This gear scoring method will make match scouting play a very large role in qualification match strategy. Understanding your alliance’s capabilities would allow you to make the decision before the match on doing 3 or 4 rotors. Also I could see scouting results playing a large impact on how much gear defense you want your alliance to be playing in any given match.
Said this elsewhere, but this seems like a relevant thread.
I’m wondering how important counting your opponent’s gears is going to be. If you’re in elims and you KNOW your opponent needs one more gear for rotor 4 with 30 seconds left, double teaming the most likely opponent to score it is perfectly rational, even if it prevents both your bots from climbing.
Which raises the question of deception and pretending you desperately need that last gear to pull one or two bots away from climbing. Except haha, it was actually hidden on the floor of the airship the whole time…
If 4 rotors in elims is as common as a breach, this sort of thing won’t make sense. If 4 rotors is as common as a capture, I think we might see a LOT of strangeness in elims.
1 is a given in airship
2 is fairly achievable crossing , acquiring placing crossing, acquiring placing in first :30
4 is grand achievement in next :90…woo hoo so much effort
6 more??? is sort of crazy… for one bot and let alone even two not certain and not likely .
If you start on the the 6 and do not finish, you just wasted a tone of time you miss the climb climbing time you just shot 50 pts
Conversely FUEL is abundant and recycled on your own end… every 3 or 9 fuels is a point everthing counts no threshold and fuel everywhere.
I think teams will figure it out after first two weeks , what seems easy is pretty hard. Not to mention terrible vision.
Missing the climb in favor of a failed attempt at rotor 4 is a major mistake that does not make sense to attribute sweepingly at all much less to teams that would potentially end up in 4-rotor territory. It’ll happen (stuff happens), but very few teams who’ve just scored 4+ gears in a match (depending on the allies’ preloads) would fail to bail out of gears 7-11 in order to climb, if they’re capable. I’m all for fuel strategies, but marking ‘missing the climb in favor of a gear’ as a point in favor of fuel is unreasonable. Similarly with saying fuel recycles to your side without mentioning that it recycles to your opponent on your side first. Both of these ostensible advantages rely on the other guy making a mistake; the real advantages of fuel are the ceilingless and linear scoring and the bulk availability. The most appealing aspect is likely the feasibility of guaranteeing yourself an extra RP (in auton!), though with the caveat that this relative advantage crashes in elims.