Elimination Rounds

[Jeff Rodriguez]

Has anyone read this yet?

Each elimination round will be comprised of 2 matches. The elimination matches will be scored
exactly like the qualifying matches except that the points will be referred to as Elimination Points
(EP’s). Both teams in the losing alliance get their own alliance score in EP’s. Both teams in the
winning alliance get their own score plus twice the losing alliance’s score in EP's. A tie awards the
total of the match points to both alliances in EP's. After the two matches are completed, the alliance
with the highest combined total score advances to the next round. In the event of a tied score, a third
match will be played to identify the winning alliance. In the event of additional ties, more matches
will be played until the winning alliance is identified.

This is, in my opinion the worst change this year. To me, this eliminates the 'dominating' robots, such as beatty from last year. Teams that come up with crazy ideas that work wonders should be encouraged, not shunned, as this seems to be doing.

[Gope]

Perhaps I'm missing something but it seems to me that if you win both matches say 30 to 0, then you advance, and I don't understand how this eliminates "beaty" type robots with great designs...plz explain.

[Gamer930]

Seems like the best would be is have a high point for you and also high point for opp but under yourself. (like last year) UNLESS you plan on defently winning both matches

Example:
if blue get 52 points and red gets 6 points
scores:
Blue would be 64 (52+(6*2))
Red 6

then next match blue gets 44 points and red gets 48 points
Scores:
Blue would get 44
Red would get 140

Totals:
Blue:108
Red:146

Is this correct??
Assuming he is copying that rules out of manual. I don't have a copy infront of me to look at.

[Jason Haaga]

Sure, a purely defense bot could win the match lets say 5-0... but then what happens if you slip up and suddenly your opponent wins the next match? Meanwhile, if you had optimized your score a little better the first match, all you have to do is win the next one or keep it low scoring. Whoever wins the first match in an elim series is going to be much better off than in previous years, and not just psychologically.

[AJ Quick]

Example:
if blue get 52 points and red gets 6 points
scores:
Blue would be 64 (52+(6*2))
Red 6

then next match blue gets 44 points and red gets 48 points
Scores:
Blue would get 44
Red would get 140

Totals:
Blue:108
Red:146

This could possibly be what Dean Kamen was saying when he said the game wouldn't be fair. This probably will add to the spectatorness of the game, it will make it more interesting like a team could be completely dead if it loses the next match and gives all its points to the other team. This is definately not fair, but the game isn't susposed to be. This method really gives teams with the less advantage to score big, and can be worked into strategies if you think about it.

Our team was having trouble with this rule aswell though. We do not understand what points attribute to what.. with the Total points, and the EP points.

[IsabelRinging]

Yeah, the way they're doing the elim rounds really makes me nervous. I don't like it.

But I don't understand how this necessarily gives the team who wins the first match more of an advantage than last year, unless there's a really large difference of EPs.

I also don't see how this shuts out the Beatty-esque robots who dominate. There might not be a change in elim round scoring rules that helped these types of robots last year, but it's still set up so that they'll get points for whatever's in their own scoring zone. The other team wouldn't be able to screw up their score nearly as much as they could during last year's qualifying rounds.

Sure, it would help to win with your opponent having points (because it increases the difference between your scores, making it harder for them to catch up in the next round) but it's not like you're screwed for having that type of dominating bot.

[GILLIGAN!!!!!!!]

I agree Izzy, I agree.

[Trashed20]

i think this is a good change. The problem with last year was that there were two games. The one during the prelims, and finals. In prelims everyone tried to get points so they could qualify, while in finals points didn't matter from one match to the next. Robots like beaty in my oppinion took the fun and excitement out of finals. Who wants to watch a robot grab everything in sight and slowly shuffle into their zone while all the other bots sat back and watched the massacre for 2 minutes. It was boring, and painful to watch. While i don't think that first should intentionally shut down certain teams, i think this is a good move for the game.

In the rules you are also only allowd to touch on side of the ramp on the top. This is so people wont just block the way and take the fun out of the game again.

It all comes down to one thing. Find another way to win.....

[rbayer]

Notice that rule SC15 says that teams "accumulate EP's throughout the elimination rounds". Does this mean they carry over between opponents? We were rather confused by this wording and already posted a message to the boards, but it hasn't been answered yet.

[Mullen]

i think changing it is great, last year the qualifiqations were exciting but the elimintion rounds were extremely boring because it was just a tug of war. i think its gonna make teams do more thinking and come up with a more functional robot than last year

[Joel J]

As I currently interpret the rules for the elimination rounds, I'd venture to say that they weren't well thought out. Think about it.. if a team were to win the first match of an elimination round by a close margin--let's say 65 - 57--and find themselves losing the second match, all they have to do is knock over their "stack" of tote boxes to guarantee themselves the overall win. Does this make sense to others reading?

[Brian Beatty]

Joel:

I agree with your analysis, although I still have not read the rule book--but if it is as I hear, if you win a close match in the first round with a big score, then "laying down" in the next match would secure the victory. You would not try for the match win, but you would limit your opponents score to win the round. Of course, if you see you are going to lose the first match, then limiting your score (and your opponents winning score) might be the best strategy. Different. Those who can adapt will survive.

Sincerely,

Brian Beatty

[pauluffel]

I may be the only one with this opinion, but I love to bring a new view to the table. If the elimination matches will still be the same as last year in respect to how teams get in them and how alliances occur (top few teams pick two other teams to be their alliance members for the elimination matches) this year"s changes will make the competition better. Last year the high-seeded team might have one really good allaince partner and a mediocre one, but they wouldn"t get to choose which one they wanted to use for which match so they might dominate a match with their good pick, but they could lose a match because they had to be paired with their lesser pick. This year each high-seeded team will get a chance with each of their picks against the other high-seeded team and their picks which - if not making the game any fairer - will at least get rid of some excuses for a team that loses in the elimination round.

[Joe Ross]

Originally posted by rbayer
Notice that rule SC15 says that teams "accumulate EP's throughout the elimination rounds". Does this mean they carry over between opponents?

I read it the same way, however, I think if FIRST were to make as big as change as that, it would be specified more. It means you not only have to win each round, but win big, or else you have no chance with the next round.

[MissDaisyGirl]

boy they sure made the elmination rounds more confusing this yr. i sure hope that the ep points don't get accumulated during all of the finals, that doesn't seem fair, if one alliance got to play all the 'weaker' alliances and another had more difficult opponents. oh well, i agree with Trashed in saying that even though it is different and confusing, i think that it is for the best b/c it does even out the playing field. what is this 'beaty' everyone keeps talking about?