Team Update: Drive Team Placement in Playoffs

[AllenGregoryIV]

Blue only can use the advantage if they have robots that are able to capitalize on it. They still have to be faster than the other team. All the placement advantages in the world, won't make the RCs come off the step any faster for you. By giving blue this advantage assuming both alliances has some sort of staggered RC grappling (some of them come off the step faster than others) we are likely allowing Blue to get some but not all the containers, if Red does have at least a faster initial pull of one or more RCs.

Basically what I'm saying is yes the GDC is giving blue an advantage but if Red is faster they still get some of the RCs and you probably have a more even distribution of RCs because of this. (2-2, or 3-1 instead of 4-0). Since Blue can put their faster puller against Red's slower puller (or later RCs if it's one robot doing all 4).

Man we really need to lock down a vocabulary for some of these things.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

Blue only can use the advantage if they have robots that are able to capitalize on it. They still have to be faster than the other team. All the placement advantages in the world, won't make the RCs come off the step any faster for you. By giving blue this advantage assuming both alliances has some sort of staggered RC grappling (some of them come off the step faster than others) we are likely allowing Blue to get some but not all the containers, if Red does have at least a faster initial pull of one or more RCs.

Basically what I'm saying is yes the GDC is giving blue an advantage but if Red is faster they still get some of the RCs and you probably have a more even distribution of RCs because of this. (2-2, or 3-1 instead of 4-0). Since Blue can put their faster puller against Red's slower puller (or later RCs if it's one robot doing all 4).

Man we really need to lock down a vocabulary for some of these things.

True Blue still needs to be faster however Red would seriously be re-evaluating if they want to risk getting entangled with Blue in an autonomous fight over the RCs and risk damaging their (and Blue's) robot.

If Red is a few seconds faster this could be a mute issue depending on how both Blue and Red collect their RCs but as the season progresses and teams get faster the GDC is giving favor to the Blue alliance.

IMHO have the head referee do a coin toss if an order needs to be determined. Blue alliances shouldn't be guaranteed the upper hand in autonomous.

[mmaunu]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

Blue only can use the advantage if they have robots that are able to capitalize on it. They still have to be faster than the other team. All the placement advantages in the world, won't make the RCs come off the step any faster for you. By giving blue this advantage assuming both alliances has some sort of staggered RC grappling (some of them come off the step faster than others) we are likely allowing Blue to get some but not all the containers, if Red does have at least a faster initial pull of one or more RCs.

Basically what I'm saying is yes the GDC is giving blue an advantage but if Red is faster they still get some of the RCs and you probably have a more even distribution of RCs because of this. (2-2, or 3-1 instead of 4-0). Since Blue can put their faster puller against Red's slower puller (or later RCs if it's one robot doing all 4).

Man we really need to lock down a vocabulary for some of these things.

Very true. This ruling also makes it nearly mandatory for a first seed robot to identify and pick the robot that can most quickly (and reliably, of course) grab containers (unless the first seed robot also happens to be the fastest container grabber). If they don't, they could face a blue alliance that prevents them from getting any containers off of the step. At the very least, it's going to be interesting seeing how this all plays out in the first couple of weeks.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by mmaunu

At the very least, it's going to be interesting seeing how this all plays out in the first couple of weeks.

My guess is this doesn't matter until Week 5+. I'm betting there are teams that will dominate the RCs early on and position and order won't matter. As the season progresses it will be like Minibots and teams will catch up.

[Alpha Beta]

According to 5.4.4 the seeding is redone after the quarters, and again after the semi's.

You may notice that the #1 seed gets to play last in QF4 and QF8. That gives them the opportunity to pre-calculate the score they need to come in 4th and sandbag the match a little (if ensuring the blue autonomous advantage was important to them).

Moving from the semi's to the finals is not as easy to control from that spot though since Q4 plays their last match against Q3 before Q1 and Q2 play theirs. (Side note: I could foresee a scenario where Q1 and Q2 both score enough to advance in the last semi-final, but battle each other for the right to be blue in the finals by scoring as close to the minimum number of points needed to edge out Q3 and Q4.)

Now what about Einstein... Will the positioning of the 8 subdivision winners be random or based on their Qualification Average in the subdivision finals? Section 5.6 is a little thin on this area.

Help me out if I overlooked something.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by Alpha Beta

According to 5.4.4 the seeding is redone after the quarters, and again after the semi's.

You may notice that the #1 seed gets to play last in QF4 and QF8. That gives them the opportunity to pre-calculate the score they need to come in 4th and sandbag the match a little (if ensuring the blue autonomous advantage was important to them).

Moving from the semi's to the finals is not as easy to control from that spot though since Q4 plays their last match against Q3 before Q1 and Q2 play theirs. (Side note: I could foresee a scenario where Q1 and Q2 both score enough to advance in the last semi-final, but battle each other for the right to be blue in the finals by scoring as close to the minimum number of points needed to edge out Q3 and Q4.)

Now what about Einstein... Will the positioning of the 8 subdivision winners be random or based on their Qualification Average in the subdivision finals? Section 5.6 is a little thin on this area.

Help me out if I overlooked something.

Thats really interesting. Wow. This game is so weird.
But also interesting. What if you score the minimum number of points needed to advance, but then in the last few seconds an errant noodle or robot knocks over a stack. What is your course of action?
How important is that slight advantage to you?

[mmaunu]

Originally Posted by Alpha Beta

According to 5.4.4 the seeding is redone after the quarters, and again after the semi's.

You may notice that the #1 seed gets to play last in QF4 and QF8. That gives them the opportunity to pre-calculate the score they need to come in 4th and sandbag the match a little (if ensuring the blue autonomous advantage was important to them).

Moving from the semi's to the finals is not as easy to control from that spot though since Q4 plays their last match against Q3 before Q1 and Q2 play theirs. (Side note: I could foresee a scenario where Q1 and Q2 both score enough to advance in the last semi-final, but battle each other for the right to be blue in the finals by scoring as close to the minimum number of points needed to edge out Q3 and Q4.)

Now what about Einstein... Will the positioning of the 8 subdivision winners be random or based on their Qualification Average in the subdivision finals? Section 5.6 is a little thin on this area.

Help me out if I overlooked something.

I totally missed this and love the complexity that it adds! It also nullifies pretty much all of my worries. I love moments like this when I realize that a) the sky is not actually falling and b) I still haven't learned the lesson that the sky is rarely falling.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by mmaunu

I totally missed this and love the complexity that it adds! It also nullifies pretty much all of my worries. I love moments like this when I realize that a) the sky is not actually falling and b) I still haven't learned the lesson that the sky is rarely falling.

I'm thinking the reseeding is probably the most glossed over rule, I've seen in a long time. I've the read manual several times and didn't notice that until Alpha Beta posted it. Sandbagging for the Blue spot could be very interesting/strange on Einstein. Also I don't understand why the GDC didn't call this out in a more clear way in the manual. I'm not a fan of rules that encourage teams to score fewer points, as it stands now this rules does that in certain situations.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

I'm thinking the reseeding is probably the most glossed over rule, I've seen in a long time. I've the read manual several times and didn't notice that until Alpha Beta posted it. Sandbagging for the Blue spot could be very interesting/strange on Einstein. Also I don't understand why the GDC didn't call this out in a more clear way in the manual. I'm not a fan of rules that encourage teams to score fewer points, as it stands now this rules does that in certain situations.

I would almost assume that the GDC glossed over the rule as well, because if they're intentionally, passively incentivizing teams not going for the best possible score every time they go on the field (as is the case in the qualifications) then that's some 10/10 game design right there.

[2130driven]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Searched and surprised to not find a discussion on this:

Team Update 2015-02-03

The higher seeded ALLIANCE will always be assigned to the Red side of the FIELD. Additionally, ALLIANCE CAPTAINS will always be assigned to the center PLAYER STATION, the first pick will be assigned to the station to their left while they’re facing the FIELD, and the second pick will be assigned to their right while they’re facing the FIELD. If a BACKUP TEAM is in play, they will be assigned to the PLAYER STATION that was assigned to the DRIVE TEAM they’re replacing.

In past games, the 1,3 (left,right) positions weren't as differentiated as they are this year. Also, I think their placement varied between Playoff (Elimination) matches.
The 3rd (right) position has a higher potential for drive team vision issues as totes accumulate on the platforms nearest the driver stations. Which they may for yes, chute door, loaders.
The 1st (left) position has the best view of the "aisle" between the stacks. for negotiating the "traffic" between the stacks.

Am I overthinking this?

...so... would team 21230 go on the RED side?

[Lil' Lavery]

While I agree that the implications for Einstein are very strange, I think far too much emphasis is being given on this. As Allen Gregory pointed out, simply placing your robot on the field second doesn't guarantee that you'll win a contest for the scoring objects at the center of the field. While I understand its importance from a theoretical perspective, in reality, I don't think it will have nearly as much impact as you guys are making it seem.

Beyond that, if winning the center step was an absolutely crucial portion of your strategy, you should have been planning on facing off against other teams from the beginning. Being faster and/or stronger should have been a design priority for your acquisition system(s). Having seen the types of autonomous routines devised in recent years and the types of devices concocted for similar early match challenges, I'm not sure why a team planning on winning these contests at the highest level would hinge their strategy on robot placement order.

I'm sure plenty of elite teams did account for this, and are prepared to win the center step regardless of placement order. And I'm even more sure that there will be far more matches in which the center step goes uncontested, especially during autonomous.

[cglrcng]

Must be Faster, AND MORE ACCURATE! (and possibly stronger too). Which can possibly lead to a whole host of other possible problems. </;-)~ The first 2 to get locked up together during auto and not able to be unhinged easily....Who will be the first to get that E-Stop Disable pressed on them? UT OH!