[YMTC]: [YMTC] A Tangled Web

[ChrisH]

Here is a scenario that does not involve anybody breaking any rules or tricky scoring questions. I don't think there is any one correct answer. While I have stretched things a little bit to increase the tangledness of the motives, the core situation is real, though I'm not sure all of the teams involved were fully aware of it at the time:

You are the on-field coach for BlueOne and are currently standing in the cueing line for the final qualification match of the Magnolia Regional. You are currently the number three seed, having lost your first match due to an out of control partner that racked up more penalties than the highest score. But you are clearly one of the best robots in the regional, hurdling five to six times a match in spite of heavy defense. One of your partners, BlueTwo, is the currently undefeated number two seed, another hurdler who can get 4 hurdles reliably. BlueThree is an average lap bot that can also knock down balls. The red alliance consists of three barely functional lapbots. If they are lucky they will make 10 laps betwen them. Everyone is expecting the match to be a blowout.

The number one seed, YellaBot is right in front of you waiting for their match, which is right before yours. This year's YellaBot is hurdling at least six and sometimes seven times a match.YellaBot is known far and wide for their integrity in addition to their capable robots. Last year they returned their medals and trophies for winning this regional when they discovered, after the competition was over, that one of their partners in eliminations used an illegal component. In this match they are facing some tough defenders and can expect little scoring help fom their partners. They will probably win, but it will be close.

Suddenly one of the drivers from BlueTwo runs up and asks if the alliance can leave the red balls on the Overpass throughout the match. They have figured out that if the losing alliance can score at least 40 points they will probably have enough QPs to take the top spot. (In which case they plan to pick you) But the only way that can happen is to leave the red balls alone for the bonus at the end. BlueThree complains that knocking balls down is the only thing they do well, and their school Principal, who they really need to impress, has just arrived.

The BlueOne drive team has talked about a possible alliance with YellaBot for the Eliminations. The two of you together will be almost impossible to beat. If you pair with BlueTwo, the outcome is somewhat less certain though there is a good chance you can win. It largely depends on who you get for the third partner. YellaBot made it clear they want no ethical problems this year and they would rather be Finalists honorably than pair with a team that doesn't meet their high standards and win. They can't help but overhear your discussion.

All three teams await your answer ....

[Cory]

Knock the balls off.

When you start to think about ranking points and how much you need to raise your average by, and how much the top seed needs to lower theirs by, sometimes you forget to just play the game.

[EricH]

Follow YellaBot 1's lead: No Quarter, in an ethically clean, legally clean, in a Graciously Professional manner. If you win against them, you earn it. Them trackballs are coming down.

[Rick TYler]

Hmm... I've seen a couple of FIRST games where a team winning a blow out backed off to manage QPs. I've also seen teams actually score points for their opponents for the same reason. FIRST built QP into the scoring, taking advantage of that is not unethical. However. Trying to arrange a close win in a game where two or three tiny mistakes means 20 or 30 points takes more courage than I would have. I say blue would be smart to leave those red balls where they are as long as the score differential is at least 50, and someone needs to point out to YellaBot what the scoring means.

EDITED: In this match, one of the alliance partners stands to gain big by winning with max QP points. Is it a responsibility of the robots on an alliance to help one of their partners achieve its goal? How does Blue2 feel if its partners won't help them maximize QPs? Would it be wrong for Blue2 to score for red by placing goals on the overpass? They benefit by better QPs and their appliance partners don't, after all? I don't think "Ignore QPs, try to crush red" is an obvious answer.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Would it be wrong for Blue2 to score for red by placing goals on the overpass? They benefit by better QPs and their appliance partners don't, after all? I don't think "Ignore QPs, try to crush red" is an obvious answer.

Yes, because they would receive a 10 point penalty against their alliance for every red ball they possessed.

[Taylor]

People are missing the obvious answer - KNOCK DOWN ONE REDABALL! Redateam gets the chance to herd, Bluetwo gets their QPs, Bluethree gets to show off for the principal, everybody's happy.

By the way, don't EVER count your chickens before they hatch. At the BMR this year, we were paired with 1741 and 45, two of the most consistent hurdlers. We thought we had a win in the bag. Within 15 seconds, 1741 had lost power, and within a minute, 45 was on its back. Play the game smartly.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by ChrisH

...one of the drivers from BlueTwo runs up and asks if the alliance can leave the red balls on the Overpass throughout the match. They have figured out that if the losing alliance can score at least 40 points they will probably have enough QPs to take the top spot. (In which case they plan to pick you) But the only way that can happen is to leave the red balls alone for the bonus at the end.

This part doesn't make sense to me at all. First, the red trackballs have no effect on the blue alliance's score. Second, if they are on the overpass all match, the red alliance can't score by hurdling or herding them, so they'll come down quickly anyway.

If you want the red alliance to outscore the blue alliance, just let them. Don't interfere with them. Play pure offense and do your best. If they're better at scoring than you are, they should win.

My philosophy: play the game. Don't "game" it.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

How does Blue2 feel if its partners won't help them maximize QPs? Would it be wrong for Blue2 to score for red by placing goals on the overpass?

Originally Posted by Cory

Yes, because they would receive a 10 point penalty against their alliance for every red ball they possessed.

Blue2 may be willing to "eat" the penalty (as long as they still win the match) in order to raise the QP's. They'd have to weigh that against the loss of goodwill they would generate among the other teams, and whether any additional penalties (yellow card or even a DQ) could be assessed.

To the original question: In past games, scoring for your opponent was allowed. Last year it was expressly forbidden. This year it is allowed, within constraints (e.g. no possession of their trackball). In some cases, it is better for you to score 2 points for your opponents by knocking their ball across their finish line, than it would be to allow them to grab the ball to hurdle.

A general strategy is to get your own trackballs down (so you can use them to score) and leave the other alliance's trackballs up (so they can't use them to score). A secondary strategy is that if your alliance cannot hurdle, then you leave your trackballs up. (Interesting aside: most of the rookies at Kettering figured this out by Saturday, but some veteran teams at regionals never got it.)

Given that, the proper strategy for this match would be to leave the red trackballs on the overpass as long as possible. During the last quarter of the match, the alliance can decide whether it is better for them to leave the red balls up, or to encourage Blue3 to show their stuff and knock them off. If the 24 points wouldn't cause you to lose the match (and you'd have to have a pretty good margin of points to be sure of that), then leave the balls up to get the QP's. This is one strategy that I saw very few teams recognize. It's not anti-GP, it's good strategy.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

I would rather lose with honor than win because of a back room deal. The game is supposed to be played on the field, let it be decided there.

Knock the balls down.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

My philosophy: play the game. Don't "game" it.

I couldn't disagree more Alan. FIRST has designed this game and made RP important.

At Boilermaker you were third and we were ninth. Tell me how important RP's were. Ask 2474 who finished 12th how they feel about it.

[ALIBI]

What if BlueThree .. um....accidentally knocked down a red trackball in hybrid?

The key here is to talk about it with your alliance. There is nothing wrong with working with your alliance to either boost RS or show off a particular robots abilities. Making sure that you boost your RS will also boost the RS of your alliance partners and the opposing alliance, what could be wrong with that?

You owe your best to the alliance you are with, individually and as an alliance. As an alliance you must decide what to do. Winning a match and getting the most RS's possible demonstrates complete knowledge of how the competition works.

What would YellaBot think of you if you helped them maintain their number one seed by making sure BlueTwo did not get the 40 RS's or for that matter a loss? Seems like YellaBot would want you to do whatever does the most good for the alliance you are in, regardless of how it affects YellaBot. By keeping the RP's low in consideration of YellaBots offer, have you just shown yourself to be unethical? Which is what YellaBot does not want to see. YellaBot would probably prefer you work with your alliance to do what is best for that alliance even if it means they become the number two seed.

Winning is not everything, however, the game is set up that winning a match and getting high RS's are important. BlueOne should try and win the match and get the maximum RS's.

A BlueOne/YellaBot/Whoever per the question would be nearly impossible to beat. BlueOne/BlueTwo/Whoever vs YellaBot/Whoever/Whoever would make the finals more exciting. I vote for more exciting.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Blue2 may be willing to "eat" the penalty (as long as they still win the match) in order to raise the QP's. They'd have to weigh that against the loss of goodwill they would generate among the other teams, and whether any additional penalties (yellow card or even a DQ) could be assessed.

You'd come out ahead with a net of 4 points, and possibly a yellow card. Why would you want to do that?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

This part doesn't make sense to me at all. First, the red trackballs have no effect on the blue alliance's score. Second, if they are on the overpass all match, the red alliance can't score by hurdling or herding them, so they'll come down quickly anyway.

If you want the red alliance to outscore the blue alliance, just let them. Don't interfere with them. Play pure offense and do your best. If they're better at scoring than you are, they should win.

My philosophy: play the game. Don't "game" it.

Alan, the situation is that red can't do anything with the trackballs on the overpass, even knock them down. They can't outscore the blue alliance if the blue hurdlers are working right all match (which they probably are). So leave the trackballs up (24 points for red) or knock them down? Leaving them up makes BlueTwo happy, but knocking them down makes BlueThree happy.

Remember, this is QPs we're talking about, not match points. 2*loser's unpenalized score, and that sort of thing.

Definitely talk it over, but I think the best thing would be to play like you've got nothing to lose. Minimum of one trackball is coming off, probably both.

[Vikesrock]

Originally Posted by EricH

Remember, this is QPs we're talking about, not match points. 2*loser's unpenalized score, and that sort of thing.

See that's the problem, we're not talking about QPs, we're talking about RPs and calling them QPs

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Vikesrock

See that's the problem, we're not talking about QPs, we're talking about RPs and calling them QPs

I always forget which is which...The one that is your "strength of schedule" Which I guess is RPs...