Where's the defense this year?

[Andrew]

Why aren't teams playing more defense?

First of all, defense doesn't look sexy. Many people will think, if your robot consistently goes out and stops your opponents from scoring anything, that your opponents were ineffective, not that you were very effective.

I've also seen some good defensive teams "lock into" their offensive game plan. Many teams who could be winning through playing effective defense are dropping their defense in favor of getting their scoring mechanism working. In other words, when their scoring mechanism is not working, they play defense and win matches. As soon as the mechanism comes back on line, they drop everything to go execute a score, and usually lose.

It will be interesting to see if teams at Championships continue to play the "let's get a high score" philosophy. If so, the alliance which can consistently score the most points will win CMP. Which means that CMP will be fairly predictable in terms of outcome. Ie. you'll just have to look at a teams scoring average and you'll know who is ultimately going to win.

However, if a team in the top eight realizes that they cannot outshoot the best shooter in the division and gambles on a combined offensive/defensive strategy, you may see an unlikely set of teams playing in the Championship match.

Another possible outcome is that a defensive robot goes undefeated (and they pretty much have to if they want to make it into the top 8). This is actually a fairly realistic possibility at CMP, where a defensive bot can be paired with a good offensive bot in every match. If this happens, a defensive bot in the top eight can easily pick two very good offensive alliance partners. If the rest of the field fails to realize that offense + defense is better than offense + offense, the surprise value alone may send some very good alliances back to the pits, wondering, "Why did we only score 30 points in that match?"

[KenWittlief]

at the buckeye regional only one team was undefeated in the seeding rounds, and they were focused on scoring points and pretty much left the other teams alone

they seeded 1st, and in the QF's they set the new high score in the nation 220:140

BTW - they finished regional champions too.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

its not harsh, its statistics - if you lose one match then you fall from the 7:0 tier down into the 6:1 tier - and if you have been playing defensively (not letting your opponent score) you will fall all the way to the bottom of it.

Screw the statistics... play the match SMART.

(This is a greatly simplified situation that I'm going to use to prove a point....)
Let's say I can score 4 balls a match, my partner can score 8 balls a match.
We are against a team that can score 20 balls a match, and their partner can score 6 balls a match.

Strategy dictates that I stop the "20 ball" team from scoring, such that my "8 ball" partner beats their "6 ball partner".

Why would we lose 26-12 when we can potentially win this thing with some good defensive play.
This simplified analogy also applies to this years game.


When you are against an offensive powerhouse, and don't have enough "fire power" to win the match in a straight blow for blow... stop them from bringing their big guns to bear. (whew... an analogy and a metaphor in the same post?!?)

Though I suppose... while there are those who argue "Defense is cheap" I argue... "Defense is strategy". Play the game.

I've argued over and over that this year's game is going to be won by versatile alliances, that are able to play every aspect of the game (strong offense in all parts of the game), and adjust their strategy to what is in front of them. Defense will be an important tool on their belt. But... time will tell if I'm right.

John

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Andrew

However, if a team in the top eight realizes that they cannot outshoot the best shooter in the division and gambles on a combined offensive/defensive strategy, you may see an unlikely set of teams playing in the Championship match.

Another possible outcome is that a defensive robot goes undefeated (and they pretty much have to if they want to make it into the top 8). This is actually a fairly realistic possibility at CMP, where a defensive bot can be paired with a good offensive bot in every match. If this happens, a defensive bot in the top eight can easily pick two very good offensive alliance partners. If the rest of the field fails to realize that offense + defense is better than offense + offense, the surprise value alone may send some very good alliances back to the pits, wondering, "Why did we only score 30 points in that match?"

Yes.
Very well said.
I was trying, but didn't express it as well as you.


John

[KenWittlief]

the reason defense is a risk is while you are busy trying to stop the other side from scoring 10 more points, YOU might be the one that ends up getting tipped over, having a cable ripped out, having your arm damaged, so when you try to hang or cap or whatever you do to score points, you cant

and you lose

our bot was designed to herd balls and to cap the goal as our 1 and 2 plan - we used the stock drivetrain from FIRST with a top speed of 5fps with custom triwheels

when you saw us poking along slow picking up balls we looked like an easy target - but when other bots tried to get in our face we pushed them out of the way, or drove right over them

if you did not build a bot that can outscore your opponent head to head, dont assume you can push them around either - and if you get frustrated and start ramming them you have a good chance of finding yourself disqualified for tipping or intentional damage.

BTW - our team played to score points - we were finalists at Pittsburg and semifinalists at buckeye.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

BTW - our team played to score points - we were finalists at Pittsburg and semifinalists at buckeye.

Our team played a strong offensive game in the quals, with random uses of defense. Then we played a tight defensive game in the elims.

We WON Long Island.
What's your point?

edit:
I don't mean to sound harsh. My point is that arguing "we play offense and we did well" is no argument at all... There are a variety of strategies to play this game. To rule one out may be prove a fatal mistake.

I also don't mean to come across as someone who is overly dependant on defensive play. We play a very mixed game, utilizing different strategies depending on the situation, and adapting to the match and opponents in front of us. As predicted early on... this is definitely a "coach's game" and it's been a lot of fun so far.

I can't wait to see how things play out in Atlanta.
/edit

[KenWittlief]

whats my point? this:

21 229 Clrksn/Mssna/SlmRvr 4-5-1

you placed 21st out of 36 teams and you lost more matches than you won.

at buckeye we were:
16 578 Gleason-Fairport HS 5-2-0

16th out of 60 teams, and only lost 2 matches.

thats my point - once you get into the elimination rounds then the game is win at all costs - but first you gotta get there.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

whats my point? this:

21 229 Clrksn/Mssna/SlmRvr 4-5-1

you placed 21st out of 36 teams and you lost more matches than you won.

at buckeye we were:
16 578 Gleason-Fairport HS 5-2-0

16th out of 60 teams, and only lost 2 matches.

thats my point - once you get into the elimination rounds then the game is win at all costs - but first you gotta get there.

I don't think that's much of a point either.
You weren't there, and don't know the circumstances of our losses, or how the matches/regional played out.

What you SHOULD note, is that we DID make the finals.

I never said offense is bad, I'm just saying completely ruling out defensive play (as it seems you have advocated in this thread) will come back to bite you. Or perhaps... you're robot is so completely undefendable you don't have to worry about this?

[rachakate]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

pick them up?

there was a match at buckeye, I think 340 was on the bar and another team hooked on, and their bot could move sideways on the bar - and they were trying to push 340 sideways, so they let themselves back down with their wheels on the platform and pushed back

and the other team pushed backed again

and 340 pushed them right off the end of the bar.

sad part is, for all the other matches I saw 340 was happy to get on the bar and mind its own business - the other team started the shoving match

and lost.

Actually, we dropped down to the platform to try and push back, and then when we raised ourselves up, 306 was above us. When we pulled up, they came up with us. They had a solid arm, so when they came up, their hook was above the bar, and they fell off.

We hung in every single round. We'd deliver our hook and then play king of the platform. Seemed to work out well.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by JVN

I don't think that's much of a point either.

then by your own logic, winning the LI regional doesnt prove your position either

?!

so why did you post it in defense of your argument?

What you SHOULD note, is that we DID make the finals.

we did too - at pittsburgh, and the semifinals at buckeye where we were picked in the first round by the 4th seed

My point is that arguing "we play offense and we did well" is no argument at all...

ok now you lost me completely - if the winning and losing results of your team is not the best measure of the success of your strategy

then what is?!

[JVN]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

then by your own logic, winning the LI regional doesnt prove your position either

?!

so why did you post it in defense of your argument?

I posted it to show you the other side of things...
To prove the point that your argument was flawed.

I was just trying to show that defense is a viable strategy, and ruling it out is foolish.

But now that you've driven circles around me logically...
I guess I have to admit you must be right.
I think I'm done with this thread.
I admit defeat.

Good Luck.

John

edit:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=13819
For those interested... I was reminded of this thread.
/edit

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

the reason defense is a risk is while you are busy trying to stop the other side from scoring 10 more points, YOU might be the one that ends up getting tipped over, having a cable ripped out, having your arm damaged, so when you try to hang or cap or whatever you do to score points, you cant

and you lose

...SNIP...

if you did not build a bot that can outscore your opponent head to head, dont assume you can push them around either - and if you get frustrated and start ramming them you have a good chance of finding yourself disqualified for tipping or intentional damage.

Ken,
I absolutely agree with what you are saying here.

John and I are arguing something very differently, though.

Some robots are DESIGNED to play defense. They have beefy, agile drive systems and mechanisms that allow them to vigorously interact, at least with a part of their robot, so that they do not sustain damage.

When I talk about a defensive bot, I am NOT talking about an offensive robot that is playing defense. I am talking about a robot that is specifically designed to play defense and which picked that strategy as its primary focus for the game.

Further, when I talk about DEFENSE, I am not necessarily talking about RAMMING.

One very common defensive maneuver has been to place a mobile goal in the ball chute. Another defensive maneuver might be to occupy a portion of the top platform and keep other robots off the top platform. Another defensive maneuver would be to park on the steps leading to the stationary goal so as to prevent capping.

I'm not sure about the team number (237?), but one team climbs onto the bar and drives along it so as to prevent other teams from hooking and climbing.

DEFENSE really means to occupy territory, either with your robot or a scoring artifact, so as to disrupt or delay another robot from executing their strategy.

When I say DEFENSE, I do not mean ramming, tipping, or intentionally damaging. I generally mean preventing, occupying, or containing.

That having been said, a robot which attempts to execute a "high objective" (capping the stationary goal, climbing the 6" steps, or extending a 10' arm to grab the bar) may end up tipping over as a result of "preventing." However, that is more a design flaw on the part of the offensive robot than an intention of the defensive robot.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Andrew

John and I are arguing something very differently, though.

No... we're really not.

[Mark Pettit]

As a team that was taken out of the semi-finals in LA by 22's exceptional defense, I can see the worth of planning defense into your strategy.
We are a strong small ball herder and we likely have the best human player in First Frenzy (I do not exaggerate).
We beat our opponent in the first match of the semi’s 150 – 70.
22 came after us at the beginning of round 2 and we were less than ready for them. They tipped us right over. Our robot is unable to right itself so we were done for the match.
In the third round, 22 tried to tip us again but we were more prepared and didn’t allow it. We filled the goal with small balls and our alliance partner, 968, brought over the doubler to cap. 22 went after them. We got in the way so that 22 couldn’t tip them and our alliance partner had to take a trip all the way around the platform to give capping another shot. We were trying to tangle up 22 so they couldn’t go after 968 but they were just too quick. 22 got to them and picked the doubler ball out of 968’s grabber just as time expired to win the round and take us out of contention.
Yep! Defense works!

[ngreen]

I've seen this game from the beginning as the winning teams will be the one that uses the alliances to the best ability. Sometimes you will have subpar offensive robots working with you that could best be utilized in defense. No, you won't get amazingly high scores but you won't lose either. And a win is a win in my book.

From watching regional, specifically the St. Louis Regional, I've seen times where one of the alliances was better used at stopping the other from scoring as many points while the other team scored points. More than anything I am super impressed by these team that do take on the defensive role and those are the kind of team that I would love to have on my alliance. To become that team you have to forget your pride and do what is best for the alliance. I kind of find the defensive team like this sexy because it makes the game exciting too.

Too say you can play a pure offensive game and do well is true (take for example the KC Chiefs) but it won't win you championships. Defense is a extremely potent tool when utilized to the right extent in this game. No alliance can be purely defensive and expect to do well. But the right mix of these can make for great alliances and great matches.

Trying to scare people from playing defense is just wrong and boring and limits who can compete to win.

As to what is better, who knows. I would love a match between a good offensive alliance and a good offensive team with a good defensive team.