[BB]: Regional Variations & Bagging It

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by rtfgnow

I don't know how we got so far without thinking of this simple answer of how to get each team 10 qualification matches.

Spoiler for Yes, it needs that much suspense:

We will have more than six teams to a 6 minute period.

IMO, three's a crowd, but necessary, while more than three is just a crowd.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

IMO, three's a crowd, but necessary, while more than three is just a crowd.

That's a hard argument to justify without knowing the gameplay mechanics, rules, or field layout of a game.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

That's a hard argument to justify without knowing the gameplay mechanics, rules, or field layout of a game.

Considering how full a 6 robot field is even in Lunacy, which had basically an empty field, barring stuff like alternate disablement or something I can't really see how 4v4 would work. Apparently it will though?

Though if the game is 4v4 wouldn't FIRST's Championship planning show 5 regional winners per event? This would at least give us advance notice.

[artdutra04]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

That's a hard argument to justify without knowing the gameplay mechanics, rules, or field layout of a game.

But it is justifiable based upon Regional and District Event sizes, which are known right now.

Having 4x4 in a 32 team event, would mean 8 on the field, 8 on deck, and another 8 in the hole. That's 24 teams, out of 32 available. That means you're competing about once every four matches. Assuming there is a [generous] six minute total time for each match cycle, that means on average you would only be in your pit 6 out of every 24 minutes.

That might not be a big deal for veteran powerhouse teams which have 50+ students, but for anything less this would be a nightmare scenario.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Considering how full a 6 robot field is even in Lunacy, which had basically an empty field, barring stuff like alternate disablement or something I can't really see how 4v4 would work.

Don't forget the trailers. That "empty field" was filled with 12 robot-sized mobile objects. But if you look at an overhead view, it actually wasn't as crowded as it appeared from the side.

Though if the game is 4v4 wouldn't FIRST's Championship planning show 5 regional winners per event? This would at least give us advance notice.

Good point.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Considering how full a 6 robot field is even in Lunacy, which had basically an empty field, barring stuff like alternate disablement or something I can't really see how 4v4 would work. Apparently it will though?

Though if the game is 4v4 wouldn't FIRST's Championship planning show 5 regional winners per event? This would at least give us advance notice.

Originally Posted by artdutra04

But it is justifiable based upon Regional and District Event sizes, which are known right now.

Having 4x4 in a 32 team event, would mean 8 on the field, 8 on deck, and another 8 in the hole. That's 24 teams, out of 32 available. That means you're competing about once every four matches. Assuming there is a [generous] six minute total time for each match cycle, that means on average you would only be in your pit 6 out of every 24 minutes.

That might not be a big deal for veteran powerhouse teams which have 50+ students, but for anything less this would be a nightmare scenario.

To support the argument that 4x4 would be difficult/impossible, aren't you making an awful lot of assumptions here? The argument only holds water if virtually every other aspect of the game/competition remains the same. To whit:
- What if the number of robots per team is not limited to one?
- What happens if the size of the robots is significantly reduced?
- What happens if the length of a match is significantly extended?
- What happens if the size of the field is altered/increased?
- What happens if the performance envelope of the robots is not limited to a single two dimensional surface?

Just a few thoughts to consider.

-dave


.

[Chris Fultz]

Originally Posted by dlavery

To support the argument that 4x4 would be difficult/impossible, aren't you making an awful lot of assumptions here? The argument only holds water if virtually every other aspect of the game/competition remains the same. To whit:
- What if the number of robots per team is not limited to one?
- What happens if the size of the robots is significantly reduced?
- What happens if the length of a match is significantly extended?
- What happens if the size of the field is altered/increased?
- What happens if the performance envelope of the robots is not limited to a single two dimensional surface?

Just a few thoughts to consider.

-dave .

Well now, should I move this to a "game hint" thread ...

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by dlavery

- What if the number of robots per team is not limited to one?
.

The ensuing conundrum of game strategies hurts my head.

I wouldn't doubt the robot sizes have been reduced, with a reduced maximum weight requirement as well. Transporting a bot and tools was a large piece of our budget last year.

Though if the game is 4v4 wouldn't FIRST's Championship planning show 5 regional winners per event? This would at least give us advance notice.

I think this is an excellent point, except for the fact that the competition format isn't released until kickoff as part of the game manual. This means that behind closed doors they may already be accounting for additional qualified teams yet haven't announced or released the info.

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

IMO, three's a crowd, but necessary, while more than three is just a crowd.

There are ways to get more than 6 robots on the field every 6 minutes other than by having all of the robots on the field at once. Two (slightly) smaller fields, side by side, playing alternating rounds of 2v2 would be one way. Back-to-back matches (cutting down on queuing/reset times) would be another.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by dlavery

To support the argument that 4x4 would be difficult/impossible, aren't you making an awful lot of assumptions here? The argument only holds water if virtually every other aspect of the game/competition remains the same. To whit:
- What if the number of robots per team is not limited to one?

This particular assumption is made based on the premise "10 matches at a regional is feasible because the game puts 8 teams on a field instead of 6".

- What happens if the size of the robots is significantly reduced?
- What happens if the length of a match is significantly extended?
- What happens if the performance envelope of the robots is not limited to a single two dimensional surface?

Stop making me think so hard!

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Jared341

There are ways to get more than 6 robots on the field every 6 minutes other than by having all of the robots on the field at once. Two (slightly) smaller fields, side by side, playing alternating rounds of 2v2 would be one way. Back-to-back matches (cutting down on queuing/reset times) would be another.

Or use the strategy used before 2001: only operate the robots from one side of the field, and set up the other side (sans robots/power) for the next match during the current one.

[Foster]

Remember too that in the water game you have the entire pool volume to deal with. So while 6 robots may fill the floor of the arena, they take up very little space when looking at the entire volume. So 8 robots at a time would pick up the cycle time.

(Yes, this is really off the topic of Bagging and Tagging ....)

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by dlavery

- What happens if the performance envelope of the robots is not limited to a single two dimensional surface?

Originally Posted by Foster

Remember too that in the water game you have the entire pool volume to deal with. So while 6 robots may fill the floor of the arena, they take up very little space when looking at the entire volume.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Jared341

There are ways to get more than 6 robots on the field every 6 minutes other than by having all of the robots on the field at once. Two (slightly) smaller fields, side by side, playing alternating rounds of 2v2 would be one way. Back-to-back matches (cutting down on queuing/reset times) would be another.

Starting to look more and more like the VEX Robotics Competition all the time...

[Fe_Will]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Starting to look more and more like the VEX Robotics Competition all the time...

Sadly