Which matches so far do you think will be most similar to playoffs at world champs?

[aphelps231]

http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2016pncmp_f1m1

Although there were only two robots on the field for blue, I think this match simulates a situation where an alliance (blue) either decides not to send a defending robot back for whatever reason, or is unable to send one back. The alliance (red) that is able to pick up a solid defending robot that is not going to be vital for scoring efforts is the alliance that will win their division and ultimately Einstein field.

For example, the alliance we ended up on at district champs consisted of three scoring robots, two of which had never played defense (1318 and 3663) and were both playing key roles in the scoring effort, and one of which (5803) had been playing defense on and off and lowgoaling all season long, but was necessary for scoring efforts but even more necessary for defense interference in the enemies courtyard. Although our alliance had more scoring potential than any other alliance on the field, we could not afford to keep 5803 on defense in our own courtyard for the entire match, as part of our later strategy called for them playing counter defense. Because of this, the enemies courtyard ended up too crowded for three robots to score against a defending robot, and the other alliance had a nice, clear courtyard to score in. The triple cycler strategy really only works if the teams have had ample practice staying out of each other's way.

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

To counter that, there were some really strong alliances at MSC with triple offense strategy. Sometimes I thought I was watching recycle rush based on the lack of contact in playoffs. The number 2 alliance and eventual winners also did triple offense until 1718 broke. That was all the way to Finals 2 as well. Hard to say how nessasary defense will be at champs. Some robots I think you have to play defense on though such as 254.

[MarcD79]

http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2016necmp_qf4m2 This the world high score match. All the elemination matches at necmp are STL-worthy.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb)

To counter that, there were some really strong alliances at MSC with triple offense strategy. Sometimes I thought I was watching recycle rush based on the lack of contact in playoffs. The number 2 alliance and eventual winners also did triple offense until 1718 broke. That was all the way to Finals 2 as well. Hard to say how nessasary defense will be at champs. Some robots I think you have to play defense on though such as 254.

To build upon this point, from the webcast it looked like the winning alliances at Indiana and New England also did not have a defender in the opponents courtyard.

[Peyton Yeung]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

To build upon this point, from the webcast it looked like the winning alliances at Indiana and New England also did not have a defender in the opponents courtyard.

In the finals I think all the defense was done in the neutral zone.

[murphy14]

Originally Posted by Peyton Yeung

In the finals I think all the defense was done in the neutral zone.

This is correct. We had 1529 disrupt cycle times in the neutral zone and feed us some boulders.

[Ginger Power]

Could it be that this triple offense strategy worked because the field at the district championships was more level? Will there be enough offensive depth at champs for there to be enough value in an offensive third robot? Will an alliance pairing of 2056 and 118 for example have any need for an offensive partner?

I personally think the triple offense strategies will be employed by the 6, 7, 8 alliances, and maybe the 4, and 5 as well. The top 3 alliances on a division will be better served by having a more open courtyard and letting their elite machines go to work. They won't have any trouble putting 15-20 boulders in the tower especially if they are undefended. The lower alliances will need all 3 robots scoring to keep up. The interesting dynamic is whether or not they're able to do so with 4 robots in the courtyard, one of which is wreaking havoc.

I don't believe the district championships played a lot like the playoffs will at champs. There will be greater disparity in the field with the top robots being far superior, and the 24th best robot being worse. I think this scenario will lead to less triple offense strategies.

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

Originally Posted by Ginger Power

Could it be that this triple offense strategy worked because the field at the district championships was more level? Will there be enough offensive depth at champs for there to be enough value in an offensive third robot? Will an alliance pairing of 2056 and 118 for example have any need for an offensive partner?

I personally think the triple offense strategies will be employed by the 6, 7, 8 alliances, and maybe the 4, and 5 as well. The top 3 alliances on a division will be better served by having a more open courtyard and letting their elite machines go to work. They won't have any trouble putting 15-20 boulders in the tower especially if they are undefended. The lower alliances will need all 3 robots scoring to keep up. The interesting dynamic is whether or not they're able to do so with 4 robots in the courtyard, one of which is wreaking havoc.

I don't believe the district championships played a lot like the playoffs will at champs. There will be greater disparity in the field with the top robots being far superior, and the 24th best robot being worse. I think this scenario will lead to less triple offense strategies.

Depends. If no one is playing defense, a blockable third robot can contribute quite a bit of boulders to the top alliances. There are actually quite a bit of high goal shooters that are pretty good but only become less effective as a result of defense. If you got two really strong outerworks shooters and one close up shooter, the defense will mostly have their hands full with the third robot. If the defending third robot used all its time to play heavy defense on the close up shooter third robot, then the shooting robot won because they contributed more points.Realistically if the close up shooter can score 6 undefended, the defending robot needs to stop or slow down the opposing alliance by 6 boulders worth just to break even.

[aphelps231]

Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb)

Depends. If no one is playing defense, a blockable third robot can contribute quite a bit of boulders to the top alliances. There are actually quite a bit of high goal shooters that are pretty good but only become less effective as a result of defense. If you got two really strong outerworks shooters and one close up shooter, the defense will mostly have their hands full with the third robot. If the defending third robot used all its time to play heavy defense on the close up shooter third robot, then the shooting robot won because they contributed more points.Realistically if the close up shooter can score 6 undefended, the defending robot needs to stop or slow down the opposing alliance by 6 boulders worth just to break even.

I think a point to be made here is that if you have three offensive robots scoring in the same courtyard, at least one but no more than two of those robots will remain undefended for a majority of the match. In our alliance with 5803 and 3663, defense was prioritized on us (1318), and our strategy had 5803 blocking the defending robot on 1318 before and/or or after their ball was put into the low goal as to not slow their cycle down too much. 3663 ended up undefended near the outerworks, and was able to pull off multiple undefended shots while 1318 and 5803 were dealing with the defending robot.

So if heavy, well played defense is something your alliance is worried about, picking up a shooter who can score from the outerworks might be something to consider.

[Ginger Power]

Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb)

Depends. If no one is playing defense, a blockable third robot can contribute quite a bit of boulders to the top alliances. There are actually quite a bit of high goal shooters that are pretty good but only become less effective as a result of defense. If you got two really strong outerworks shooters and one close up shooter, the defense will mostly have their hands full with the third robot. If the defending third robot used all its time to play heavy defense on the close up shooter third robot, then the shooting robot won because they contributed more points.Realistically if the close up shooter can score 6 undefended, the defending robot needs to stop or slow down the opposing alliance by 6 boulders worth just to break even.

I would contend it's a lot easier to prevent 6 boulders from being scored than it is to score them. I would also say that by the time you get to the 24th best robot on a division, the offensive skill will probably be below the defensive skill of available robots.

There are a ton of blockable robots. Very few robots can shoot consistently and accurately from the outerworks with a 54" blocker reaching out 12"-15" over them. This means a defensive robot will more than likely be playing defense on more than 1 offensive robot, increasing its value.

In a case where there are no defendable robots, a defensive robot is still incredibly valuable as a secret passage blocker. Cutting off an alliance from their secret passage (without blockading) can easily account for 6 boulders worth of time, especially if the opposing alliance is running with 3 offensive robots.