*Originally posted by M. Krass *
**Dave L.'s going to come beat you down if you don’t watch yourself …plenty of thought goes into the game.
Erin;
If you have your heart set on changing the game, there are only two things I’d touch -
Change Elimination Rounds to be a 2 of 3 format. This won’t have an adverse effect on robot function.
Reduce the value of the ramp points. Because, through the season, so many robots have been modified to do things other than stack, I would try hard to avoid swinging the pendulum too far to the stacking end of things. You’ll notice the two other replies are from stacking teams. I think that, by making the ramp points 15 rather than 25, there’s still incentive to battle for the top, but stacking has more potential to play a role.
In the end, though, I think that if you do change that point value, the net result will simply be lower scoring rounds. I don’t anticipate that stacking will become any more important that it’s been for the past two months.
…and, likewise, if you need any help with things, I’d be more than happy to do what I can. **
I agree thaqt a lot of thought goes into the game. No one knew that the game was going to be played in the way it was. Maybe they should change the name from “Stack Attack” to “Battle Bins”. LOL. It has a hard game to play, but still a lot of fun.
Here is an easy way to make stacking more valuable: Multiply the height of the stack by the number of bins in the stack and the number of bins in the color carpeted area. That way a stack of five would be worth 5*5=25 (same as a robot on the ramp) by itself and the other bins would just be a bonus:) . Opponents will of often clear the bins out of ur zone while u defend/build a stack. I think it is asking too much of a robot to build/defend a stack and defend all the bins in their zone too. It also would lessen the impact of autonomous on the game since a lower number of bins on ur side could be easily overcome with a higher stack (this should make user mode more exciting).
I always thought it was stupid to exclude the bins in the stack from the multiplier. An example of how ludicrous this scoring policy is: If have a stack of 5 but no other bins in ur area it is worth zero points (5*0=0). :eek: I thought this years game was intended to be easy to understand and score on the fly. That is rather hard to explain to a spectator (5=0). The current scoring system seems like something my math prof would give us for HW :ahh: . Try to think about this problem during the heat of competition:
Maximize the function f(x,h) = h * (x-h) where h is the height of the stack and x is the number of bins in your colored area which varies based on autonomous ability and bin pushing ability.
The new scoring function would be simple (f(x,h)= x * h), and its maximum will always be x = h. So keep stacking, it cant hurt. Go for the ultra high score of 2025 with a stack of 45 (45*45=2025):D. Achieving this nearly impossible task used to be worth 0 .
Also to decrease the effect of “descoring” by pushing bins into the gray area by counting bins and stacks in the gray area by the alliance stations as if they were in the colored area (which is small). Then only neutral area for bins would be the ramp (which is huge) and the robot starting areas (hard to fit bins there). I dont think any team really likes “descoring” even if their bot is really good at it. At PARC, our exciting Qualifying Round against 25 ended up with a whopping 9-9 tie cause both sides just tried to reduce the other’s score. Every bot in that match fought hard but only got 18 QPs. Also stack defense would be easier if human players could put their stack in the corner braced by the alliance station. This would make any scoring changes that favor stacking more fair, because bots that cant stack could still easily reap the benefits of stacking thru their HP stacks.
The more functions and crazy ideas you throw in, the harder it will be for spectators, including ones who were at previous regionals.
My ideas:
King of the Hill: 20 Points
Stacking, (All Bins in zone * Multiplier)
scoring in example:
15 bins are on the blue side. 12 are scattered in stacks of 1 and 2, there is a stack of 3 standing. 2 Blue robots claim the HDPE
12 bins are on the red side. 6 are scattered in stacks of 1 and 2, there is a stack of 6 standing. 1 Red robot claims the HDPE.
This would have higher scoring matches, with emphasis on TALL stacks (which we all know are very hard to keep alive). The closer the SHU : Loose Bin ratio is, the more productive it is. I intentionally had equal score, similar bin amounts because it shows the swaying of king of the hill. Play with other scenarios that real games ended with and you’ll see it won’t sway every match, but it will sway for some of those last second fall-offs or broken down robots.
Many a match could be swayed by 12 points and many times the above scenario has played out.
*Originally posted by Gadget470 *
**The more functions and crazy ideas you throw in, the harder it will be for spectators, including ones who were at previous regionals.
My ideas:
King of the Hill: 20 Points
Stacking, (All Bins in zone * Multiplier)
scoring in example:
15 bins are on the blue side. 12 are scattered in stacks of 1 and 2, there is a stack of 3 standing. 2 Blue robots claim the HDPE
12 bins are on the red side. 6 are scattered in stacks of 1 and 2, there is a stack of 6 standing. 1 Red robot claims the HDPE.
This would have higher scoring matches, with emphasis on TALL stacks (which we all know are very hard to keep alive). The closer the SHU : Loose Bin ratio is, the more productive it is. I intentionally had equal score, similar bin amounts because it shows the swaying of king of the hill. Play with other scenarios that real games ended with and you’ll see it won’t sway every match, but it will sway for some of those last second fall-offs or broken down robots.
Many a match could be swayed by 12 points and many times the above scenario has played out. **
That seems like a pretty good idea. To bad it wasen’t played that way. Good Thinking Gadget.
*Originally posted by JVN *
**Throw a “hanging bar” above the ramp!
It would certainly be a new spin on things.
25 points to hang.
15 points for the HDPE
10 points for the mesh
**
Although it would be cool, think about how hard the game was to understand already. It was hard to explain already, think about how much harder it would be to play it with a bar over the ramp. I already think that there were to many different ways to alter scores. Add another variable, and I would probably be lost. lol.
*Originally posted by GregTheGreat *
**Although it would be cool, think about how hard the game was to understand already. It was hard to explain already, think about how much harder it would be to play it with a bar over the ramp. I already think that there were to many different ways to alter scores. Add another variable, and I would probably be lost. lol.
Good Luck to everyone at the invitationals. **
I think JVNn was just being sarcastic… I see his point- you don’t want to change too much of the game or it won’t be fun anymore… For example, if you added two more baskets to a basketball game and threw in another ball, the game would just be utter chaos… I agree with those who say that only the KOH score/ stack multiplier should be changed… Keep the game simple and fun…
It seems like the easiest solution that wouldn’t change the game too much is just making stacks also count in the bin total. The KOH doesn’t have to be changed when you have the extra points from a stack (5 stack = KOH)
2 out of 3
Colored Bins is COOOL!
Count stack bins
How about changing draft so that you can’t draft other top seeds? PLEASE! I hate it when 1 drafts 2, 3 drafts 4, etc.
Then you have Battle Cry where 20 declines to draft?? and 21 (us) drafts 23 then draws 34 for our third. How fair is that? We put up a darn good fight though!
…plenty of thought goes into the game.
.