|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Noodle Agreement
Not to be confused with the noodle incident.
![]() The noodle agreement is an exploitation of the tournament rules and scoring system, in that QA score is based upon maximum score alone, and G24 prohibits robots from throwing game objects to the other side of the field. For effectively zero effort, both alliances can score the other alliance 40 points by simply dropping their noodles (litter) on the floor outside the player station. It is a huge net benefit to both alliances, for both the points, and no longer having to worry about noodles getting tossed into locations which could tangle on their robots. And since the herculean task of putting a noodle into a trash can earns but 2 more points above the noodle agreement, there is very little incentive to spend time/effort/weight to attempt to accomplish the task. It does mean one of the player stations will be cluttered with noodles, but the asymmetry of the map means one player station is better used than the other anyway. Good teams will also be able to minimize the quantity of time the station is cluttered by rapidly deploying the noodles near the end of the game. But effectively, if the 6 teams on both alliances agree to do the noodle agreement will have almost a 40 point lead above any two alliances which fail to honor the noodle agreement. Thoughts on the matter? |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Simply Brilliant Sir!
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
The counter is that both sides have to agree to it, and trust them to follow through. If one team does it and the other doesn't (or puts them in the landfill) it's advantageous. Basically a nerd version of the Prisoner's Dilemma.
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Thought of this almost immediately, and it seems like a mutually beneficial arrangement.
I also cant think of a way to restrict teams from doing this, because teams will inevitably drop noodles on their own side while attempting to throw them over the center into their opponents side. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
This is a form of Prisoner's Dilemma.
The problem with the agreement is that it is beneficial for any individual alliance to deposit their noodles for the 10 points, meaning that one alliance gets 50 points and the other gets 0. This way, unless you can trust your opponent, it is in your best interest to deposit the noodles. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
im interested to see how this and how coopertition works in elims
![]() |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Coopertition doesn't work in Eliminations. No points are awarded. I assume that this won't happen either.
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Quote:
I had just assumed it worked in quarters and semis because i didn't see anything when I skimmed. I'm sure you're right |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Quote:
And while coopertition earns a mere 20 points for a fairly difficult task of stacking 4 boxes, this earns 40 points for much less effort. |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Thanks! I was looking at section 5 trying to find a rule specific to elims
|
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Reading through the rules this came up as a HUGE red flag for me... With how eliminations are structured this year, teams can game this system to try and knock off the top alliances in the quarters/semis, 40 points for noodles on the ground is very substantial. The lower/middle tier alliances can stick to the noodle agreement when playing each other, but not against the top alliance or two. I can see a situation where the middle alliances have a massive advantage in this playoff format.
Unfortunately this game gives too much power to the opposing alliance to prevent coopertition scoring, its almost human nature to try and help the underdog teams rank higher then powerhouse teams, there are 80 potential coopertition points to be denied by not cooperating (not sharing a yellow tote for coopertition stacks, and the noodle agreement). As much as this game tries not to be a competition, there is still a winner. Last edited by Jonathan Norris : 03-01-2015 at 16:29. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Even though it seems like a prisoners dilemma I don't think it is. If alliances say they will do the noodle agreement. And then one team/alliance doesn't then I think there will be serious repercussions, people would stop doing the noodle agreement with them meaning they wouldn't get their 40 points after the screwed another alliance. Also who would want to pick a team like that for elims? My team puts a lot of weight on how our teams work together when picking an alliance partner. Why would you pick a team that doesn't listen or lies.
|
|
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
My initial thoughts on how to make this work. You agree to the noodle agreement with the terms that you throw one noodle at a time. Alliance a throws one noodle and then alliance b throws another and back and forth. If one alliance stops, so does the other.
I really hope first gives an update that makes this not okay somehow. |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Noodle Agreement
Any thoughts on how they would hypothetically make it work? I'm struggling to come up with a solution that works... even if they were to hypothetically introduce red and blue noodles that are alliance specific
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|