|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
How much was the center of the field goal? Question, in years past and possibly the future will there be a addition to the game like you have this year.
That is awesome. |
|
#3
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
WPI always has a game change.
as for how it worked the center goal was a toggle hit it once and you gain ownership. For the other team to take ownership they have to hit it twice. once to bring it back neutral and then once to make it theirs. Having ownership of the center gave a 10 pt bonus at the end of the round. |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
Quote:
WPI has had a long history of modifying games for BattleCry, although it's only done to fix a perceived flaw in game-play (we would never make a change just for the sake of change). Perhaps the most drastic change was for the 2001 game, in which the 4v0 game was modified into a 2v2 game, and a second bridge was added to the middle of the field. On a smaller scale, for last year's BattleCry, the points for having robots in the home zone were modified to be 5, 10, and 25 points for one, two, or three robots (sound familiar?). Last edited by ahecht : 26-06-2006 at 13:19. |
|
#5
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
I loved that new center goal!
It adds a whole new level of scoring in the game, which IMHO should have been there from the start of the season. It brings back fond memories of the 2004 game, in which we had more ways to score than you could imagine. (Well not literarily, but you had a mobile goal, a stationary goal, the hanging bar, AND capping, all of which are radically different.) I wonder if any other off-season events would consider adding a center goal like this... ![]() |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
Hmm, I almost re-modified that field when I got slightly overzealous on defense...
Sorry about that ![]() |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
i kno it saved multiple teams :cough: 177 :cough:
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
Quote:
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
Originally, I thought no one was going to even bother hitting it considering the lack of green target and whatnot.
I never expected teams would be fighting over it in the finals. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
One benefit to the center goal was that teams had to keep an eye on the back-bot which could score that goal. It helped with some of the overzealous defense that was seen in this year's game. Usually, a bot had to go back and harass the back-bot if it was trying to score the new goal. This eliminated some of the 3 on 2 that caused much of the damaging contact.
It also added a second "big finish" to the game. More than once the center goal was swung from one alliance to the other in the last 10 seconds of the match. ![]() |
|
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
I just wish there will be something cool like that at the Ruckus.
Was i bold enough to the planning commitee? |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Playing Field
It was an interesting twist... for a second though I did think they were going to say "just kidding"
![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| pic: BattleCry@WPI 7 Teaser | BrianBSL | Extra Discussion | 7 | 26-06-2006 11:51 |
| pic: 2006 Playing Field | Starke | Extra Discussion | 6 | 08-01-2006 17:05 |
| pic: 1992 playing field | Koko Ed | Extra Discussion | 7 | 31-03-2005 18:55 |
| pic: Wildstang Playing Field | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 20 | 02-03-2004 11:38 |
| pic: BattleCry@WPI IV | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 4 | 17-06-2003 14:43 |