|
|
|
 I then thought "hmm, who would want to attack the FIRST website?" I guess unfortunately the answer to that would be "Mother Nature." - Adam Shapiro [more] |
 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
| I then thought "hmm, who would want to attack the FIRST website?" I guess unfortunately the answer to that would be "Mother Nature." - Adam Shapiro [more] |
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#34
16-01-2010, 00:06
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9.3.4 Match Seeding Points
This actually means that the losing alliance can get higher seeding points than the winning alliance. As a simplified case, consider that the winning alliance scores 10 points and is penalized 8, but the losing alliance scores zero. The winning alliance gets two points, but the losing alliance gets 10!
This actually makes it unprofitable to play defense if you are winning. In fact, if you are winning by a lot, it makes it profitable to SCORE ON YOURSELF to drive up the losing alliance's score! I don't like this change. It penalizes defensive bots, when defense is an integral part of the game itself. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Match Ranking Points | Daniel Bathgate | Rules/Strategy | 3 | 06-01-2008 00:25 |
| pic: QF match that set new record score = 220 points | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 3 | 29-03-2004 15:34 |
| Seeding System | Koci | Rules/Strategy | 23 | 25-03-2004 15:27 |
| pic: YMTC: 150 points or 100 points? | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 4 | 25-03-2004 01:53 |
| Seeding Calculations | archiver | 2000 | 50 | 23-06-2002 21:57 |
Threaded Mode