How will Alliance captains pick ?

[saikiranra]

At the Inland Empire regional, the two alliances that made it to finals consisted of
1. RC Specialist (1572, 3250)
2. Feeder station stacker (359, 3476)
3. Landfill clearer (3562, 5136)

The more successful of the two alliances had some over lap in roles. 359 could also cap their stacks and 1572 could semi-consistently get the RC's from the center step in autonomous. Additionally, none of the alliances did anything with the bins and totes on their side during autonomous.

These alliances were successful at Inland Empire, but might not have done well in other events, like Dallas. For this game, it seems that the alliance selection configuration is heavily dependent on where you are.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by saikiranra

At the Inland Empire regional, the two alliances that made it to finals consisted of
1. RC Specialist (1572, 3250)
2. Feeder station stacker (359, 3476)
3. Landfill clearer (3562, 5136)

The more successful of the two alliances had some over lap in roles. 359 could also cap their stacks and 1572 could semi-consistently get the RC's from the center step in autonomous. Additionally, none of the alliances did anything with the bins and totes on their side during autonomous.

These alliances were successful at Inland Empire, but might not have done well in other events, like Dallas. For this game, it seems that the alliance selection configuration is heavily dependent on where you are.

IMO,
if 359, 3476 and 3250 were on one alliance, I'd argue we could do around 200 points +/-20 every single match. As long as we were able to get 2 RC's from the step at some point during the match.


-Glenn

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by waialua359

IMO,
if 359, 3476 and 3250 were on one alliance, I'd argue we could do around 200 points +/-20 every single match. As long as we were able to get 2 RC's from the step at some point during the match.


-Glenn

Possibly but the way alliance selection works that would never happen unless seven alliance team captains were all brain dead.

Face it in IE after the first round pickings were getting rather slim. 399 should have been a higher pick than #13.

You are taking about finishers in IE #1, #2 and #3 in QA ...like that would ever form and alliance in elims which is the only point you for a solid alliance that does not change.
1-16 then reverses on last round so #1 always gets last of elimination teams, after getting first dibs.

As was evidenced many times why many #1 alliances had much weaker third bots..usually.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Boltman

Possibly but the way alliance selection works that would never happen unless seven alliance team captains were all brain dead.

Face it in IE after the first round pickings were getting rather slim. 399 should have been a higher pick.

You are taking about finishers in IE #1, #2 and #3 in QA ...like that would ever form and alliance in elims which is the only point you for a solid alliance that does not change.
1-16 then reverses on last round so #1 always gets last of elim teams.

As was evidenced many times why many #1 alliances had much weaker third bots

I think you missed my point.
This is very possible at championships with similar teams with a deeper field in the future, or with these very same teams.
As a coach/strategist since our inception who influences our alliance selections, I understand your point.

[saikiranra]

Originally Posted by waialua359

I think you missed my point.
This is very possible at championships with similar teams with a deeper field in the future, or with these very same teams.
As a coach/strategist since our inception who influences our alliance selections, I understand your point.

Too bad we couldn't get an alliance like that working. It would have been amazing competing in playoffs with your team.

I agree that we could definitely see alliances like those form at championships (Especially with all 3 of those teams qualifying at Inland Empire). It will be interesting to see how alliances form at later regionals, and how an alliance of specialized robots compares to alliances of well rounded robots.

[MooreteP]

Originally Posted by donnie99

The way our team discussed this problem at the beginning of the year was different because of the new way the playoffs are held. With the top four teams in the quarterfinals and top 2 from the semifinals advancing, then alliances that maximize their own scoring while limiting the scoring of as many other alliances as they can, would be the ones to advance. With this in mind, the RC's on the step are the most important part to this strategy.

My point is that the RC's being taken off the step can make or break an alliance's run in the playoffs.

Your excellent strategy in the Playoffs is the model this year.
237 grabbed the RCs in autonomous, then 558 filled them with noodles and set them aside to put on whatever stacks you could make with 4557.
Had your alliance been more adept at acquisition and able to make higher stacks, you would have easily won Waterbury. (4th seed)
I expect to see you in Worcester and St. Louis.


As far as this thread goes, I submit that the top alliances will grab an RC, human player loading, capable of 5-6 tote stacks with an RC on top.
Most bang for the buck in qualifications.

The first pick should be a can grabber, the quickest will only get two in the finals, but with their 3x value, it's enough to multiply the value of any stacks, and as long as each alliance gets two, they've swapped queens. You need to get two ASAP.

I believe that the second pick is the most important. This is where scouting this year is quite difficult.
- Co-opertition points will skew the numbers and a modest stacking Robot that is consistently able to gain co-opertition with the other alliance will seed high.
This is worth little in the Playoff matches.
- Do you go for a hybrid? The warehouse worker that can do everything, but nothing well?
- Are you in a deep Regional (50-60 teams) or a shallow District (30-40 teams)?
- The seeding order may play strong this year. I think as the season progresses we will might see more 5-8 seeds winning Regional/Districts.
- By Einstein........

Don't even want to touch the statistical randomness of those $@#$@#$@#$@# noodles.

I was so worried about this game last week. Not anymore.

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Your excellent strategy in the Playoffs is the model this year.
237 grabbed the RCs in autonomous, then 558 filled them with noodles and set them aside to put on whatever stacks you could make with 4557.
Had your alliance been more adept at acquisition and able to make higher stacks, you would have easily won Waterbury. (4th seed)
I expect to see you in Worcester and St. Louis.


As far as this thread goes, I submit that the top alliances will grab an RC, human player loading, capable of 5-6 tote stacks with an RC on top.
Most bang for the buck in qualifications.

The first pick should be a can grabber, the quickest will only get two in the finals, but with their 3x value, it's enough to multiply the value of any stacks, and as long as each alliance gets two, they've swapped queens. You need to get two ASAP.

I believe that the second pick is the most important. This is where scouting this year is quite difficult.
- Co-opertition points will skew the numbers and a modest stacking Robot that is consistently able to gain co-opertition with the other alliance will seed high.
This is worth little in the Playoff matches.
- Do you go for a hybrid? The warehouse worker that can do everything, but nothing well?
- Are you in a deep Regional (50-60 teams) or a shallow District (30-40 teams)?
- The seeding order may play strong this year. I think as the season progresses we will might see more 5-8 seeds winning Regional/Districts.
- By Einstein........

Don't even want to touch the statistical randomness of those $@#$@#$@#$@# noodles.

I was so worried about this game last week. Not anymore.

Its interesting... I am of course scouting so I watched both what was going on in IE and SF since we face bots in those.

A curious case of a team in SF (DEEP-50) placed low 30's in field of 50 and not picked
Would have been (estimating) #11 in IE (SHALLOW-39) beating the #11 in IE due to co-op pts and a definite alliance selection in that event...probably eliminating the 3rd bot on the winning alliance that is now in WC. So close yet so far.

A whopping 20ish place swing due to location played LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION think we'll do IE next year.
I think what this shows is good bots can certainly get buried especially in DEEP events by random chance of partner selection in qualification matches.