So we all know that touching the opponents bridge during the match is a 9 point penalty, and we also know that balls scored in autonomous are worth 3 extra points.
What if you were to take the balls from the opponent’s bridge in autonomous (-9 points) then score them in the top hoop (+12). You would have a 3 point gain, and the opposing team would not have the bridge balls until their inbounder inbounded them.
You could also use this strategy for getting balls off of your bridge to gain an additional 12 points, but if you have 3 robots on an alliance, all score both of their balls (+36 points) then one gets the middle bridge (assuming two are on it, +12) then one gets their alliance bridge (+12) then one gets the other alliance bridge (+3) you have scored 63 points in the first 15 seconds of the game.
While none of the side bridges have been scored in hybrid before, I think that some of the teams that we will be seeing at Championships will be able to pull it off. Get the right robots on an alliance, and you would have the best hybrid alliance in the game.
I think this sounds like a great idea, but you wont see it happen.
Including the breaking of a rule into part of your alliances strategy doesnt show very good sportsmanship.
In addition, I believe you are penalized EACH time you touch the bridge. Since the bridge is bouncing around, you come in contact with it multiple times racking up a lot of penalty points. Didn’t this happen in one of the events when a team was inadvertently trying to get on the wrong bridge? I’m thinking it was with 1717.
But the balls on your bridge are already yours will the co-op balls are anybodys in the match, the first to get them gets a small edge in the match to start and if you can score those in autonomous you have a larger edge. Another factor is time, the co-op bridge is a straight shot while the alliance bridge is awkwardly off to the side which requires extra turns and manuevers which eat up seconds. Some robots who go for the balls on the co-op bridge in hybrid barely have enough time to get them and then re-line up.
you’re alliance could get up to 72 pts not 63… it’s just that the penalty points are added to the opponents score, not taken from yours.
we’ve been trying our hand at the alliance bridge balls and it’s alot harder than you think. we’ve had the 4 ball auto from the co-op bridge for some time and there aren’t many other teams that can do it, so we’ve had no problems. but we’re on Archimedes with 67 who can also do it, and i’m sure there’s prolly a few others… and since we’d rather play with them then against them we’ve tried to get the alliance bridge auto working… i’m not sure if we have yet tho… i would guess not, but we have been working on some other auto modes as well. we’ll just see how it plays out at champs.
I wouldn’t say it’s bad sportsmanship, it’s just really smart playing. Penalties are part of the game, and if an alliance feels that they can earn more points by taking those penalties, then what’s to be done? Yeah, it’s not a ‘nice’ move, but the C in FRC stands for competition, and that means you play the best you can to win.
For example, at the 2011 IRI, our alliance (1126, 233, 2016) went up against the number 1 alliance (1114, 987, 67). They employed a tactic to counter us pushing tubes into our lanes to protect them, by taking the 3 point penalty to go into the lane and get them. Because the 3 point penatly paled in comparision to the 18 point unaided top row logo, the cost of the penalty was worth the extra tubes. Were we happy about it? Of course not. But that’s because they mopped the floor with us doing that. It was a brilliant tactical move and fully justified in the scope of the game.
There are differences between smart play and cheap moves. I don’t think stealing balls off the alliance bridge is a cheap move. If nothing else, the offending alliance is taking a 9 point hit for it. If they want to risk taking that, let them do it. It’s not like they’re taking the balls and getting away scot free.
Consider the difficulties involved. First, you have to be able to shoot your two balls, then get to the bridge and tip it reliably. Then you have to gather the balls as they come down (something even the best gatherer’s I’ve seen can’t do 100%), then you have to line up and shoot at the basket, something that only 2 teams I’ve seen could do 100% in autonomous mode when when could perfectly line up their robot in the key. All in 15 seconds.
I think the risk of losing points is going to keep teams from trying this with their opponents bridge… but I can certainly see teams trying it with their own bridge - worst case the balls just end up on their side.
I can tell you right now 4055 has done alliance bridge and co-op bridge in autonomous. Look it up. We did it a lot in Hartford and will do it again at the championships. Our new autonomous will be to reverse our conveyer and push the two balls we have directly into our alliance best shooter and hope to see a quick 12 points. We also have a stinger check us out.
As good of a strategy as it is… it IS against the rules. And youre not doing it by accident, you are intentionally aiming to do it. I define intentionally breaking the rules to get an advantage as bad sportsmanship… As smart as it may be strategicaly.
67 already has the ability to go for the Alliance bridge. They were playing around with it at MSC during the practice rounds incase they paired up with another robot that also went for the Co-op bridge. I don’t think they used it in a real match, but they do have the option.
I figured they were probably working on it too, but i didn’t know if they had it yet. hopefully we get paired with them one round (if not in elims :P) and we can try to get a 60 point hybrid… :eek: that would be amazing…
I understand your reasoning behind that, and I agree it’s not the most wholesome tactic, and I definitely understand a lot of people won’t like it, but the rules are there to provide guidelines and consequences for the teams involved in a match. Now, breaking a rule to maliciously and ruthlessly undermine your opponents is one thing. If you’re trying to flip them over on a bridge or damage then, THAT is bad sportsmanship because of the nature of the act. That’s not a doubt.
But the consequences for stealing the opponent’s balls are clearly defined, and you’re not deliberatly trying to pulverize your opponent. It’s a tactical advantage. If a team wants to take the penalty to do it, it’s their choice. Yeah, it’s not ideal, of course it’s not an ‘honorable play’, because it does violate the rules. But to call it ‘bad sportsmanship’ I think think is incorrect. They’re doing it in the name of the game, but not to an extreme point that makes you shake your head at the team.
I understand what you mean, they would be breaking the rules and that makes the play rather questionable in merit, but it is a plausible tactic and you can’t question it’s a smart play. I’m not saying I’d promote it or encourage it, but I wouldn’t look down on a time who did this.
I do not believe it is bad sportsmanship to take penalties for a net gain. Especially because this isn’t something like an intentional tip - this is just picking up balls.
That said, it’s a pretty bad strategic decision. Three points is not enough to justify the risks. Miss one ball and it’s not worth it. If you’re desperate for something to do in that time, and you have already exhausted both the co-op and your alliance bridge, I’d start preparing for your first moves in the teleoperated period.
What about if you know your opponent can score both balls from their alliance bridge reliably? Then it’s a net-potential-gain (In the sense that 9 points < 12 points, plus any you happen to score to lessen the swing.)
Just making up crazy situations.
In my opinion breaking rules does not automatically equate to bad sportsmanship.
I’m working on the math, and this is what I have (With auton points):
With out taking balls (Opponents score from alliance bridge in auto):
Opponents: +12 (2 on top)
You: +0 (no advantage)
Net gain: -12
With taking balls:
Opponents: +9 (Technical foul)
You: +12 (2 on top)
Net gain: 3
Taking balls (miss shot):
Opponents: +9 (Technical foul)
You: +6 (1 on top)
Net gain: -3
However, you then have an open balls on your side that you can put up in teleop, effectively making it a wash.
Taking balls (miss both shots):
Opponents: +9 (Technical foul)
You: +0 (no advantage)
Net gain: -9
However, you then have 2 open balls on your side that you can put up in teleop, making it a net gain of -3.
It seems to me that even if you miss the shots, you still end up on the better end of things than if you get their alliance balls than if you let them sit.
It may not be a game changing move, but it may be something worth considering.
It would be a wash if the time constraint wasn’t too great. There’s a ball on your side you have to score to make the move a wash, which takes several seconds away. So I would say it’s a net negative move.
It’s hard to quantify the other moves you could make as a third robot when your partners are scoring and moving to the bridges, but I’m tempted to say that getting in position to block the return would probably be the greatest benefit. If you win the Co-Op bridge, you have at least an 18 point lead you’ll want to stretch as long as you can.
It just seems like more trouble than it’s worth for only three possible extra points. Denying six points in teleop to the opponents is also somewhat nice though, but I think it’s too close to be worth it.
I’d agree that it’s definitely a steep move. Were I coaching, I wouldn’t even consider doing this unless the opponent had a consistent autonomous that put in 2, then went to the alliance bridge, and put in 2 more. Other than that, it is a pretty risky move and it’s easy for it to backfire. So were I to use this tactic, it would be VERY sparingly and only under special circumstances.
(In the sense that 9 points < 12 points, plus any you happen to score to lessen the swing.)