The 4 Team Alliance

FIRST General Forum
1

It’s now been 3 seasons with 4 team alliances at the championship, so now is a good time to reflect on the decision that made this happen. Overall this was one of the most popular changes FIRST has ever made to anything at the time.

I think there’s definitely some positives, such as being able to have more strategies to pull from and being able to have 3 working robots in any given match. This also eliminates teams waiting to see if they will be pulled as a backup.

However the last two years the alliances I’ve been on (and others as well) have definitely had some awkwardness with this alliance structure. Being told to sit out is hard for both sides to do, especially when most teams have seniors on their teams down in the playoff pit who want to play in the last matches of their time as a student. I’ve seen it lead to lots of tough arguments and hurt feelings.

The alliances that seem to have the most success with this are the ones that have a captain who makes it clear to everyone what their role in the alliance is, but unfortunately most captains can’t seem to do this effectively.

So overall, what is your thought on the 4 team alliance?

2

I honestly think that 4 team alliances in eliminations should be implemented FRIST wide. While I realize that district events are smaller and so the amount of rotation of the 4th robot into the alliance will probably not be as high because of decreased comparative ability, the strategy decisions that this opens up for regionals and district champs would elevate game play to a new level.

Also by doing this teams will be better able to utilize a 4 alliance team at champs because they already thought about the different ways that these alliance could be formed and potential uses for such robots. Also this would increase the number of teams that would qualify for champs based on an event win, be that a regional or district championship.

3

FIRST could go back to the old way, and the 4th team could be sitting in the stands or packing up instead of hanging out in a playoff pit and fieldside with a chance at a medal and trophy…or yes, getting into a match if the situation is right.

Yeah it might be rough that a 4th team doesn’t get to play more often than not, but they should be proud they made it to the dance at all. They should also understand the alliance captain has zero obligation to play them. Should they still keep their heads in the game and contribute to match strategy and periodically suggest their involvement in a particular match might be beneficial to the alliance? Sure - nothing wrong with that, and their coach can even stand with the rest of the alliance behind the glass and directly contribute. But in the end, the AC’s decision is final and should be respected. If a 4th team persists in lobbying for themselves despite the AC’s judgment, I don’t view the AC being the problem in that situation.

Same thing goes for a team who gets subbed out for the 4th. Perhaps the AC feels the 4th team’s robot is better suited for a particular matchup and decides to run with them. Perhaps the AC decides to keep playing the hot hand if the 4th team does well. Whining from the displaced team isn’t going to help matters.

As long as everyone views the 4-team alliance as a group of interchangeable parts and not 3 teams plus a “backup robot”, and everyone respects the ultimate decisions of the AC, there shouldn’t be any problems. And all four teams should be proud to be a part of the process.

On the topic of 4th robots at regionals/districts - I would LOVE to have more choice as an alliance captain on who subs in for a disabled robot. I don’t like the rankings dictating which robot I get as a backup. I’d rather run one more round of the draft (same order as the CMP’s) to select what would TRULY be a “backup” robot. Keep all other backup substitution rules in place. The 8 selected backup robots would remain in the pits unless called upon. The only drawback to this plan is a bit more time dedicated to alliance selections, and perhaps a longer load-out time as more teams have to hang out waiting for the playoffs to end.

Perhaps a compromise to the “designated backup draft” would be to let teams at districts/regionals select from a pool of 4 or so backup robots instead of automatically assigning the highest-ranked unselected robot as their backup. FIRST makes the top 3 or so unpicked teams hang around anyway, right? Let the AC pick from the backup pool. At least then perhaps they could acquire a robot that better matches the capabilities of the robot being subbed out.

4

Just figured I’d throw this out for the sake of discussion. I don’t know if it’s still like this, but when I did VEX, in eliminations it was 3-team alliances with 2 robots on the field, with the caveat that every team *had *to play in each best-of-three set. So you had to choose who to rotate out after the first match. This way no one was left out entirely (although you might only play one match out of three).

5

This was based upon 2v2 era of FRC, which had 3 team alliances in the playoffs and required each team to play a match in each set.

6

I think I could get behind this if their was a single championship with only four divisions. The problem with doing this now is that a deep division will already have a huge advantage on Einstein and will be even more powerful with a change like this. The power of a well rounded lower seeded alliance would also be gutted as they get the last pick of fourth robots.

7

God no. 24th pick at many district events is painful. I can’t even imagine 32nd pick.

Re 4th bots sitting out, I’m with Travis on this one. Would they rather MAYBE be contributing if the situation arises or sitting in the stands done for the season?

I know where I’d rather be.

8

In one of the competitions that we were in, we had to sub out one of our partners because they weren’t working. The team that got subbed in was ecstatic that they got to play, at least for one last time.

Once the 4th picks roll around at champs, teams should happy just to be picked. I’d rather be picked to lend a hand to a captain whether it be with our robot or through strategy than not to be in the eliminations at all.

So I guess it just depends on the perspective and the attitude of the team, if they want to be sour about being the 4th pick then that’s their problem. If we were to have been picked for an alliance at Worlds we would have been happy just to help our captain strategize. The way the system of FIRST works is you have to rely on other teams in order to succeed, and other teams know that. Different perspectives of a game are what make strategy work. So despite what it might seem at first glace, the 4th pick can be vitally important.

9

One thing that I want to point out is some of the backups I’ve played with and watched all feel in a similar way, that they thought they should’ve been picked higher and playing. So it creates a bad relationship from the beginning.

Also, while it’s nice to think teams should all have a mindset of working for the alliance and be willing to sacrifice for each other, that just simply doesn’t happen all the time. Teams aren’t always going to play nice and it shouldn’t be expected that they will.

10

It’s far, far better than the alternative, it allows more teams to participate in the eliminations, and it adds a ton of strategic depth to the Championship. Tossing that all because it’s a little awkward sometimes when an alliance partner is being a bad sport? Bad idea. I hope it’s here to stay.

11

While I think that 4 team alliances are great because allowing an alliance to choose their own 4th robot instead of being given the next highest ranked team leaves fewer things to chance, some small district events are actually too small to do that. Some examples are MAR-Westtown, NC-Pitt County, NC-UNC Asheville, and probably a few others. Israel and North Carolina District Championships were only 32 teams large haha. But it would be cool, I think, if this was a possibility.

12

FTFY

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Since I’ve been on 74, we’ve been in a few different positions at CMP events. We’ve been alliance captains, we’ve been 4th robot, and we’ve sat out elims entirely. While it may seem awkward for the whole alliance to have a robot sit out for (sometimes) all of elims, I know I would much rather be on an alliance and not play than be in the top 8 unpicked with the hope of being a backup. The 4-team alliance was a great addition to Champs, and could easily be implemented in all FIRST events. This allows alliances to form good, well rounded alliances, and have a solid contingency plan in case something goes wrong. At the Shepherd District event this year, we had the privilege of competing against the great alliance of 4970, 5162, and 5712 in the finals. After the first match, something went wrong with 5162 (I’m unsure of exactly what it was), and they had to sit out for Finals 2. The alliance chose to compete with 2 robots, because if they were to call in a backup, 5162 would not have been able to return to match play if they were able to fix themselves (which they were). Having 4 robots on an alliance would’ve allowed for that alliance to swap in their chosen 4th robot, and put 5162 back in when they were ready. It must’ve been a tough call by the alliance captain to play with only 2 bots in a Finals match, and having a 4 team alliance would’ve eliminated that tough call.

I know that being a 4th robot on an alliance is hard, but it’s still a great opportunity to help out your alliance when you can, even if that means watching matches and helping your alliance to develop a solid strategy, and not playing. It was an honor to be on an alliance with 1885, 229, and 5036 this year, and we were glad to help out where we could.

13

I don’t know how to say this nicer so I’m just going to say it and take the red dots.

They weren’t. They were picked as a backup, they can play as a backup. If they don’t like that they can decline the invitation to play and pack their pit early. This isn’t the rules or the AC creating a bad relationship, this is solely on the backup team.

Again, sorry for not knowing how to say it in a nicer way.

14

Those teams would likely not be picked in the future then. Problem solved. As the 4th team on an alliance, I’d want to show the great teams that we are fun and easy to work with.

15

1511 has made it to Einstein two years in a row without playing a single playoff match. While I wish we did get a chance to drive, I’m certainly glad we got picked onto alliances with great teams. In my opinion its much better to be out on the floor than up in the stands. I love 4-team alliances because they are the reason for our appearances on Einstein.

16

In the past three trips I’ve made with a team to St. Louis since the four robot alliance was introduced, we’ve been the fourth bot in 2014 with 2590, 1625, & 1477 as well as in 2016 with 842, 2767, & 4451. In both cases we did not play during the elimination rounds. 2014 our alliance made it to Einstein & in 2016 we were eliminated in the quarter-finals.

I can agree with the sentiments some people have brought fourth that being a 4th robot can be awkward especially when you don’t play. I have also seen firsthand through other alliances how it can quickly become heated when the alliance captains choose to consistently play certain robots (either first picks or third round) or when the alliance members protest that the alliance captain should not play. For us, we’ve had a great experience working as part of these alliances and were thankful to get that opportunity to join them. In 2014 we tried to be the best support team we could be assisting our partners in pit maintenance, strategy, and anywhere we could on and off the playing field.

Even still, I’ll admit it can be awkward yet its becoming normal. The first year especially I would say it’s an odd feeling: being on the alliance that won the division but having never played your robot in a match but knowing you contributed. It can feel odd being the fourth robot on the alliance as well as how its received by peers and the community for teams who make it far in the tournament or are on the Champions alliance.

Tensions on elimination day can run high since it is the Championship event: everyone wants to play late and win on Saturday. This past year we had the unique opportunity of being the #1 alliance captain on our division, a new position for our team and myself considering our team hasn’t seeded above #5 and only been a Championship alliance captain twice in eight trips. This isn’t an easy position to fill. You have the fate of your team to decide as well as the fate of three other teams in your court that you are responsible for. We also had the unique spot of having the 24th & 25th picks and while we had a ranked picklist our final decision came down to two teams we really wanted on our alliance so as the numbers were written on our whiteboard the thought of one being our “backup” didn’t really cross our mind. We knew both would contribute to our success and gave us two unique strategies to play in autonomous: balls or two rotors. We often went with the dual rotor autonomous strategy hoping to achieve a higher output in auto and reduce the number of gear cycles we had to run in teleop to get to defense sooner. We know we wouldn’t have made it to Einstein without 67, 1640, and 2137. They each deserve credit for the success of our alliance.

I do believe the move to four robot alliances has been beneficial to the quality of the Championship. We see more in depth strategy choices taking place on Saturday as well as reduced downtime or on field performance as robots who are broken can quickly be replaced for a match or two or permanently with a machine the alliance is prepared to work with. More deserving teams are participating on Saturday which is a good thing. I remember in 2013 & even 2014 some extremely capable robots not playing in the elimination rounds.

IMHO, fourth robots do not belong outside of the Championships though a strong argument could be made for the District Championships. At the regional and district level, some of these events are small barely capping 30 teams making a 32 team bracket impossible. With how small these events are I could see more harm than good from having an event with 1-4 teams walking out having not been picked. Not being picked can do wonders for a team in terms of motivation, but being in a position where you are the only team who isn’t picked at a qualifying event is tough. An argument could be made for more alliance bickering as teams earn points for matches they play as long as their alliance moves on in the bracket. Teams in desperate need would protest more to play and I don’t agree with forcing a rotation of teams on the alliance. Every alliance should have the opportunity to play their best group of robots.

Just some of my thoughts having been on both sides. My advice would be regardless of when you get picked, be the best alliance member you can on and off the playing field. As a captain, always remember you need each and everyone of those robots and team members to make it far in the tournament at some point or another.

17

While at a 32 team district it doesn’t make sense to have 4 team alliances, it sure would at a 45-65 team regional. Both our regionals had excellent teams that got left out of eliminations, and I know we would have loved to have another strategic option on both of our eliminations alliances.

Maybe have some threshold where regionals above x teams can have 4 team alliances? Or give the regional planning committees the ability to choose?

More on-topic, I’m definitely 200% in favor of 4 team alliances at the championship, btw. More strategic options = better, and the cost of a little awkwardness is worth it for sure.

18

Unless the district points rules change, I am against 4-team alliances in districts (both district events and district champs). Teams are incentivized to do whatever it takes to play more matches to get more points and secure a spot at the next level of competition, which opens the potential for more bad blood between teams.

19

This is true, however the question becomes how does that balance between events that have four members on a winning alliance at a qualifying event vs events that do not?

If so you’ll have more draw to larger events above this threshold and less draw to events without it.

This is why I’ve just seen it as easier to keep it at three.

20

Not quite sure what you mean here. District points are not related to how many matches you play. The only way you would get more district points is to rank higher in quals, get picked higher, or go further in elims. Isn’t that everyone’s goal? How does that change when you add a 4th alliance member?