|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#46
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
25 is out.
|
|
#47
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
|
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
1305 176 2166 |
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
25 went down suprisingly fast o.o
|
|
#50
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
Quote:
Maybe part of it is that when the triplets were all together, tactics-development proceeded at three times the rate. 1503/1680 might try something with their robot, and say "hey, this worked for us", and so their tactics would evolve quickly. On the tactics note, they certainly matter a lot more at nats where people can conceivably fill the rack in a match. At most regionals, you could be satisisfied with just putting up tubes as fast as your alliance could do it, but here it looks to be ludicrously important to block off your opponents early. Last edited by Bongle : 14-04-2007 at 13:55. |
|
#51
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
championship Alliances
2165 and their alliance is out. What a great rookie year from a team in smalltown Bartlesville Oklahoma!
|
|
#52
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
Go 116!!!
They advanced to the semi-finals with 93 and 1595 knocking off 45, 217, and 2272! |
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
I think the difference isn't in the design of the robot, it's in the game. This just isn't a game where you can shoot tons of balls into a goal, rather it's a game with a limited number of scoring opportunities and a common goal. Last year's game was one where a dominant robot almost never lost (25 is another example), this year's game is one where a dominant robot like 1114 (yes I still think they're dominant) has to work a bit harder to win their two regionals. Note that they still won those two regionals...
Quote:
|
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
any divisions done yet?
P.S. I think 195, 121, 1276 are going to win their division (curie??) and 233, 71, 179 win arch |
|
#55
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
Wow, upset in Newton. #8 alliance (190, 177, 987) just beat the #1 alliance (2194, 33, 1503) to move on to the semifinals.
|
|
#56
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
They all just finished the quarter-finals. Time to move to the semis!
|
|
#57
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
Newton: 8 seed won. 4 seed. 2 seed. 3 seed
Galileo: 8 seed. 5 seed. 2 seed. 6 seed. Archimedes: 1 seed. 2 seed. 4 seed. 3 seed Curie: 1 seed. 5 seed. 2 seed. 3 seed. |
|
#58
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
Wow, Galileo had three upsets!
|
|
#59
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
Quote:
|
|
#60
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Nats Alliances
I really didn't expect whatever alliance 2056 ended up in to be a ramp-dependant alliance. I figured they'd just be scoring monsters.
Quote:
Last edited by Bongle : 14-04-2007 at 14:22. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Picking alliances | geowasp | General Forum | 37 | 03-04-2007 20:57 |
| Alliances in touble? | archiver | 2000 | 24 | 23-06-2002 22:46 |
| alliances | archiver | 1999 | 49 | 23-06-2002 22:43 |
| Tri-Alliances? | archiver | 1999 | 6 | 23-06-2002 22:16 |
| 3 Team Alliances | archiver | 1999 | 5 | 23-06-2002 22:13 |