Update #3 & Negative Scores...

Competition Rules/Strategy
1

The rules as written now seem to allow for huge negative scores.

Did FIRST really think this one through?

This is a huge confusion factor for the audience.

Here is the scenerio.

Assume the Blue alliance has twin Ramp Bots. They quickly go to the ramp, knock down the wall, plop down a couple of toilet bowl plungers and sit tight with the expectation that they have a lock on a win with 50 points in the bank…

But along comes the red alliance with Plow Bot and Tall Bot. Plow Bot methodically pushes all the containers in the blue zone into the no score zone. Tall Bot then picks up a single container and lifts it 11 Stack Height Units.

Red wins.

The score:
Red: 16 (assuming that the human players scored during the first 10 seconds)

Blue: (-10*11)+50 = -60

1 container IN
11 SHU
Multiplier 11
Base score 1-11=(-10)

This is going to be crazy for folks to understand.

Just my thoughts.

Joe J.
B

2

Two things:
1 - In the scenario as described, base score blue is zero, as the crate held by the robot as the multiplier stack is counted as zero points.
2 - Assuming there was another box still in the scoring zone, that one box would be counted as one point. It’s not (B-X) anymore, as the equations have been showing, when you have an opponent supported stack. It’s one point for every crate “in” the scoring zone that isn’t in the highest stack.

3

The scenario you posted doesn’t seem quite clear maybe it’s just me but; if red team has one of their bot’s in the blue teams scoring zone at the end of the game with a box raised 10 SHU high, and the blue team has only 5 boxes in their scoring zone…then it seems as if the score would be (5-11)*11 = -66… it does seem that negative scores are possible… I hope FIRST will change this, yet again, cause as you said this would definately confuse the audience and also make one specific type of robot dominant after teams have already strategized and begun building robots without this possibility…
-sigh- guess it just makes it all the more of a challenge.

4

*Originally posted by JTH *

2 - Assuming there was another box still in the scoring zone, that one box would be counted as one point. It’s not (B-X) anymore, as the equations have been showing, when you have an opponent supported stack. It’s one point for every crate “in” the scoring zone that isn’t in the highest stack.

in update # 3 under rule SC8 it says “the height of the tallest stack located in the scoring zone (the “multiplier stack”), measured in whole stack height units (as defined in SC9) is subtracted from the total number of containers to establish the “base score.”” - how is that not (b-x)?

5

Oh… I guess I’ve been reading the rule wrong ever since Team Update 1 came out. I was still thinking the original rule, which considered stacks in the multiplier as zero. Now I really hope that FIRST reconsiders the virtual stack created by opponent robots.

6

I have a feeling that this is not what FIRST means. And anyway, the bot is touching the stack of 11, so it’s not counted.

Love,
Team 384 Rules Nazi

7

The opponent robot in your zone does not affect the eligibility of the stack.

But, my brother suggested that this might make a great blackmail strategy, if you have a really tall armed robot and are going up against a team that is almost guaranteed a top spot. “You know, we’ll give you a huge negative QP unless…” How’s that gratious professionalism?

8

*Originally posted by JosephM *
**I have a feeling that this is not what FIRST means. And anyway, the bot is touching the stack of 11, so it’s not counted.

Love,
Team 384 Rules Nazi **

it’s the oppositions bot that would be touching your stack, so yes, it would actually count.

and i agree, this is definately not in the spirit of FIRST, i dont see why they would do this intentionally?

9

I asked FIRST about this, and basically got back snide comments about my questions being convoluted and me abusing the forums. I asked FIRST:

The way the rules are currently written, if your opponent’s team has x containers in their scoring zone, and you take one of their containers and lift it x wSHUs into the air, their base score is reduced to zero. A robot with a tall enough lifter could easily ensure that their opponents never got any points for containers. Is this correct?

and they replied via email:

Rule SC8 states:

“Opponents robots in contact with containers in the alliance scoring zone will not affect the determination of the base score.”

How much clearer could that be.

This lead me to believe that stacks would be measured form the lowest bin, not from the ground, but nowhere in the rules does it say where stacks are measured from. I replied to the email they sent me asking if the height was measured from the bottom container, and they replied:

See Team Updates

Please do no abuse the Team Forum process. Please do not send e-mails directly to FIRST. Use the team forum. You received an e-mail response because I did not want to clutter the Forum with your convoluted question. If you abuse the forum, we will remove your access to it.

Has anyone managed to get a real answer on this issue?

10

Am I wrong? If red gets 16 and blue gets -60 the final score will be
red 16 +(2*60)=-104
Blue -60

Blue wins

11

from what i understand the base score is the number of boxes that are in the scoring zone that are not in the tallest stack…so if there was a box 11shu and a stack 1shu then they would recieve 11*1 = 11 points

“All containers within the alliance’s scoring zone will be worth one point EXCEPT the containers in the tallest stack”

12

Well… would this be in the best intrest of the team doing it… because they still get 2X their opponents score in QP, so say they did manage a win with the opponents getting say -30 qp, well they would drop by 60 IF FIRST allowed negative QP scores to be applied…

that just hit me like a sack of dead drill motors…

<edit> shawn on re reading your post I realized I jsut restated what you said in a way. red would still win… but the real winner would be blue (see shawn’s post) </edit>

13

Originally posted by Shawn60 *
**Am I wrong? If red gets 16 and blue gets -60 the final score will be
red 16 +(260)=-104
Blue -60

Blue wins **

Sort of correct. Red wins, but blue gets more Qualifying Points

14

first of all, i haven’t seen ya post in a while, Joe! it finally feels like a FIRST season again =-]

just a quick reason why this wouldn’t be a good strat at all…

the QP for Joe’s scenario would be as follows:

blue (the loser) of course would get -60 QP

red (the winner) would get 16 + 2*(-60) = -104 QP

the winning team is getting the lower QP!!!

the really needs to be addressed…

maybe the height of a robot-held stack should be measured from the lowest point in the stack… or maybe the multiplier stack height can never be higher than the number of bins in the stack…

something needs to be changed, that’s for sure

15

Originally posted by ejthe4th *
**from what i understand the base score is the number of boxes that are in the scoring zone that are not in the tallest stack…so if there was a box 11shu and a stack 1shu then they would recieve 111 = 11 points

“All containers within the alliance’s scoring zone will be worth one point EXCEPT the containers in the tallest stack” **

That’s what I thought until Jacqui corrected me.

The original SC8 stated

All containers in the tallest stack located in the scoring zone (the “multiplier stack”)
are worth zero points. Containers in additional stacks of the same height will be
scored normally;

but, in order to fit with the original hint equation of “y=ax^2+bx+c”, Team Update 1 changed it. That statement now reads

The height of the tallest stack located in the scoring zone (the “multiplier stack”),
measured in whole Stack Height Units (as defined in SC9) is subtracted from the total
number of containers to establish the “base score.” Containers in additional stacks of the
same height will be scored normally;

The original rule would have meant that a team could give the opposing team a huge multiplier. With the updated rule, because of the inverted parabolic scoring, we are seeing that teams can give penalties.

16

*Originally posted by George1083 *
**first of all, i haven’t seen ya post in a while, Joe! it finally feels like a FIRST season again =-]

just a quick reason why this wouldn’t be a good strat at all…

the QP for Joe’s scenario would be as follows:

blue (the loser) of course would get -60 QP

red (the winner) would get 16 + 2*(-60) = -104 QP

the winning team is getting the lower QP!!!

the really needs to be addressed…

maybe the height of a robot-held stack should be measured from the lowest point in the stack… or maybe the multiplier stack height can never be higher than the number of bins in the stack…

something needs to be changed, that’s for sure **

Originally posted by Shawn60
**Am I wrong? If red gets 16 and blue gets -60 the final score will be
red 16 +(2*60)=-104
Blue -60

Blue wins **

You guys are 90% there. Now finish the thought.

Joe’s original point was spot-on. One alliance can directly affect the score of the opposing alliance by playing with the opponent stack height (to be complete, you should also assume that the opposing alliance is doing the same to your stacks). A robot could lift a container up to be equivalent to a 10-high stack (hmm, 4.8lb container at 14.75*10=12feet above the base of a 130 lb robot, plus a little “robust physical contact”, yields a CG rapidly moving outside the conservative support polygon…), and it is possible to create a negative score.

At this point it is worth pointing out that this potential is exactly why no teams should start any game with a strategy that has them plunking down on top of the ramp and just sitting tight with the expectation that they have a lock on a win with 50 points in the bank…

A little more analysis is then done, with a broader view. Yes, negative scores are possible. But then there are those pesky QP and EP calculations. If your opponent gets a negative score, which means you will probably win, then your alliance gets twice as many negative QPs! You better be REALLY FRIENDLY with your alliance partner if you cause this! Sure, you won the game, but - through your own actions - you actually DROP in the QP standings. By giving your opponent a negative score, you may actually cause them to move ahead of you in the overall tournament standings as you drop down the QP ladder. And because the scoring systems are the same in the qualifiers and finals, this is also true in the finals!

So it quickly becomes obvious that while negative scores are possible, they are generally a bad idea. So their potential use becomes self-limiting. There are a very few particular circumstances where you might be willing to take the QP/EP hit, just to ensure that your opponent moves to a certain position in the QP/EP standings (think about this and you can identify those few circumstances). “Sacrifices” could become an element of the competition! It works in baseball and chess, so why not?

What does this mean? It means that there is a potential whole new level of strategy in the tournament (notice I said “tournament” and not “game”). It means that teams need to start thinking beyond the effects of the current match, and start thinking about multi-match strategies.

Don’t automatically assume that this is a “loophole!” This is not an accident that wasn’t thought through. It is actually an opening onto a new level of the competition that requires a little more thought and offers more complexity to the players.

-dave

Y = AX^2 + BX + It’s great to see Joe again!

17

Simple fix to those who didn’t think about it.

(total amount of bins EXCLUDING those in the multiplier stack) * (the amount of bins in the multiplier stack

There is no subtracting in this anywhere, it’s just there or it isn’t.

18

Further thoughts.

If you have 3 stacks of 5 bins, 4 bins laying scattered about the score zone, and a stack of 7 bins, this is how the score will be calculated:

(3*5)+4] * 7

Not any other way. You don’t need to bother with the 7 bins in the first half of that equation.

More examples:

You have a multiplier stack of 4 bins, and one bin lying next to the stack

1*4=4.

19

oh yeah, one more thought, to complete any other thoughts :wink:

an enemy robot IN YOUR SCORE ZONE, whether it is holding 1 container 10 units high or holding a stack of 10 containers, will not effect your score.

This was mentioned in update #3 if I’m not mistaken.

Again, there are absolutely no subtractions, the only thing your opponent can do is knock down your stack, which would be hard considering they probably won’t be able to see their bot on the other side :eg:

Ok, I was wrong. an enemy robot CAN add points to your score, but not subtract, think of them adding bins to your multiplier stack or such.

But the only way they can knock down your score is by knocking down your stacks, which still won’t subtract anything as long as your bins are not pushed outside the score zone, then those just don’t count at all :wink:

20

The height of the tallest stack located in the scoring zone (the “multiplier stack”), measured in whole SHUs is subtracted from the total number of containers to establish the “base score.” Containers in additional stacks of the same height will be scored normally;

The base score is determined: (<All bins in scoring zone>-<bins in tallest stack>)*<bins in tallest stack>

Negative scores are not possible.