Whats 2 x 0 _ G-14

if a team has 0 points and you get in a couple moon rocks… how do you get twice or three times the score of zero…?

We don’t know yet. This has been discussed, but I’m sure the GDC will be asked soon. (They haven’t posted any answers to this one yet.)

Wouldn’t it be more than 3x the score automatically? (assuming you didn’t score 0 as well)

And then I guess technically even a match where nobody scores (0-0), where all robots are broken and all human players can’t hit the broad side of a barn (or a whole load of penalties) . . . You would have an even score, 2x the score, AND 3x the score . . . simultaneously. :ahh:

That’s just it! You could have 2x, 3x, or a non-application, in one single match.

If it’s a 0-0 tie, then the rule says nothing about ties; in fact, it wouldn’t come into play at all because it show up only on a win.

I truly don’t see this as being an issue (unless penalties are going to play a bigger role than expected this year which I doubt). The ease of scoring 1 ball into any goal will prevent a score of 0. If you hold a team scoreless, you should be penalized during the next match based on the rule. It is very easy to score a few balls in your own trailer to offset some of the difference.

The reason for the rule is similar to what was insituted in earlier years, where the winning team received 3x the losing team’s score. (During the 2002 competition specifically I remember a few alliances moving all robots out of scoring zones during seeding matches when they knew they were going to lose to force the other team to take 0 qualifying points because the other alliance was dominating the goal placement/scoring).

I think G14 is an attempt to “even out” the luck that teams get, and to try and take some of the cutthroat competition out of it.

Just remember, it’s REALLY easy to score points for your opponent . . you always have control of their scoring zone, and if you have more than twice their score, you should have no issue throwing a few in to tighten up the match.

You should be penalized but I really dont think that is right. I mean if you hold them scoreless its not your fault that they didnt score so why should you be penalized?

Because in the spirit of FIRST, you should score FOR them.

Haha. What? I am sorry but that makes absolutely no sense.

This is a debate for another topic/thread (preferably not during build season…please???..).

I would like to see a minimum score difference clause added to the rules. Because 4-2 or 6-2 also applies. If my team has six points and the other team has two, I’m not scoring for them because I have no idea what penalties may be called on my alliance. Maybe the other HP entered a super cell too early on the opposite side of the field from our drive station, I don’t know he did it.

Also, I’d like to know if this rule is pre-penalty score or post-penalty score.

And what spirit is that?

Ook, I’ve heard this many times. Please define the SPIRIT of FIRST to me. And please, don’t just restate their mission statement from the website as that has nothing to do with spirit of FIRST.

Just read the quopte in my signature and maybe you’ll make sense of it. You are free to score for the other team, but don’t stress that on others.

With the lack of (easy) penalties and abundance of scoring elements, I honestly don’t see many low scoring matches.

And I appologize for using buzz words, but I refer back to cutt-throat competition and the desire to crush your opponent. I guess I could have used GP, but that too is an overused buzz word at times.

Look back to the scoring structure in 2002 and 2003 for similar rules.

Not exactly on the 0-0. It wouldn’t actually apply since G-14 says

CELL Count Modification – If the assigned ALLIANCE score for the last non-surrogate MATCH played by the TEAM was more than twice (2x) the opposing ALLIANCE score, then one EMPTY CELL or SUPER CELL will be withheld from the initial set of GAME PIECES made available to the PAYLOAD SPECIALIST for the TEAM. If the assigned ALLIANCE score for the last non-surrogate MATCH played by the TEAM was more than triple (3x) the opposing ALLIANCE score, then a second EMPTY CELL or SUPER CELL will be withheld from the initial set of GAME PIECES made available to the PAYLOAD SPECIALIST for the TEAM.


However, if an alliance scores zero, it doesn’t seem right to penalize the opposing alliance if they score, say 2 so that they can win. I’d prefer to lose a match by a large margin knowing that the opposing alliance was doing their best against us than to lose by a small margin or win because they purposely didn’t compete to their full potential. Although it is intended to take out cutthroat competition, it can also be taken as an insult that a team would not really try against you, inadvertently saying that you are not a worthy opponent for them to use their full capacity.

Oh but it does. For at least 5 years now it has been in a team’s best interest to beat their opponents but allow them as many points as possible. There have been game rules that prohibit scoring for your opponents, met with much dismay.

Don’t, you don’t have to apologize for your opinion.

Yeah what Stogi said no need to Apologize. But Stogi needs to apologize for coming at me for trying to be the PS.

LOL, fine. I iz sawry danny.

We’ve been doing some practice with the balls (or, technically, “Ball”. Until our Logo Loc order arrives, we’ve just got the one. Apparently no one checked to see if Orbit Balls were commercially available outside the USA.) and I am willing to suggest that the chance of an alliance scoring zero… without intentionally TRYING to score zero… is, well… essentially zero.

Consider that red alliance is having bad luck. NONE of the red robots show up to play. That means that the players have sixty shots and just have to hit once to get a non zero score.

I think they’ll hit at least once… it won’t be easy, but it will be far from impossible for the human players… er… payload specialists… to score.