<G14> during eliminations

[PhilBot]

Originally Posted by Bob Steele

I can see an interesting strategy in which an alliance who has won the first match and seems to be losing the 2nd match dumps balls into its own alliance in order to gain the supercell advantage in the third match of the elimination.

My first reaction to this strategy was: "That's terrible, it's like throwing the match. How un-GP".

But then I started to wonder. A LOT of thoughts came to mind.

1) How practical is it to know the likely outcome of the game anyway. Even if the real-time scoring says 40-20, that's only a difference of 2 super-cells. Would you really have enough knowledge and determination to start scoring on yourselves, rather than trying to even the odds a bit and win with a super-cell or two.

2) Since the human players have control over the Super-Cells at the end, how quickly are you going to be able to assess their final scoring capability, and make the determination that you're better off NOT trying to win, but instead hold-back to get better handicap next game.

In other words, the final outcome of the game can be tipped either way with one or two well/badly placed super cells, so I think most teams would be hard pressed to back off. It will be a VERY HARD LESSON to learn.

But perhaps FIRST really is trying to get us to learn it.

FIRST is always about teaching us Life Lessons.

They tried "teamwork" in Aim High, making us help our alliances onto the ramp at the end. Exponential reward for additional robots.
---> Impromptu Cooperation...

They took it further in Rack 'n Roll, where we had to be innovative about lifting strategies so that unknown alliance robots could work together.
--> Cooperation by design...

I think this year they are teaching us that sometimes we need to PLAN to sacrifice our own "glory" to ensure that those around us also have a shot at success.
--> Strategic cooperation.

It's the ultimate "Not winning at all costs" lesson. You actually have to PLAN A STRATEGY to assist your compeditors so that you can both succeed.

Phew..... I get it.

Phil.

[smurfgirl]

Originally Posted by iCurtis

I think there a lot of people who'd agree with you on that. That said, for people who build a new robot and play an entirely new game year after year, we're incredibly resistant to change. Who'da thunk?



That's not quite true. Dave has said that <G14> does not exist to level the playing field. I don't think anyone's trying to dodge <G14>. Some people are actively campaigning against it, while others are content to sit back and watch the show.

Notice how we've all been having discussions of its dynamics and how it will affect matches and game strategy? Hmm... did anyone ever think that might be the reason it's here? To make us think harder, to add a new level of complexity to the game? Different teams are going to take different approached when dealing with <G14>, and I predict many interesting matches because of it.

[Bob Steele]

I think that perhaps somewhere the GDC is smiling after reading the last two posts.......if they read this sort of thing...

[Joe Ross]

I think the strategy of making sure you get blown out in the 2nd match would be not unlike a strategy used in the eliminations in 2003.

That year, there were only two matches in the eliminations. They used the same qualifying point formula as the qualifying matches (that year it was 2x opponents score + your own score). The alliance that had the highest combined qualifying point score between the two matches advanced. It was to your advantage that if you were losing, you wanted to minimize your own score so that you minimized your opponents qualifying score. If you look over the elimination rounds at the championship's scores (http://www.usfirst.org/community/frc....aspx?id=9304), you generally saw either a very close score, or a blowout. You would often see a team descoring their own boxes, or pulling off the ramp at the last second to minimize their own score.

One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

[Andy L]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

If your alliance is capable of pounding the opposing alliance into mush the previous match what does it matter if they have supercells if you can so readily outscore them with ease?

EXACTLY what I was thinking

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

I think the strategy of making sure you get blown out in the 2nd match would be not unlike a strategy used in the eliminations in 2003.

That year, there were only two matches in the eliminations. They used the same qualifying point formula as the qualifying matches (that year it was 2x opponents score + your own score). The alliance that had the highest combined qualifying point score between the two matches advanced. It was to your advantage that if you were losing, you wanted to minimize your own score so that you minimized your opponents qualifying score. If you look over the elimination rounds at the championship's scores (http://www.usfirst.org/community/frc....aspx?id=9304), you generally saw either a very close score, or a blowout. You would often see a team descoring their own boxes, or pulling off the ramp at the last second to minimize their own score.

One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

I called that the scorched earth scoring system. I'm gonna knock all of the tubs out of all of the zone (mine and theirs) just to play it safe!
What a crazy year that was.
There is no controversy in FIRST that will ever match 2003's "Collusion" controversy. Where teams protected their stacks by brokering deals with the opposing alliance so that no one's stack would be knocked down and both alliances would score well and seed well no matter who won or lost. This <G14> stuff is a trifle compared to that.

[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Somewhat troublesome. I'm not sure what to do about that, or whether anything should be done about it.

Fight fire with fire and do the same thing?

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

Doh! You gave away a secret! I laugh every time I think about this strategy. The audience will be so confused!

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by JesseK

Doh! You gave away a secret! I laugh every time I think about this strategy. The audience will be so confused!

Comedy gold just waiting to be mined!

[smurfgirl]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

That year, there were only two matches in the eliminations. They used the same qualifying point formula as the qualifying matches (that year it was 2x One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way.

I would like to see it happen at least once, I think that would be a really crazy match to watch. I can imagine some very confused audience members.

[Mr. Van]

I wasn't concerned about <G14> until now.

For those who don't think that supercells will make much difference, recognize that each supercell is worth 7.5 moon rocks. Three tosses from your human player and you've got 45 points! This will be very important in low scoring matches.

Imagine the pre-supercell score is Red 30 - Blue 20, and both alliance have 4 supercells. Do you throw the supercells? How many?

Suppose Blue begins to toss a supercell in the last seconds, so Red throws one as well. If blue misses, and Red scores, Red wins 45 - 20. Red alliance - all three teams get a <G14> handicap. Red has to toss the cell, or Blue can win the match...

I am certain that in elimination matches, alliances will play the game -that is try to win the tournament - by making their scores low if they feel that they are loosing. Imagine a mistake is made by Blue - two empty cells are dumped into a robot, and they are scored in a trailer early in the game, for example. This puts the alliance with a potential 40 point disadvantage. They are certain they can't win against super Red alliance, so Blue begins to play ineffective defense and stops scoring, hoping to get a <G14> advantage in the second match.

Blue stops scoring with 16 points. What does Red do? (Blue still has two supercells...) If Red takes their score up to 30 points - so as to not get the <G14> handicap, then Blue can win with a last second supercell toss.

Any ideas on how coaches can deal with these situations - especially when two of the alliance human players are far from the coaches?

-Mr. Van
Robodox

[Rick Wagner]

A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. I'm inclined to win the current match and not worry about G14. It would be ironic to be worrying so much about G14 and then to lose a match that you won't need to worry about it any more.

In the qualifying rounds, the effects are diluted, and by the time you get to the eliminations, the scores will be higher and there should be less effect. Until I have some match experience behind me, I'm not going to worry much about it.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Mr. Van

Any ideas on how coaches can deal with these situations - especially when two of the alliance human players are far from the coaches?

-Mr. Van
Robodox

A solution is already implied above: score in your own alliance's trailers when necessary.

The other solution is to not let on that you're about to dominate the score, then blindside your opponents with alot of orbit balls of all types in the last 20 seconds. This is a high-risk since it's impossible to know where your opponents will be in the last 20 seconds.

The best solution would be to only depend on moonrocks every single time, with supercells for last-minute assurance for victory.

[Rick Wagner]

As super cells will only be available in the last 20 seconds, and only in the corners for PS throwing (probably not enough time to feed attack robots), the implied defensive strategy is for robots to head to the mid-crater and keep moving. Should be an awesome sight.

[Ted Weisse]

Circle up the wagons...