How many points do you think a team can earn in a REEFSCAPE match at worlds?
1 Like
220-230-ish, thats just my guess though
- Less than 100
- 100-120
- 120-140
- 160-180
- 180-200
- 200-220
- 220-240
- 240+
0
voters
1 Like
A team or an alliance?
11 Likes
29 Likes
donât jinx it.
5 Likes
3255 showed that in a match, after optimizing your cycles, you could get 22 cycles
Now they only score in L1, so for L4 for max points I would guess youâd have 20 cycles
So for auto lets say you do 5 L4 pieces:
5 * 7 = 35
So 7 (12-5 from auto) cycles for L4: 7*5 = 35
And 8 from L3: 4 * 8 = 32
For endgame it would be 12
So you could get something like 114 points as a single robot
2 Likes
Doing five auto L4 cycles followed by 15 processor cycles and a climb allows a single robot to get 137 points 
1 Like
That would be 9 second cycles for scoring ALGEA in the PROCESSOR. I would think thatâs doable (i highly doubt if itâs a useful strat) but i feel sorry for the human player of the opposing Alliance. 
240 points is tough, but doable. Maybe a little bit higher than that pre-climb, maybe like 242 points max. Then you get a 12 point climb but thatâs about the best you can do.
As we learned from the glitchy note sensors last year, the maximum score is 2^24 - 1 = 16777215, since any score above that would wrap back around to 0.
5 Likes
A processor cycle isnât actually worth 6 points though. It is six point minus four because you give the algae to your opponent to get in the net. So you come out only 2 points ahead that way. Maybe a bit more than that if you assume that the HP is going to miss some percentage of the shots.
When we calculate robot score contribution in our scouting system, scoring in processor WILL NOT yield 6 points for that robot.
1 Like
Hehehe, time to bust out my math degree.
Worth of a Processor Cycle
While I would like to point out the exact questions was maximum number of points a team could score (and not net points) Iâm willing to put that aside to discuss one of your other suggestions
According to game theory, the points per cycle can be calculated as 6 - 4p, where p is the probability that the human player can make a shot. In most cases, P is pretty high when the opponent has no algae in their barge, but substantially lowers as more algae is scored. With 9 algae in the barge, p is very close to 0.
Since the human player is throwing algae into the barge, they arenât neatly placed, leading to a higher chance of missing from the human player.
6 Likes
Lets assume the human player can get 6 algae onto the net, its -24
So you get 113, coral wins!
Also 15 means going to the other side, which will move your cage, you mignt end up fouling the other team, and they might score the algae in their proccesor / net before you
1 Like
Around 140 seems to be the limit.
5*12 + 4*12 + 12*1 = 120, round up a few for Auto and youâre still under 140 for sure and thatâs 24 cycles and a climb.
HUGE citation needed here.
It is verging on negligence to state this with such authority without any evidence. The net is over double the width of the algae, and only a few feet from the HP. Will the chance of bounce-outs increase as the net fills? Absolutely. Will it decrease to near 0? I highly doubt it, especially at only 9 pieces.
3 Likes
This is an awkward hill to die on. âYou canât state things with authority without any evidenceâ followed by doing the same.
Or, do you plan to show evidence of how the âonly a few feetâ isnât also variable? Soft shots to take advantage of the near are at least likely to stay nearby versus roll to the opposite side. In those instances, the few feet grows.
The next bit stated with authority thatâs outright false is âonly 9 pieces.â Thereâs nothing limiting this theoretical conversation to 9. With 18 ALGAE, the posed probability would drop until the point of 17 are in the NET. Thatâs the point at which a single ALGAE would remain to be cycled through for additional shots.
All of that to nitpick a debate on the exact value of the probability to avoid having a conversation about the real intent of the chat: the more ALGAE. scored in the NET, the more difficult it becomes to score more.
At best, a minor citation needed. Even with that, it wonât fundamentally alter the conversation unless the change to difficulty is negligible.
1 Like
At this point there is a lot of speculation about how well human players will be able to do. I expect weâll get some reports from human players trying their accuracy during practice shortly.
2 Likes
are we allowing for a scoring run up of the noodle agreement style?
Agreed on the ânothing limitingâ factor, though to be clear @Zaque didnât choose the 9 number, the user he was replying to did - and he also fundamentally agreed with the premise that shots get harder the more are scored, just not at the quickly decreasing to âvery close to 0â rate the first user suggested - hardly âavoiding the real intent of the chatâ - in fact, he very specifically addressed it.
Unsure what this post accomplished other than being unduly combative over an issue the two sides pretty clearly agree to the fundamentals on tbh.
2 Likes