Will the 2016 World High Score be Set in Eliminations?

[wsh32]

Also during elims breaching and capturing give points, whereas during quals they only give ranking points.

[The Lucas]

I also picked playoff, 45 is a lot of extra points the for the the same work.
The only good counter arguments I can come up with are:

• Super alliance that could never form in elims, and otherrs mentioned.
• Boulders are more easily accessible in quals, less competition, holding or def.
• Penalties. Super high penalty scores are usually mistakes that are much more likely in quals.

[Calvin Hartley]

I would be interested in seeing what kind of match each of the past several years high scores were achieved in. Does anyone have that data? (Who am I kidding, I know you're out there. C'mon, fess up. Who's got the data?)

[Bluman56]

Originally Posted by Calvin Hartley

I would be interested in seeing what kind of match each of the past several years high scores were achieved in. Does anyone have that data? (Who am I kidding, I know you're out there. C'mon, fess up. Who's got the data?)

2010 - Curie Qual 100
2011 - Waterloo Semi 1 Match 1
2012 - Curie Semi 1 Match 2
2013 - Galileo Quarter 1 Match 3
2014 - GTE Qual 4
2015 - Hopper Semi 2

Source: http://www.thebluealliance.com/insights/2016

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by Bluman56

2010 - Curie Qual 100
2011 - Waterloo Semi 1 Match 1
2012 - Curie Semi 1 Match 2
2013 - Galileo Quarter 1 Match 3
2014 - GTE Qual 4
2015 - Hopper Semi 2

Source: http://www.thebluealliance.com/insights/2016

2010 was 6v0 (actually 4v2) and 2014 was a massive amount of tech fouls. IMO this strongly supports elim matches.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Bluman56

2010 - Curie Qual 100
2011 - Waterloo Semi 1 Match 1
2012 - Curie Semi 1 Match 2
2013 - Galileo Quarter 1 Match 3
2014 - GTE Qual 4
2015 - Hopper Semi 2

Source: http://www.thebluealliance.com/insights/2016

Interesting that 4/6 of those matches had 1114 on the winning aliance (yes 2010 counts).

[MooreteP]

Good discussion here that will be answered over the next two months.
I'm going with a quarterfinal match in a shallow competition.
250 points

Now let's work on calling them playoffs, rather than eliminations.

A kindler gentler FIRST, in a game that begs the return to the previous term.

[BrennanB]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Now let's work on calling them playoffs, rather than eliminations.

A kindler gentler FIRST, in a game that begs the return to the previous term.

Are people seriously like... upset if they call things eliminations instead of playoffs? Like. Really?!? I just don't understand why a team/individual would be upset because someone said eliminations...

And as for elims vs quals, especially games where the game score changes (eg 2012) are almost definitely going to see the highscore in eliminations. The highest penalized 2014 score was in elims.

[MooreteP]

Originally Posted by BrennanB

Are people seriously like... upset if they call things eliminations instead of playoffs? Like. Really?!? I just don't understand why a team/individual would be upset because someone said eliminations...

And as for elims vs quals, especially games where the game score changes (eg 2012) are almost definitely going to see the highscore in eliminations. The highest penalized 2014 score was in elims.

No, people seriously like... are not upset if you choose to call "things" eliminations instead of playoffs.
It's in the Game Manual, that the matches that are played after alliance selection are referred to as Playoffs.
It's also suggested in the Game Manual that we refer to the "balls" as "boulders", but you are welcome to call them "spheres", or even "tetras".

The Cheval de Frise could be the Quadruple Orthogonal Balancing Bridge, and the Rock Wall is really just a Step.

I am considering referring to this years game as Aerial Frenzy Ascent Rebound Tower Rush.


"Language is a Virus from Outer Space" ~William S. Burroughs

[Sperkowsky]

Well the 'world' high score will be set at IRI.

But, the season high will be either set in division elim's or on Einstein.

[BrennanB]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

No, people seriously like... are not upset if you choose to call "things" eliminations instead of playoffs.
It's in the Game Manual, that the matches that are played after alliance selection are referred to as Playoffs.
It's also suggested in the Game Manual that we refer to the "balls" as "boulders", but you are welcome to call them "spheres", or even "tetras".

The Cheval de Frise could be the Quadruple Orthogonal Balancing Bridge, and the Rock Wall is really just a Step.

I am considering referring to this years game as Aerial Frenzy Ascent Rebound Tower Rush.


"Language is a Virus from Outer Space" ~William S. Burroughs

I misunderstood your point then, apologies. I thought you were implying that the word playoffs was somehow nicer and more kind than the word eliminations, and thus we should use it.

Nonetheless I don't see much point of us trying to point out and change vocabulary for things that are virtual synonyms/derailing a thread even further over semantics. That's just picky. The game manual may be the rules for stronghold, but it isn't the rules for the English language. May as well time travel back to 2009 and demand everyone call coaches "commanders" and human players "payload specialists" because the words they use are pretty ridiculous sometimes.

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

Well the 'world' high score will be set at IRI.

But, the season high will be either set in division elim's or on Einstein.

Well IRI usually has altered rules that allow the scores to significantly increase, so you can't really say that was the "world highs score"

I don't have the data in front of me, but I seem to recall it's about a 50/50 split for world high scores being set at worlds/at another event. With the most common event setting the world high score being Waterloo (I think it was like 3 times, but foggy memory) (even over top of a specific division) Worlds often really isn't that much different than say a winning alliance at a regional.

[MooreteP]

Originally Posted by BrennanB

Nonetheless I don't see much point of us trying to point out and change vocabulary for things that are virtual synonyms/derailing a thread even further over semantics. That's just picky. The game manual may be the rules for stronghold, but it isn't the rules for the English language.

I have been reminding people of this change in other threads, and I don't intend to derail them. Sorry 'bout that. EDIT: about.

I Game Announce in New England and I can't even count the times last year that I kept saying "eliminations". It's an 18-year habit.
It took me two competitions to stop saying that the Red or Blue alliance "won" a match last year. (So glad that's gone)
Oops, don't say won his year, they're the Victors, and not the ones from the Robot.

My problems so far this year include calling "boulders" balls and confusing the Tower with the Castle.

I should be well calibrated by the NEDCMP.

Originally Posted by BrennanB

May as well time travel back to 2009 and demand everyone call coaches "commanders" and human players "payload specialists" because the words they use are pretty ridiculous sometimes.

You just had to bring up Lunacy, didn't you.

[Captain_Kirch]

We've yet to see autonomous go horribly horribly wrong for an alliance. I think you combine the penalty points of a botched auton with a super alliance in quals and it could happen....maybe.

Certainly we wont see triple digit penalty points outside of quals, but in quals it's bound to happen at least once right? Imagine a robot starting near the mid line completely freaks out and does 5 donuts, crosses he mid line 5 times, and earns 5 tech fouls.

Stronghold is a ridiculous game. Expect the unexpected.