Nats Alliances

[Adam McLeod]

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...

Originally Posted by Bongle

In all honesty, I think 1114 is simply not as dominant a design as they were last year. At each of their regionals, they were good, yes, but they weren't as unstoppably good as they were last year. Last year, their autonomous was 90%+ accurate, they were unmoveable when in shooting positions, they were very easy to human-load, they were fast. This year, they are good at everything, but the margin that they are better than other people isn't quite as large.

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.

[nutron5skills]

any divisions done yet?

P.S. I think 195, 121, 1276 are going to win their division (curie??) and 233, 71, 179 win arch

[ahecht]

Wow, upset in Newton. #8 alliance (190, 177, 987) just beat the #1 alliance (2194, 33, 1503) to move on to the semifinals.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by ahecht

Wow, upset in Newton. #8 alliance (190, 177, 987) just beat the #1 alliance (2194, 33, 1503) to move on to the semifinals.

That's only the second time since the introduction of seperate divisions that that has happened.

(If anyone's interested, the first time was on Galileo in 2005.)

EDIT:

Huh. Steve pointed out that it happened twice this year. So it's the second/third time. Why is this game so even?!

[Bongle]

Wow, I didn't expect 2056's alliance to be so ramp-dependant. They've double-ramped in every match I've watched.

Go canadian teams!

[xzvrw2]

Originally Posted by iCurtis

That's only the second time since the introduction of seperate divisions that that has happened.

(If anyone's interested, the first time was on Galileo in 2005.)

8 beat one in galilieo this yeat

[Tottanka]

that makes it 3 =]

[Bongle]

Simbotics lost their arm

...and their semifinal

Let's go 2056!

[Corey Balint]

Curie: 1 and 2 won

[Corey Balint]

Ill make one post of who won all the Semis so its easier for everyone insetad of just massive posting.

[Corey Balint]

Curie: 1 and 2 won
Newton: 8 and 3 won
Galileo: 2 and 8 won
Archimedes: 2 and 4 won

Timeouts and third matches....

[ScoutingNerd175]

Originally Posted by Corey Balint

Archimedes: 2 and 4 won

1 vs 4 was the first upset all afternoon on Archimedes, and it was a big one.

[Corey Balint]

Divisional Finals:
Newton
3. 1124-1592-1816
8. 190-987-177

Curie
1 1732, 67, 48
2 330, 910, 1270

Archimedes
2. 233, 71, 179
4. 386, 85, 107

Galileo
2. 173, 1902, 1319
8. 65, 503, 79

[ScoutingNerd175]

Originally Posted by Corey Balint

Archimedes
2. 233, 71, 179
4. 386, 85, 107

Alliance 2 wins.

[tkwetzel]

Any update on Galileo? I am stuck watching the results update on FIRST's website, and the Galileo results have not been updated after the quarter-finals. Anyone watching know what is up?