A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

[StevenB]

I'd like to propose a strategy I haven't seen yet on CD or on the field: always scoring for your opponents. I think it's at least viable, and perhaps even a winning strategy during the qualification matches. Here's my reasoning.

If you lose, only your opponent's score matters (Manual section 9.3.4). Thus, if you're likely to lose a match, you should never try to score for yourself or play defense.
If you think you will win, you'll theoretically get the best score by scoring for your opponents to keep the score near even. But the number of penalties in this game throws a wrench in that plan.
Suppose the other alliance can't do anything. You can score 10 points for yourself, or 10 points for your opponents. Either way, you will get 10 seeding points. However, if you get a penalty, the opposing team will get more seeding points than you do. But if you choose to score for your opponents, you score points you can't lose. As long as you don't get disqualified, any penalties you commit won't affect your seeding score.
The only thing I see that would make this hard is <G29>, which says you can only have one robot in your opponent's zone.
Now, if your opponents figure out what's going on, and start trying to score for you, things could get really interesting. I'm not sure what would happen in this case.

Does my thinking make sense, or do I need to get some sleep?

[Vikesrock]

Originally Posted by StevenB

You can score 10 points for yourself, or 10 points for your opponents. Either way, you will get 10 seeding points.

Does my thinking make sense, or do I need to get some sleep?

Or you could score 6 for yourself and 4 for your opponent and get 14 seeding points.

[dtengineering]

I think you "get it".

Just remember to change that strategy once you get to the elimination rounds, where a win is actually a "win".

Jason

[StevenB]

Originally Posted by Vikesrock

Or you could score 6 for yourself and 4 for your opponent and get 14 seeding points.

That seems to be the "conventional thinking", and may be a better strategy. However, I think that choosing to always score for your opponents might actually be a safer strategy. What if one of your alliance mates gets three penalties, or perhaps one penalty with one of your opponents managing to hang at the last minute?
Most teams don't have the strategic awareness to pull off a score-balancing act like you describe. Something safe and simple is likely to be a better route for many teams, even if it doesn't have the maximum scoring potential.

Originally Posted by dtengineering

I think you "get it".

I'd like to think I do. :-) My concern is that the majority of teams don't, and the game is going to suffer for it.

[Vikesrock]

But your opponents will just see you scoring for them and begin scoring for you. They will then end up with more QP then you.

This is the great part about this year's game, the coaches will have to be very aware of what is going on if they want to maximize QPs.

[JackG]

If you're playing for the red team, then your total score is as follows

                                                       
|    |   Play for opponents   |     Play for self    |
|Win | red  +  2*blue + 2*S   |   red + 2*blue + S   |
|Lose|       blue + S         |        red + s       |

where S is the number of points you score for a given alliance


The decision of whether or not to score for the other guys depends not only on the probabilities of winning in each case, but the relative value of S. So without even talking about the odds of actually being able to score just barely enough to win, the decision would also depend on how many points you think you could score.

[waialua359]

I dont agree with this.
Scoring 4 for yourself and scoring 2 for the other team across the field is easier said than done.
IMO, you only need 1 scoring bot in the near zone and an effective defensive/shoot balls over the bump mechanism to win a week 1 regional!

[Swampdude]

I can see where duking it out with no defense will screw the loser if this becomes the norm. Knowing this the loser would always opt to help the winner. So it doesn't make sense to try and outright win unless you know for certain that you can AND the other team WILL score some points for them in your benefit to cover some of your penalties.

So now, it seems to me if you could get an agreement from all 6 teams to score for the team that has hangers. Plus give the losing team 1 or 2 points to cover the winning teams penalties, then you would have assurance from everyone that it was reasonable to cooperate from the beginning, hence optimize the assured seeding and coopertition points. Otherwise playing chicken with them will just lower everyone's points.

There's some logistical issues. It's going to get crowded at the winning teams goals. So put your 2 best herders there, the mid field bots can make shots, the far bots just help move balls forward then help if they can or just stay out of the way. Then the winning team hangers hang making more room for the other bots to move in and continue scoring till the end. This could make a consistent 15-20 point seeding/coopertition score for both teams fairly reasonable.

I think this is worth proposing, but the purists will spit on you. And you need to be able to trust the agreed winning team for this arrangement to work. Maybe we need an insurance agreement document, where the cheated party gets to pick a spare motor from your kit if you diverge.

[George1902]

Originally Posted by Swampdude

I think this is worth proposing, but the purists will spit on you.

If they can reach you from where you'll be sitting, way up in the standings.

[skimoose]

Originally Posted by waialua359

I dont agree with this.
Scoring 4 for yourself and scoring 2 for the other team across the field is easier said than done.
IMO, you only need 1 scoring bot in the near zone and an effective defensive/shoot balls over the bump mechanism to win a week 1 regional!

Sorry, but this thread is correct. One of the worst things any team can do during the qualification rounds is play defense. The ranking system and current regional rankings clearly show this. Preventing your opponent from scoring is driving your team down the ranking ladder plain and simple. Since you start with a "backfield" robot, scoring for your opponent should be relatively simple. just bulldoze balls in.

As for what's needed to win a week 1 regional... lets see what happens when the seeding point system isn't important in a match.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by waialua359

IMO, you only need 1 scoring bot in the near zone and an effective defensive/shoot balls over the bump mechanism to win a week 1 regional!

Striker / "Recycler" / Flex - Defense is something that won't just win week 1 events, I hope.

Collusion sucks. I'm going to figure out how to maximize my team's ranking score (if it matters to us) without talking to the other alliance. Then again, my team's built a very defense oriented robot, and the qualification system gives us no chance to show off the characteristics of the robot designed completely around the elimination round... *sigh*

[XaulZan11]

If both alliances are scoring for the other alliance, wouldn't it be better just to score for your alliance?

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

If both alliances are scoring for the other alliance, wouldn't it be better just to score for your alliance?

I'm beginning to wonder if I should just flip a coin and tell my team to score in whichever goal the coin says.

[Kevka]

Basically, you have to score into your own goal, keep your oponents from scoring into their own goal and then there are two more things to consider:
1. How do you get your oponents to get penanlties?
2. If your strategy is to loose anyway, you can get as many penalities as you want. What does this allow you to do.

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by Kevka

Basically, you have to score into your own goal, keep your oponents from scoring into their own goal and then there are two more things to consider:
1. How do you get your oponents to get penanlties?
2. If your strategy is to loose anyway, you can get as many penalities as you want. What does this allow you to do.

Clearly you havent read the rules. Winning your qualification matches is not nearly as critical as it has been in years past.