Should you invoke the wrath of <G14>, the whole world will know!

[Paul Copioli]

I have a theory.

A very low percentage of alliances will actually score more than 2 super cells anyway, so up to 2 teams in an alliance can have 2 super cells / empty cells taken away without it mattering. Let me explain.

Two teams on an allinace get 2 super cells each in their fueling stations. One team gets 4 empty cells. If two teams in an alliance get their super cells / empty cells taken away, then you put one in a fueling station and one in an outpost and you still will have 2 empty cells and 2 super cells left.

Based on this fact, we are not sweating G14. Our goal is to get a G14 penalty in every match we play! I love this game!!

[Doug Leppard]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

I have a theory.

A very low percentage of alliances will actually score more than 2 super cells anyway, so up to 2 teams in an alliance can have 2 super cells / empty cells taken away without it mattering. Let me explain.

Two teams on an allinace get 2 super cells each in their fueling stations. One team gets 4 empty cells. If two teams in an alliance get their super cells / empty cells taken away, then you put one in a fueling station and one in an outpost and you still will have 2 empty cells and 2 super cells left.

Based on this fact, we are not sweating G14. Our goal is to get a G14 penalty in every match we play! I love this game!!

First let me say Thunder Chickens is a great team.

Second I totally agree with you. I think it may be difficult to get those empty cells from the outpost to the fueling station. Then the human player must score the super cell. All that to say i agree with keep scoring.

[Dave Scheck]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

Our goal is to get a G14 penalty in every match we play

Raul, is that you?

[Waynep]

Originally Posted by Dave Scheck

Raul, is that you?

That's his twin. Separated at birth Pa-ul.....

I'm with Copioli on this one. I'm using G14 as a motivational rule.

[Jared Russell]

I could see some interesting repercussions of <G14> in the playoffs...

(it does apply in the playoffs, does it not? EDIT: It sure looks that way from the rulebook)

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

I have a theory.

A very low percentage of alliances will actually score more than 2 super cells anyway, so up to 2 teams in an alliance can have 2 super cells / empty cells taken away without it mattering. Let me explain.

Two teams on an allinace get 2 super cells each in their fueling stations. One team gets 4 empty cells. If two teams in an alliance get their super cells / empty cells taken away, then you put one in a fueling station and one in an outpost and you still will have 2 empty cells and 2 super cells left.

Based on this fact, we are not sweating G14. Our goal is to get a G14 penalty in every match we play! I love this game!!

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Paul Copioli again"

Paul, as usual, focuses us on a very important thought.

[Jared Russell]

If I Alliance A beats Alliance B in the first round of an elimination match by a score of 30 to 8, alliance A would not have any super cells in the second match... (each payload specialist would lose 2 game pieces).

And what if in the semifinals, you blow out your opponent in the final match? You get to start the finals without any 15 point game pieces!

[GaryVoshol]

Any chance anyone would view running up the score as egregious behavior? Ah'm jist askin'.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Any chance anyone would view running up the score as egregious behavior? Ah'm jist askin'.

Not me. Some will, but did anyone complain when the Sooners ran up 60+ points per game against opponents who scored, for the most part, less than 20? (Other than fans of the losing teams, that is.)

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Any chance anyone would view running up the score as egregious behavior? Ah'm jist askin'.

I think some people will. The purpose of the rule is to keep the games close and discourage teams from blowing other alliances out.

Purposely ignoring the rule and piling on anyway seems pretty egregious, not to mention not very GP and I think some people will take offsense to seeing a strong alliance blast another one out of the water.

Personally, I'm split. I don't like the thought of ignoring the rule but I love seeing a strong robot dominating at what it's designed to do.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by 340x4xLife

The purpose of the rule is to keep the games close and discourage teams from blowing other alliances out.

Since this hasn't been explicitly stated anywhere, you might want to be careful asserting it as fact.

Originally Posted by dlavery

I do have to ask: why are you so convinced that the GDC was attempting to "level the playing field"? [...] I can tell you that some of those publicly stated assumptions (including those concerning the rationale behind Rule <G14>) are just flat out wrong. Perhaps there were reasons other than "leveling the playing field" [...] that might have affected the design of the game?

[Paul Copioli]

To me, actively scoring for the opponent is worse than playing your best.

In addition, stopping to try your hardest in a match is just as bad.

To me, it is disrespectful to score for the other team and FIRST is basically encouraging it (so I do not fault teams that do it).

We will not score for the other team. We will not stop trying hard. As a result, we will get a lot of G14 penalties if we are lucky enough to be partnered with great teams. The message I am sending to my students is this:

Be respectful at all times even if it means scoring more than 3x the opponents score on the field.

[Doug Leppard]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

To me, actively scoring for the opponent is worse than playing your best.

In addition, stopping to try your hardest in a match is just as bad.

To me, it is disrespectful to score for the other team and FIRST is basically encouraging it (so I do not fault teams that do it).

We will not score for the other team. We will not stop trying hard. As a result, we will get a lot of G14 penalties if we are lucky enough to be partnered with great teams. The message I am sending to my students is this:

Be respectful at all times even if it means scoring more than 3x the opponents score on the field.

Agreed. Problem some teams will have low scores and it will be hard not to double. Could be dangerous to keep score close and all of a sudden a penalty makes you loose.

People don't like blow away games, but in NBA you don't pay to watch a team holding back, but you want them to play great ball.

[rick.oliver]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

To me, actively scoring for the opponent is worse than playing your best.

In addition, stopping to try your hardest in a match is just as bad.

To me, it is disrespectful to score for the other team and FIRST is basically encouraging it (so I do not fault teams that do it).

We will not score for the other team. We will not stop trying hard. As a result, we will get a lot of G14 penalties if we are lucky enough to be partnered with great teams. The message I am sending to my students is this:

Be respectful at all times even if it means scoring more than 3x the opponents score on the field.

I understand the perspective; however, I do not share it entirely. Scoring points that accrue to your opponents is clearly within the rules this year. As such it represents a legitimate strategy, albeit not without risk. I don't know why the rule exists. To be sure, I don't particularly care for it.

I do agree with being respectful and I appreciate the "gracious assertiveness" with which many teams approach the game. I, too will be encouraging our team to excel and to do their best at all times - always being respectful. If that means depositing some game pieces in the trailer that our robot is pulling in order to enhance our ranking points, then so be it. I trust that our opposing alliance will understand that we mean no disrespect and that we are merely playing the game within the rules, but to win.

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Since this hasn't been explicitly stated anywhere, you might want to be careful asserting it as fact.

If you ask the majority of the teams why they think the rule is in place I think they would tell you that it's to discourage teams form running up the score.

What else could it be?

To encourage blowing out the other alliance? Certainly not.

If you get penalized for blowing out your opposing alliance, it seems to me that the GDC wanted to discourage that.