If teams decide to ally just cause they are good friends or have preacticed with each other, they’re going to try to do that with or without < t13>. It happens all the time where a team picks a team seeded much lower than them just bc they are sister teams, even if there are better options.
They would still have to scout because nothing is guaranteed. They would still need a backup just in case their ideal alliance doesn’t happen due to T13. But, if T13 is removed, its guaranteed, making scouting basically pointless.
I think one reason it is set up this way is to pressure teams into scouting, so that they will not only make a better choice for their teammates but develop skills with teamwork etc. I do think it should be changed a little bit though, it seems really inefficient right now. In South Dakota, we form a massive line and just put a mic in each teams face. I don’t exactly have a proposition to improve this, but I do think it should be modified, just to make it quicker, more efficient.
yes, this is precisely how engineers should approach problems
Do I smell a sarcasm in your words?
Also, the biggest complaint that I have seen is “Lucky”, but only mediocre teams, using a “Scorched Earth” tactic that keeps the “Best” teams from winning the tournament. I have a couple of comments on this:
- people seem to assume that the “Lucky” teams that make it to first use the “Scorched Earth” on purpose. Our team has ended up using this twice, because teams in that tourney just couldn’t wrap their minds around the fact that an off-meta bot could make it to first place. Sure, we may have had a favorable schedule, but we weren’t constantly matched up with the best teams against the worst teams. Anyways, teams often don’t do it on purpose. If they scouted teams, then the teams that they asked may have said no. So, they ended up just going down the line, hoping to pick a good team.
- Tourney champion isn’t the only way to find the “Best team.” Skills, excellence and design are also ways to find the “Best” team.
Um… No it can’t? That’s the Judges Award… kind of.
The judges guide is very specific on the criteria for the Design Award. It is practically second-place excellence. You need a good notebook, and you need to perform well in the competition.
Hm. Well after scrolling up I further understand the purpose of the T13 rule. It’s all right the way it is now, and I do admit it does add a bit o’ spice to the tournament, even though it can end up kinda sucking for some teams. I do have experience getting a really hard schedule and not being able to get a good alliance parter, though, even though we had a really decent robot that beforehand performed really well. Over and over our teammates’ robots would break down, leaving us to try and beat usually two of the top 5 teams. This was very frustrating for us. I know, sometimes these things just happen, but in the future it would be nice to make rankings even more accurate. We found that teams would just look at our ranking and just decline. Maybe if skills scores influenced normal rankings, it would be more fair?
Skills score doesn’t need to be involved, since skills is simply for the best robot. This is the fairest way to represent teams, since you have an equal chance to have an easy schedule as the next guy. They are completely random. In a completely random system, this is as equal as it gets. Also, if you have done proper scouting, this issue wouldn’t arise. For example, say Team A is first place while Team B is 16th place. But, in skills, Team B is first place while Team A is second place. Team B can go to Team A during scouting and explain the situation. If Team A thinks that Team B is an acceptable partner, then they can select Team B. If they don’t, then Team B would simply just look for another team, knowing that they are the best in skills.
I see what you mean, and I agree. I think it is just built so teams really have to scout to be successful in the finals.
and some judges, including some om this very forum, have admitted to not exactly using the rubric
There is absolutely nothing fair about luck in a skill based competition.
Suck it up, Buttercup
In skills? No luck should be there. In tournaments? Luck will be an inherent flaw in order to give everyone an equal opportunity. I doubt anyone would complain if their team was given an easier schedule in comparison to other teams. With that logic, why should teams complain that other teams have easier schedules?
I’m not saying that luck is bad nor good. Its really on how you perceive it. If you benefit from the luck, its the greatest thing in the world. If you don’t benefit from the luck, it should be changed immediately.
nope. luck is the worst part of vrc no matter how you slice it
Drew, not everyone agrees with that. In fact, I’d say most people disagree. There’s a reason Skills is called Skills. It demonstrates the true solo abilities of your robot. A tournament is fun because it has more than just true skill, it has luck. If you want only skills, go to skills-only tournaments.
I think the only way to have a competition where no luck is involved is if it is round robin. This means every team will have to play with every other team so everyone is on an even playing field. This is totally unrealistic.
ok lets do that then
also a 12 alliance round robin is perfectly reasonable
That’s just not feasible. It takes half an hour for the round robin at worlds with just 4 alliances. Granted, I believe its 2/3 and there is a lot of commentary, but that is just so much time. Imagine going to an event with ~30 teams. It would take a fairly long time.
This goes back to the point of if I am a robot that is seeded higher than one of these two and I know I would not be able to beat them if they went together then I would try and split them the best I could. Without there is no strategy involved in alliance selection. Last year I was at a tournament where I had 2 alliance partners in mind, my sister team who knew this seeded higher than me and made sure to split this up leading me to find a new alliance partner. This led to a very fun, all be it stressful, elimination. Things like this would not happen if we removed and it takes away a big part of the competition.