Meta-Game

Haveing been to two regionals (wisconsin and buckeye) i noticed something. although we were playing the same game at both regionals the way the game was played was very different. at wisconsin ramping was key to winning nearly any match, whereas at buckeye a ramp that could lift 2 robots the full 12 inches was a rarity, ringers were the key to winning and ramps only helped durring a close game. this made the game very different to play, to watch, and to scout. i was wondering if people noticed these kind of differences between other regionals.

The game is played differently from event to event. Championships are a completely different game from regionals. Regionals vary. LA and San Diego were similar, but about half the teams at SD were in LA.

Personally, when I think of any meta-game, I think of the progression from week to week, and how teams are going to alter their strategy to stay ahead of the competition.

Between Great Lakes and Buckeye, there was a great change between what dominated and what won. GLR saw tubes win more than anything, as Buckeye saw ramps (thank you 48) become a key player. Even then, both got closer and closer in importance, and what usually nullified that was a partially defensive strategy.

As I said countless times before (well, maybe not countless, maybe twice), I really cannot wait to see how the Championship games play out. Those are going to be wickedly awesome and one sight to see and have archived.

-Joe

Yep. That’s always been true.

GSR 2005
In the finals, the alliances had two scorers and a defender

Buckeye 2005
In the finals, the alliances had three scorers

Battlecry last year was the biggest display of New England defense. Most scores didn’t go above 30. Our alliance made it pretty far by winning autonomous with 4 or so balls put in by 230, us and 1276 playing some nasty defense, putting our 10 balls into the side goal, and then hitting the ramp.

You go to IRI and teams are all score score score. It eventually got to the point where there was a score of 137 - 133.

Personally, I prefer the “tubes! tubes!! tubes!!!” mentality, makes for a much more exciting and strategic game. I’m all about strategy and excitement.

Ramps bore me to death (no offense). A game can usually be easily won with a 2@12 lift… yawn

just watch boston finals match 3…

tubes tubes tubes + spoilers + de-spoiling + last second ramp…

thats how the game should be played…

I’m going to agree with Heretic. I’ve seen 3 regionals in person. BAE, UTC, and Boston not to mention a lot of the webcasts. All of the finals at Boston were some of the most intense matches I’ve seen.

There was no one way for the alliances to win. The win from the blue alliance came from a last second ramp by 125, because a spoiler was played, by 121, on a row of tubes that were battled over all match. I believe 126 also placed a spoiler on earlier in the match that 1626 despoiled. Those elims used all elements of game and there was no way for either alliance to come out on top unless they executed their strategy amd use everything they got to do it. And that last second ramp climb was probably the most exciting thing of the whole match. Power was cut as we coasted up the rest of the way, so ramps can be just as exciting as tubes.

But thats just my .02, and maybe I’m a little partial…

There’s no mystery here.

Ramp-bots have nothing better to do then play defense. With so many robots playing defense it becomes very hard to score tubes, and ramps become more important.

On the other hand…

At an event with more tube scorers, the defenders will be spread thin - and 60+ with tubes alone will become common. In these cases both alliances will ignore ramps - trying to put up more tubes in the end-time.