Tower Strength Raised to 10 for CMP

[BenHildy]

Ok I honestly don't think that this will make a huge difference in score, especially in matches with high tier teams (which will be quite often as it is world's). I say this because from what I've seen, at least at many competitions nationwide, a -2 or lower tower strength is not entirely uncommon. When it comes to low-goal cyclers vs high goal ones, however, I do see a bit of an advantage on the low-goal robots because of the speed and efficiency they bring to the table. High goals are easier to defend against and are statistically less accurate. However, the scores will not be affected in my opinion. Since balls still count as scored even when the tower is decreased below zero, the alliances will simply gain the Capture later in the match as opposed to after the eighth shot (which has recently occurred pretty early).

[wjordan]

The lines show the percent of half-matches with a certain score that damaged the tower to a certain degree.

This leads me to believe that increasing tower strength may be a fairly big deal in qualifications (where match scores should hang around in the 100-150 range), but no so much in eliminations, where teams should be able to put up 120+ without the breach/capture bonuses.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by wjordan

The lines show the percent of half-matches with a certain score that damaged the tower to a certain degree.

This leads me to believe that increasing tower strength may be a fairly big deal in qualifications (where match scores should hang around in the 100-150 range, but no so much in eliminations, where teams should be able to put up 120+ without the breach/capture bonuses.

I'm actually curious how this change would have affected DCMPs. It'd be interesting to see how the rankings would shuffle with 10 tower strength instead of 8. Keeping in mind that average quality at DCMPs is usually much higher than at CMP.

[Van.Augur]

Seems like a pretty straightforward change. In the New England District at least, by the latter end of competition season (and especially at District Champs) you were regularly seeing both alliances get the breach ranking point every single match. It often came down to which team could score more boulders. Increasing the tower strength only seems to up the ante. It's obviously going to favor the teams who can score quickly and consistently. As others have said, having a tower score <-2 wasn't particularly uncommon amongst the upper caliber of teams, so I'm skeptical about the magnitude of change this rule will make. I think the obvious conclusion is that it will separate the good/quick shooting bots from the exceptional/rapid shooting bots. Things like 2-ball autonomous code will be even more valuable going into worlds.

[wjordan]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

I'm actually curious how this change would have affected DCMPs. It'd be interesting to see how the rankings would shuffle with 10 tower strength instead of 8. Keeping in mind that average quality at DCMPs is usually much higher than at CMP.

I wrote a script to calculate just that. Here's MSC, for example:

New Rank, Team, New Rank Pts, Spots Changed
1 frc2767 44 0
2 frc3620 42 7
3 frc4967 42 3
4 frc2771 41 7
5 frc4003 41 -2
6 frc5150 41 -2
7 frc33 41 3
8 frc27 39 -6
9 frc494 38 5
10 frc1023 38 7
11 frc5980 38 -6
12 frc1918 37 -4
13 frc67 37 0
14 frc6086 37 17
15 frc5050 37 0
16 frc573 37 8
17 frc3641 37 -1
18 frc70 36 -11
19 frc5053 36 0
20 frc858 35 9
21 frc3688 34 1
22 frc5505 34 1
23 frc2474 34 -11
24 frc4391 33 -3
25 frc548 33 13
26 frc107 33 19
27 frc1701 33 6
28 frc5048 33 -3
29 frc5712 33 19
30 frc3534 33 -10
31 frc3548 33 31
32 frc2834 32 -2
33 frc3098 32 6
34 frc51 32 8
35 frc4362 32 -17
36 frc3604 32 -8
37 frc1481 32 22
38 frc5460 32 -12
39 frc3546 31 -2
40 frc2054 31 9
41 frc5084 31 -14
42 frc217 31 -1
43 frc5878 31 -11
44 frc3357 31 -1
45 frc3234 31 2
46 frc3452 31 -10
47 frc2619 30 -7
48 frc3655 30 8
49 frc1684 30 -3
50 frc3536 30 14
51 frc1250 30 1
52 frc3618 29 1
53 frc5448 29 -9
54 frc5167 29 -3
55 frc3602 29 6
56 frc2586 28 -6
57 frc4377 28 -2
58 frc85 28 0
59 frc2337 28 1
60 frc3539 28 9
61 frc3770 28 -26
62 frc6098 27 -5
63 frc6193 27 -29
64 frc2612 27 3
65 frc3707 27 3
66 frc3656 26 21
67 frc4384 26 -13
68 frc74 26 10
69 frc4216 26 -6
70 frc5907 26 13
71 frc68 26 8
72 frc1718 26 0
73 frc5230 26 17
74 frc1025 26 2
75 frc1711 25 -4
76 frc4776 25 8
77 frc503 25 -3
78 frc6121 25 3
79 frc4680 25 14
80 frc3414 24 -10
81 frc6075 24 -1
82 frc5155 24 4
83 frc2137 23 -6
84 frc123 23 -2
85 frc2604 23 -12
86 frc2611 23 9
87 frc5166 23 -22
88 frc5114 23 -22
89 frc5203 22 -1
90 frc66 22 -1
91 frc3668 22 -16
92 frc3886 22 -1
93 frc4381 21 5
94 frc6097 21 -9
95 frc2959 20 1
96 frc5222 20 -2
97 frc3538 20 -5
98 frc5502 19 -1
99 frc1322 19 3
100 frc5090 19 0
101 frc3767 18 0
102 frc5926 18 -3

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by wjordan

I wrote a script to calculate just that. Here's MSC, for example:

This would certainly have created a very different draft!

However, I suspect higher tower strength would also have caused several teams to play differently.

I look forward to the style of play this change will cause at CMP.

[JB987]

Originally Posted by Van.Augur

Seems like a pretty straightforward change. In the New England District at least, by the latter end of competition season (and especially at District Champs) you were regularly seeing both alliances get the breach ranking point every single match. It often came down to which team could score more boulders. Increasing the tower strength only seems to up the ante. It's obviously going to favor the teams who can score quickly and consistently. As others have said, having a tower score <-2 wasn't particularly uncommon amongst the upper caliber of teams, so I'm skeptical about the magnitude of change this rule will make. I think the obvious conclusion is that it will separate the good/quick shooting bots from the exceptional/rapid shooting bots. Things like 2-ball autonomous code will be even more valuable going into worlds.

Hope so

[Amit3339]

First of all I gotta say i'm pretty happy with increasing the tower strenght to CMP. I was sure that the defences strenght will increase as well because of it...
I don't think this action will effect the low goal robot from the main reason that if you can capture the tower if can get the RP and if you can't you just won't. I't dosen't has anything to do with where you score the boulder, it's all about if you can score 10 boulders in the tower and unfortunately this will effect many teams during the entire CMP.
Whenever it comes to playoffs I believe that the tower health will be down by every game but the real question that still keeps the capture precent pretty low is will the tower will be captured? Will all the teams will be on the batter? That's the biggest misery

[Chak]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Assumedly this would be a G11 infraction.

Imo, putting a boulder in your own defenses would not be a G11 infraction by itself. G11's blue box says

G11 requires an intentional act with limited or no opportunity for the TEAM being acted on to avoid the penalty.

Putting a boulder in your own defenses would be a valid defense strategy then, since the opposing robots can choose to slow down and clear out the boulder to avoid the foul. As I see it, the difference is that the opposing alliance is not forced into committing a foul.

Disclaimer: Just a student's interpretation of the rules. The refs may call it differently.

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Chak

Imo, putting a boulder in your own defenses would not be a G11 infraction by itself. ...
Putting a boulder in your own defenses would be a valid defense strategy then, since the opposing robots can choose to slow down and clear out the boulder to avoid the foul.

Read one rule further.

G12-1 ROBOTS may not deliberately use FIELD elements, e.g. BOULDERS, in an attempt to ease or amplify the challenge associated with other FIELD elements, e.g. DEFENSES. Violation: FOUL. For every five (5) seconds in which the situation is not corrected, FOUL

And its Blue Box:

Example actions that violate G12-1 include, but aren’t limited to the
following: adding BOULDERS to your Moat to make it harder for your
opponents to CROSS the Moat, using a BOULDER to prop up Cheval
de Frise elements, propping open a DEFENSE door with a BOULDER.

[Rosiebotboss]

I think you all are missing a very valid point. Consider this:
A consistent, accurate high goal shooter, spends a lot of time chasing down boulders. A consistent, fast, robot that can breach most outer works can feed the high goal shooter. Get a ball, drop it in front of the high goal shooter and go get another one. Repeat the cycle. Quickly. Two things happen, the outer works fall and the cycle time for high goal scores drop. Scores go up. Discuss.

[Eric Scheuing]

Originally Posted by Rosiebotboss

I think you all are missing a very valid point. Consider this:
A consistent, accurate high goal shooter, spends a lot of time chasing down boulders. A consistent, fast, robot that can breach most outer works can feed the high goal shooter. Get a ball, drop it in front of the high goal shooter and go get another one. Repeat the cycle. Quickly. Two things happen, the outer works fall and the cycle time for high goal scores drop. Scores go up. Discuss.

What is the third robot doing in this situation? If there is a good defender against the high goal shooter who can do something with the boulders that the feeder bot brings, it would cause the shooter to go chasing boulders down instead of shoot, load, rinse and repeat.

EDIT: Third bot could draw the defender's attention away from the shooter and allow it to do its thing, or remain undefended and make up for the lost cycle time. If the third bot is playing defense, I feel this strategy would get shut down pretty quickly.

[Edxu]

Originally Posted by Eric Scheuing

What is the third robot doing in this situation? If there is a good defender against the high goal shooter who can do something with the boulders that the feeder bot brings, it would cause the shooter to go chasing boulders down instead of shoot, load, rinse and repeat.

If you had a reliable shooter whose limiting action is its defense crossing ability, you could consider running the third robot in tandem with your shooter, setting picks and crossing defenses, but not manipulating balls.

[Breakaway3937]

One of the things you have to remember about low vs high is that it takes 2.5 low goals to = 1 high goal. Look at the following situation. One alliance scores 10 boulders all in the low goal in elims this = 45 points. The opposing alliance shoots just 9 but all high goals this = 45 points. A low goal shooter is really valuable for bringing down the tower, but it is going to take the high goal to win divisions or Einstein. If the high goal shooting alliance previously mentioned scores just one more ball, the swing is 30 points. You cannot just rely on the low goal, at the CMP level you will be out scored on most occasions on Saturday, however you will gain that ranking point in quals which is always wanted. You have to put some boulders in the upper chains. This is going to be a neat addition to offensive and defensive strategy at CMP.

[MamaSpoldi]

Originally Posted by Breakaway3937

One of the things you have to remember about low vs high is that it takes 2.5 low goals to = 1 high goal. Look at the following situation. One alliance scores 10 boulders all in the low goal in elims this = 45 points. The opposing alliance shoots just 9 but all high goals this = 45 points. A low goal shooter is really valuable for bringing down the tower, but it is going to take the high goal to win divisions or Einstein. If the high goal shooting alliance previously mentioned scores just one more ball, the swing is 30 points. You cannot just rely on the low goal, at the CMP level you will be out scored on most occasions on Saturday, however you will gain that ranking point in quals which is always wanted. You have to put some boulders in the upper chains. This is going to be a neat addition to offensive and defensive strategy at CMP.

I think you made a typo...

One alliance scores 10 boulders all in the low goal in elims this = 20 points.