driving space to support that. 2013 on the other hand is pvp you don't play tetris the same way you play chess

2 human player stackers and a landfill stacker. I think there is plenty of room for 3 stackers, as long as they can also cap their own stacks.

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

2 human player stackers and a landfill stacker. I think there is plenty of room for 3 stackers, as long as they can also cap their own stacks.

The distribution of bins to cap with is auto to land fill. With only one robot working landfill wouldn't the run the risk of the other teams taking step bins. Unless you don't move bins during auto then its an even split but at that point the four bins would be better be utilized by two robots. Then one using four.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

The distribution of bins to cap with is auto to land fill. With only one robot working landfill wouldn't the run the risk of the other teams taking step bins

Unless the one robot gets them first...

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

Unless the one robot gets them first...

If it rushes bin it doesn't have a stack scoring side it has stack staging side and a bin on nothing is worth nothing.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

If it rushes bin it doesn't have a stack scoring side it has stack staging side and a bin on nothing is worth nothing.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to saying.

[wesbass23]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

Pardon the typos cause I'm mobile right now but this is how I see it.
Recycle rush is a PvE based game where interaction between teams isn't as big of a factor as interaction within teams. This is due to it being based around resource management. The asymetrical field design ensures there are absolutely optimal areas for each scoring platform. There is the driver station scoring platform with a close driver station andd a far driver station. The obvious ideal is the close driver station. There is also the step scoring platform. Where you have two resource piles one closer one farther again optimal areas availiable. The sacrifice for running three stackers is that you don't really have an area to create stacks without causing traffic jams. So yeah you could triple up on stackers but then you restrict movement incase you get noodled. So yeah there is enough space on the platforms I don't believe there is enough driving space to support that. 2013 on the other hand is pvp you don't play tetris the same way you play chess

How and where a team creates stacks will vary but seeing as the totes will come from one of three locations (2 feeder stations and the landfill) there should not be much need for moving between those locations and interfering with your alliance. Even if a team shuttles one tote at a time from the feeder station to the scoring platform you should be able to set up a prematch strategy with your alliance to designate what routes each robot will be taking. As far as only having half the field to work with it is now 3 robots on half a field instead of 6 on a full field with the added bonus that the robots on your side of the field aren't intentionally trying to slow you down.

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

I don't understand what you are saying.

If you go for the bin first without having a stack you either need to put it down and wait for a stack or move to the staging platform and hope there is a stack there. Both options waste time. In a management match you want the cycles tight, unnecesary movement is wasting time wasted time is lost score.
Got the comment its kinda like cooking
"Yo I opened the cookie dough!"
"Dude were in the sick ward of a hospital and we don't have an oven..."

[wesbass23]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

If you go for the bin first without having a stack you either need to put it down and wait for a stack or move to the staging platform and hope there is a stack there. Both options waste time. In a management match you want the cycles tight, unnecesary movement is wasting time wasted time is lost score.

Unless your robot is designed to efficiently move bins and fill them with litter. Then by the time a stack or two is ready, you'll be ready with a couple noodle filled bins.