|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
I chucked this together to make sense of the QP strategy this year. It is interesting that (in my mind), defense almost always results in low QP scores for both alliances. Pretty much any other choice is usually the right one.
Note: This is for qualifying, obviously. In eliminations defense will play a bigger role.
07-03-2010 00:33
commodoredlReminds me of the Prisoner's Dilemma.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma
I have a feeling that many attempts to hold a perfectly evenly seeded 8-0 or 10-0 match will fail to be even because a team will attempt to switch scoring to maximize the winning alliance's seeding points. This could lead to a problem with attempts to do 6v0 matches.
Teams will need to decide how important ranking in the top 8 is to their overall strategy. The difficult part with choosing will be working out a strategy with your alliance partners and possibly the other alliance, who may have alternative plans. There is also the wrench in the mix of teams which don't understand the seeding point system at all, and therefore won't want to work out a maximizing strategy or will deviate from plans set at the beginning.
07-03-2010 01:38
SavtaKennethI believe there is one choice you are forgetting. coordinating a tie would result in having high QP for both alliances, so long as nobody decided to screw the other one over it would result in both alliances getting very high QP.
~Kenneth
07-03-2010 09:26
Bongle|
I believe there is one choice you are forgetting. coordinating a tie would result in having high QP for both alliances, so long as nobody decided to screw the other one over it would result in both alliances getting very high QP.
~Kenneth |