A Tie in 15 second Autonomous Should Award Each Alliance 2 AP


#42

Since no alliance actually scored any points, nobody would be awarded points. But, say that a robot’s autonomous accidentally cancels out thier partner’s, then it’d be a bit more difficult.

And then you’d also have to factor in failed autons and, if both alliances fail and score no points, you couldn’t award any AP, despite both alliances moving.

It’s just an idea. And the rare backfiring auton might not even be a big deal, but I’ve seen it happen. (My partner accidentally flipped a cap to their color when grabbing a ball, and tipped auton in their favor.) As long as everything is not as it began, I would give the tie points out.
(But then there’d be the edge case of two robots shooting at the same flag in auton, leaving the field unchanged. But, because both alliances potentially would’ve scored points without the other alliance, I’d give them the tie points.)

(It quickly gets complicated, I guess. You’d have to accommodate edge cases in rules, and then refs would have to know all of these rules. I would justify it as “If each alliance would’ve won auton if the other hadn’t played, and the score is tied, then the tie points are given.” So the double-cap-flip-tie thing would just count as 0. )


#43

Something like in FRC where literally just driving scores you autonomous points (not to be counted in matches) would allow newer teams to have an autonomous, and win over a team who just sits there. An easy autonomous goal makes awarding autonomous ties 2 WP much easier, as it makes autonomous ties less likely


#44

In games like Turning Point and Starstruck where your team’s points and those of the opposing team are tied together, and both teams start with points, it becomes very difficult to have any sort of division of points. For games like In The Zone, where the points your team scores and the points your opponent scores are independent of each other, and both teams start with no points, it would be more reasonable.

I do believe there should be more incentive for teams to put time and effort into their autonomous. Making AP a higher order tie breaker than SP was a great step forward. I’d like to see longer autonomous periods and larger autonomous bonuses. But again, that is harder to do well in games like Turning Point.

As annoying as they were, i would rather see a team have a disruptive autonomous than no autonomous. I would be interested in whether this year’s rule of not crossing the centerline increased or decreased the collective time and effort put into autonomous programming. Some of the easier strategies like interference are no longer viable, but on the other hand, teams can make more complex programs without worrying about opponent interference.


#45

My experience this season is that as the season has unfolded more and more teams are attempting to run at least a minimum autonomous (i.e. trip a low flag, knock a cap off of a ball) than had been in the past. The key is that the 4 point autonomous bonus has been the difference in quite a few matches.


#46

Plus, teams might be reluctant to try certain autonomous strategies (such as ones that involve a lot of driving) if there’s a chance they could accidentally cross the line (which automatically awards the bonus to the other alliance, even if it wasn’t match-affecting).


#47

I know this this has already been said but I would like it to be if there is tie that each alliance gets awarded two AP unless no alliance scores any points.