05 World Wide High Scores

[Rombus]

One thing ive noticed heavily is heavy score diff, one side gets a LOAD of points, the other gets squat. I remember seeing a 56-0 match and a 26-6 match. This is going to be an interesting few weeks.

[elrabin]

The majority of matches are boring, yes, but some are very exciting.

One bot at Peachtree (M'Aiken Magic) seems to have a tough time using their arm, but they are amazing at defensive strategies. In one match, M'Aiken Magic's bot immobilized the entire opposing alliance, leaving the other two bots to cap at their own leisure.

In another match, two bots (don't know what teams) with arms were battling each other in order to cap a side tetra. They wrestled for a good minute and got entangled. One fell and pulled the other down.

In my opinion, the most exciting parts of this game comes when robots are playing "defensively." Also, I think the penalties are worth far too much and many times are over something very small. Our highest score was something in the high 50's, so a 10 point pentalty is a pretty big chunk of that score.

[Sachiel7]

Well, I know we didn't get the highest score at VCU, but I think we were one of the teams to get some of the highest QP's from the losers, and probably by one of the smallest margins too!
match #12, i think, we (1132) and our partners (769, 447) won over the other alliance 26 to 25. Not a bad jump at all. I think that another issue playing a role (at least at VCU) thats causing some low scores is some of the judging. Now, don't get me wrong. The judges are doing a fantastic job this year, and I congratulate every one for being able to score possibly one of the trickiest games to date. Now, based on our interpretation of the rules, if a goal is not capped, the highest tetra underneath the goal owns the goal for the alliance. Well, here at VCU, it doesn't. Apparently, the judges (at least in all our, and a few of our friends matches) have only been counting tetras on top of goals toward forming rows. I think that this is killing alot of play, and quite a few team's strategies, especially those who are very efficient working underneath the goals. It also places much more emphasis on capping. Some of our matches, however, both us and our opposing alliances couldn't understand what was going on with scoring. There was even one match where they forgot our 10 pts for being behind the line. I know that these conditions may seem rough, but I still say the judges are doing great. Even though we're playing with a different interpretation of the rules, it still makes for some interesting gameplay.
Oh, and for those wooing over not-so-much action and not-so-much auto action, watch our 3 matches tomorrow. If all goes as planned, we will be among the ranks of 1 or 2 teams who can accomplish this autonomous feat...
Its not vision... (sorry dave! were still crackin on it!)
Keep your eyes peeled...

[jlevans]

So far this morning at NASA/VCU there have been "considerably" fewer penalties... I am thinking that the teams are paying much more attention and it is paying off. It was stated that the number one seed starting this morning, made it through yesterday without a single penalty. It just takes effort.

Just an observation.

[Li Jianliang]

Sacramento's highest score so far has been 78... Highest penalty points: 70 (?).

[Sterno]

Originally Posted by Li Jianliang

Sacramento's highest score so far has been 78... Highest penalty points: 70 (?).

was that our (766) team?

[whakojacko]

Not only did we have 78, BUT we were 2 darn seconds away from capping that corner goal to give us all 9 goals controlled, which would have given us 111 (unless im being stupid, which is always a possibility). O well, it was good enough

[Pin Man]

yeah that was a rough match when we lost 79 to like 13 or something in the semis at the BAE... 213 broke, 529 didn't have an arm, and we just played terribly... but what can you do... but it was awesome that during the regular matches we (88) scored from 70-80 points 4 times... wooot!

[Goobergunch]

Originally Posted by Sachiel7

Now, based on our interpretation of the rules, if a goal is not capped, the highest tetra underneath the goal owns the goal for the alliance. Well, here at VCU, it doesn't. Apparently, the judges (at least in all our, and a few of our friends matches) have only been counting tetras on top of goals toward forming rows. I think that this is killing alot of play, and quite a few team's strategies, especially those who are very efficient working underneath the goals. It also places much more emphasis on capping. Some of our matches, however, both us and our opposing alliances couldn't understand what was going on with scoring. There was even one match where they forgot our 10 pts for being behind the line. I know that these conditions may seem rough, but I still say the judges are doing great. Even though we're playing with a different interpretation of the rules, it still makes for some interesting gameplay.

I concur with your interpretation. According to Section 4:

OWNING A GOAL – A GOAL is OWNED by an alliance if the alliance color corresponds to the last STACKED TETRA placed on the goal. If there are no TETRAS STACKED on the GOAL, the color of the highest TETRA CONTAINED in a goal will determine which alliance OWNS the GOAL. If all CONTAINED TETRAS are at the same height, the alliance with a majority of the CONTAINED TETRAS will OWN the goal.