<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>KodeBreaker</dt><dd>Feb 18 2013, 11:02 AM</dd></dl><div>
Terminal Velocity vs. Parasite
Oh dear... 13 weapon to 4 armour is no joke. Terminal Velocity absolutely needs to protect his sides.
And as a personal note, because this is getting a bit irritating... Spatula, you can go on about your speed being halved if you run Parasite at half-speed, but no matter what, your speed is always going to be rated 7 and your traction 4. Parasite will have control issues regardless.
That said, I still think Parasite will win.
Parasite = 65%
[/quote]
Why, exactly would this strategy not work? According to the rules, a robot with twice the speed needs twice as many traction points to have the same amount of control. A robot with 8 speed and 8 traction has the same 'control' as a robot with 4 speed and 4 traction. So... I have a hard time seeing how driving at half speed wouldn't improve a robot's control, according to the way that stat works.
I'll stop doing that if it annoys you. It's your tournament; interpret the stats however you want. I'm not emotionally attached to that strategy. It's not central to my overall strategy. I just need some explanation for why.
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
Moderator: Tournament Hosts
-
GF93
- Posts: 6142
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: The Last Train To Clarksville
- Team: Ice Cubed Robotics
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Spatula</dt><dd>Feb 18 2013, 04:01 PM</dd></dl><div> <blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>KodeBreaker</dt><dd>Feb 18 2013, 11:02 AM</dd></dl><div>
Terminal Velocity vs. Parasite
Oh dear... 13 weapon to 4 armour is no joke. Terminal Velocity absolutely needs to protect his sides.
And as a personal note, because this is getting a bit irritating... Spatula, you can go on about your speed being halved if you run Parasite at half-speed, but no matter what, your speed is always going to be rated 7 and your traction 4. Parasite will have control issues regardless.
That said, I still think Parasite will win.
Parasite = 65%
[/quote]
Why, exactly would this strategy not work? According to the rules, a robot with twice the speed needs twice as many traction points to have the same amount of control. A robot with 8 speed and 8 traction has the same 'control' as a robot with 4 speed and 4 traction. So... I have a hard time seeing how driving at half speed wouldn't improve a robot's control, according to the way that stat works.
I'll stop doing that if it annoys you. It's your tournament; interpret the stats however you want. I'm not emotionally attached to that strategy. It's not central to my overall strategy. I just need some explanation for why. [/quote]
With all due respect though, Spatula- if it's going to have its speed halved so it could go the same speed either forwards or backwards, wouldn't it be easier to have a 5 speed in general along with 5 traction?
That way, you'd save two points for other things like extra traction or armour, and you'd achieve more or less the same intended effect, albiet with more balanced control, and more points to spend on other stuff to balance the rest of the robot out.
Just a suggestion of course, since I'm not exactly familiar with that sort of control system, but that's the way I see it.
Terminal Velocity vs. Parasite
Oh dear... 13 weapon to 4 armour is no joke. Terminal Velocity absolutely needs to protect his sides.
And as a personal note, because this is getting a bit irritating... Spatula, you can go on about your speed being halved if you run Parasite at half-speed, but no matter what, your speed is always going to be rated 7 and your traction 4. Parasite will have control issues regardless.
That said, I still think Parasite will win.
Parasite = 65%
[/quote]
Why, exactly would this strategy not work? According to the rules, a robot with twice the speed needs twice as many traction points to have the same amount of control. A robot with 8 speed and 8 traction has the same 'control' as a robot with 4 speed and 4 traction. So... I have a hard time seeing how driving at half speed wouldn't improve a robot's control, according to the way that stat works.
I'll stop doing that if it annoys you. It's your tournament; interpret the stats however you want. I'm not emotionally attached to that strategy. It's not central to my overall strategy. I just need some explanation for why. [/quote]
With all due respect though, Spatula- if it's going to have its speed halved so it could go the same speed either forwards or backwards, wouldn't it be easier to have a 5 speed in general along with 5 traction?
That way, you'd save two points for other things like extra traction or armour, and you'd achieve more or less the same intended effect, albiet with more balanced control, and more points to spend on other stuff to balance the rest of the robot out.
Just a suggestion of course, since I'm not exactly familiar with that sort of control system, but that's the way I see it.
ICE³ ROBOTICS
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
The idea behind the extra speed is that it allows staying away to spin up. Doesn't require much accuracy to get away from your opponent. Not having enough speed is a flaw that many spinners have to overcome. Parasite's speed is what allowed it to edge out fights it may have lost in Armageddon, and back on FRA it was also very effective as a fast design (really gave it an edge against other spinners).
You can still drive slower for more precise maneuvering, but this gives you more versatile strategic options than having speed-5 traction-5 and getting pushed around by everyone.
You can still drive slower for more precise maneuvering, but this gives you more versatile strategic options than having speed-5 traction-5 and getting pushed around by everyone.
-
NWOWWE
- Posts: 6889
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: E-Town, PA
- Team: Team Blood Gulch
- Contact:
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
Take comparisons with the Armageddon version with a grain of salt because that was under a different stat system. Traction was still pulling double duty as a Torque replacement and they are distinctly separate now.
I don't think it's in your best interest to reference Armageddon Parasite anyway as I think it got a hell of a nice free pass over some issues. Not the least of which is how I'm still shocked that any bot that has an armor of TWO could make it all the way to the finals, regardless of how cool and/or effective the design was otherwise.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Parasite's speed is what allowed it to edge out fights it may have lost in Armageddon[/quote]
And with this specifically I think you end up banking more on luck than anything else. You're facing bots like Pinpoint or Ocelot that had weapon powers FIVE times your armor value. Realisticly one hit should have wrecked you. And if you're facing any kind of rammer that can eat a hit from your weapon, they could impale you on the spike strip or let the pulverizer pound you into hash within a couple hits. Now I didn't write much for Parasite that season so obviously other writers saw differently, but really, I don't think I'm too out of line here.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>and back on FRA it was also very effective as a fast design (really gave it an edge against other spinners).[/quote]
Okay I don't want this to sound mean or rude or anything like that, but please don't start with that kind of reasoning. FRA DOES NOT NECCESSARILY TRANSLATE TO THE ARC STAT SYSTEM OR VICE VERSA. I have no doubt that it's very possible to design a fast powerful bot like Parasite using the real world applications of the FRA system, but the ARC system doesn't always allow for that kind of thing. If it did don't you think practically everyone would be doing it? You'd be foolish not to.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>The idea behind the extra speed is that it allows staying away to spin up. Doesn't require much accuracy to get away from your opponent.[/quote]
Yeah up until your cataclysmic lack of control coupled with your weapons own gyroscopic forces have you overcompensating right over the killsaws or your opponent (who likely isn't having to deal with ice-skate physics) can see what you're doing and is able to compensate/turn a hell of a lot better than you can.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Not having enough speed is a flaw that many spinners have to overcome. [/quote]
Actually not so much this season. Outside of the LW's Spinners aren't really facing the speed disparity any more. I mean Ocelot is out-sped by exactly two bots, Parasite and Cutie Honey. Everyone else is either equal or slower. Granted there aren't as many pure rammers as there usually are (not that I think that's a bad thing mind you), but still.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>You can still drive slower for more precise maneuvering, [/quote]
But can you really? I mean there's still the speed/traction ratio to consider, and I don't think that just goes away. I'll allow that going slower would help a little in that you have less momentum, but I still don't think it helps your overall control that much. I don't see you getting better grip on the floor just because you aren't going as fast.
I mean if you want get all meta-game on this than let's throw in more human error on keeping at a specific speed for extended periods. What's easier to maintain: holding the speed stick at full throttle or some exact half-way point? Yes bots will drive slower than max speed at times during fights, but usually only briefly and not because they are trying to improve their control.
And as far as spinners getting pushed around by everyone, that is far more dependant on Torque not your control/Traction.
I don't think it's in your best interest to reference Armageddon Parasite anyway as I think it got a hell of a nice free pass over some issues. Not the least of which is how I'm still shocked that any bot that has an armor of TWO could make it all the way to the finals, regardless of how cool and/or effective the design was otherwise.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Parasite's speed is what allowed it to edge out fights it may have lost in Armageddon[/quote]
And with this specifically I think you end up banking more on luck than anything else. You're facing bots like Pinpoint or Ocelot that had weapon powers FIVE times your armor value. Realisticly one hit should have wrecked you. And if you're facing any kind of rammer that can eat a hit from your weapon, they could impale you on the spike strip or let the pulverizer pound you into hash within a couple hits. Now I didn't write much for Parasite that season so obviously other writers saw differently, but really, I don't think I'm too out of line here.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>and back on FRA it was also very effective as a fast design (really gave it an edge against other spinners).[/quote]
Okay I don't want this to sound mean or rude or anything like that, but please don't start with that kind of reasoning. FRA DOES NOT NECCESSARILY TRANSLATE TO THE ARC STAT SYSTEM OR VICE VERSA. I have no doubt that it's very possible to design a fast powerful bot like Parasite using the real world applications of the FRA system, but the ARC system doesn't always allow for that kind of thing. If it did don't you think practically everyone would be doing it? You'd be foolish not to.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>The idea behind the extra speed is that it allows staying away to spin up. Doesn't require much accuracy to get away from your opponent.[/quote]
Yeah up until your cataclysmic lack of control coupled with your weapons own gyroscopic forces have you overcompensating right over the killsaws or your opponent (who likely isn't having to deal with ice-skate physics) can see what you're doing and is able to compensate/turn a hell of a lot better than you can.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Not having enough speed is a flaw that many spinners have to overcome. [/quote]
Actually not so much this season. Outside of the LW's Spinners aren't really facing the speed disparity any more. I mean Ocelot is out-sped by exactly two bots, Parasite and Cutie Honey. Everyone else is either equal or slower. Granted there aren't as many pure rammers as there usually are (not that I think that's a bad thing mind you), but still.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>You can still drive slower for more precise maneuvering, [/quote]
But can you really? I mean there's still the speed/traction ratio to consider, and I don't think that just goes away. I'll allow that going slower would help a little in that you have less momentum, but I still don't think it helps your overall control that much. I don't see you getting better grip on the floor just because you aren't going as fast.
I mean if you want get all meta-game on this than let's throw in more human error on keeping at a specific speed for extended periods. What's easier to maintain: holding the speed stick at full throttle or some exact half-way point? Yes bots will drive slower than max speed at times during fights, but usually only briefly and not because they are trying to improve their control.
And as far as spinners getting pushed around by everyone, that is far more dependant on Torque not your control/Traction.
Area51Escapee,Jan 30 2011 wrote:It sucks going 0-5. You lose all 4 of your bot fights for the week and you also lose at life.Spatula,Jan 29 2011 wrote: I should go 3-1 this week but it'll probably be something like 0-4 or 0-5.
-
That Kode Guy
- Posts: 9125
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: Canada
- Team: Dissonance-Tek
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
Josh said it all, Nick. I will admit I'm not the best person for debating with stats, not only because these guys have been around longer but because I'm not a good debater period. However, forgive me but I find it absurd that driving slower allows for better control. That's not how it works here. And besides, the acceleration window is so marginally small that you might as well be going at 7 speed anyway. Look at how robots like Vladiator flew across the box in like milliseconds.
This account is in a state of dimensional flux
-
GF93
- Posts: 6142
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: The Last Train To Clarksville
- Team: Ice Cubed Robotics
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>KodeBreaker</dt><dd>Feb 19 2013, 10:43 AM</dd></dl><div> Josh said it all, Nick. I will admit I'm not the best person for debating with stats, not only because these guys have been around longer but because I'm not a good debater period. However, forgive me but I find it absurd that driving slower allows for better control. That's not how it works here. And besides, the acceleration window is so marginally small that you might as well be going at 7 speed anyway. Look at how robots like Vladiator flew across the box in like milliseconds. [/quote]
Aye- like Kody said, you don't necessarily need that high a speed to have optimum efficiency. Look at Tornado for instance- its top speed was only 10mph, yet with its high acceleration, it could still go like the clappers. :P
Aye- like Kody said, you don't necessarily need that high a speed to have optimum efficiency. Look at Tornado for instance- its top speed was only 10mph, yet with its high acceleration, it could still go like the clappers. :P
ICE³ ROBOTICS
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
-
GF93
- Posts: 6142
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: The Last Train To Clarksville
- Team: Ice Cubed Robotics
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
But yes- if the control issues are there, I'm reasonably confident that I can beat it.
ICE³ ROBOTICS
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
Josh, I can see you've had this pent up in your system for quite some time. You clearly have very strong opinions about Parasite. I'm not going to respond to the whole post as I don't want to create a Berlin Wall of text.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Take comparisons with the Armageddon version with a grain of salt because that was under a different stat system.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Take comparisons with the Armageddon version with a grain of salt because that was under a different stat system.
-
NWOWWE
- Posts: 6889
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: E-Town, PA
- Team: Team Blood Gulch
- Contact:
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>So you're telling me that a robot with 4 speed and 4 traction has less traction than a robot with 8 speed and 8 traction? Is that what you're saying? [/quote]
I'm not sure where you got that. I was talking in ratios. Both of the scenarios you mention there are the exact same ratio, so they have the exact same control. What I was saying was that a bot with, say, 8 speed and 4 traction does not have the same control as a bot with 4 speed and 4 traction just because it decides to drive slower. You can drive slower, but you have the same base ratio that you're working from.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Parasite had 2 traction in Armageddon and has 4 traction now. The speed didn't change. I changed the stats to suit the needs of the new system. I'm very well aware the 'torque' responsibilities of that stat were taken out of it. [/quote]
Okay, but there's a noticeable difference between a 7/2 ratio and a 7/4 ratio. Comparing control between them is kind of pointless. Also, I kind of like the part where you give MORE points to a stat that now has LESS responsibility.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Let's also not beat about the bush here: traction has never meant 'traction' in the way traction actually works in real life. If that were the case, everyone would have 1-2 points on that stat unless they were New Cruelty or something. The type of material on the tires that makes contact with the floor is a very small percentage of the robot's weight, and in real life doesn't correlate linearly with the top speed of the robot.
The way traction works here, the more points you have on it, the more 'control' you have. That is all. RPG stats. You need twice the traction to maintain the same amount of control at twice the top speed--at least that aspect of it is realistic.[/quote]
It's really for simplicities sake. We've bounced around the system using Torque as a catch-all, then switching it over to Traction, and now using both. I mean you could go on and on splitting stuff and adding things until you had around a dozen different stat categories much like the original run of FRR tournaments had, but that becomes more of a mess then it's worth. And it's been said over and over again: the stats aren't meant to perfectly replicate real life, so you can't always look at them in a literal fashion
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>But I think there is some value in trying to see how far I can push the stats. I like the idea that there is some leeway for strategy in this tournament, instead of everyone having to have a 1:1 speed traction ratio to even be functional. Well... why even have a traction category if there's no reason to add/remove points from it, and it merely serves to double the points you need for speed? Hey, if I can nip a few points off that stat and put them on other things, great. Worked before; if it doesn't work this time I'll change my strategy. Big deal.[/quote]
I can accept this as a reasonable argument. What I'll say is that part of the reasoning for using Traction as it is was more or less to force rammers to have another stat they really needed to keep an eye on so they couldn't just throw all their points into Speed and Armor like they did for so long. Back when it was just Torque a rammer rarely needed more than 3 or 4 because spinners would never have more than 1 and only the most hardcore rammers had at least 5. In addition, Spinners have more reason to invest in it as it also affects recoil from weapon impacts. So unless you want to get thrown across the room, investing in traction is a good idea.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>And this argument would mean something if anyone had more than 1 point of Torque this time around. In Armageddon, of course, there was no Torque stat. I can't see any present or historical basis for what you're saying here actually. Redemption was a very long time ago and is irrelevant to the subject at hand. [/quote]
Coincidentally I remember calling out Agent X for only having 1 point in Torque early on in the sign-up process. Granted I think some of the rammers would benefit from having a bit more Torque, but this only the second tournament with both Traction and Torque so the nuances of the stats are still being refined. A spinner with no wedge protection still has little use for Torque since any wedge can get under him and push him without fail. It's ultimately still more of a wedge-centric stat. And if it turns out that it's a stat that ends up being universally lower than other stats overall so be it. It has its uses even if not everyone takes full advantage of it.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>If you don't like my design decisions then you're welcome to make me lose a lot. I took a calculated risk. The way I see it, the value of having a bit of extra speed to get away and spin up outweighs the control I would gain if I simply had 5 speed and 5 traction. It could be that speed is less useful this year. I'm not psychic when I lay out the stats at the beginning. I cannot guess the way the writers will interpret the stats or the kinds of opposition I will face. Even though I lost to Cutie Honey, which was the sort of bot I had in mind when I stuck with this philosophy, I still see its value. And if I face Cutie Honey again in the playoffs I will have a different strategy that will still very much hinge on having 7 speed and not being completely overwhelmed.[/quote]
I don't want to create the impression that you need to have a 1:1 ratio to be viable. That would more apply to a rammer anyway. I mean if you have a -1 or -2 it's not going start costing you big time against an opponent. It when you start getting to the -3 and -4 and so on that you can't really depend on stopping/turning on a dime and such.
As for not being able to guess how the stats will be interpreted, I don't really buy that. Traction isn't exactly new and the way it's been treated hasn't really changed at all since it was introduced except for losing any properties of Torque when that was re-introduced. And don't say you don't know how your opponents will stack up. Anyone can edit stats up to the deadline and it's usually not hard to see general trends in how stats are being used. If you choose not to use this a resource that's your own lookout. And again, if you have any questions about anything in the sign-up process (including stats) all you need to do is contact the staff. We have no problem filling you in on how we interpret things. It's not supposed to be a big secret.
And I don't have a problem with Parasite, design wise, or your desire to have quicker bots. I can certainly appreciate the desire to want to be able to keep pace with a bot like Cutie Honey, but bots like that are much more in the outlier realm than they were in the past. Lightning bricks are nowhere near as prevalent. What I take issue with is the way it ends up looking like you want to have your cake and eat it too. If I sacrifice some speed for Ocelot (though he's still faster than a lot of past spinners and he's at his quickest in this tournament) to have a tighter speed/traction ratio, I hope you can understand where my frustration comes from when a bot like Parasite comes up and tries to claim that it actually has superior control because, well, no reason in particular. The argument about design shape would carry more weight if they had the same speed/traction ratio.
I'm not sure where you got that. I was talking in ratios. Both of the scenarios you mention there are the exact same ratio, so they have the exact same control. What I was saying was that a bot with, say, 8 speed and 4 traction does not have the same control as a bot with 4 speed and 4 traction just because it decides to drive slower. You can drive slower, but you have the same base ratio that you're working from.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Parasite had 2 traction in Armageddon and has 4 traction now. The speed didn't change. I changed the stats to suit the needs of the new system. I'm very well aware the 'torque' responsibilities of that stat were taken out of it. [/quote]
Okay, but there's a noticeable difference between a 7/2 ratio and a 7/4 ratio. Comparing control between them is kind of pointless. Also, I kind of like the part where you give MORE points to a stat that now has LESS responsibility.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Let's also not beat about the bush here: traction has never meant 'traction' in the way traction actually works in real life. If that were the case, everyone would have 1-2 points on that stat unless they were New Cruelty or something. The type of material on the tires that makes contact with the floor is a very small percentage of the robot's weight, and in real life doesn't correlate linearly with the top speed of the robot.
The way traction works here, the more points you have on it, the more 'control' you have. That is all. RPG stats. You need twice the traction to maintain the same amount of control at twice the top speed--at least that aspect of it is realistic.[/quote]
It's really for simplicities sake. We've bounced around the system using Torque as a catch-all, then switching it over to Traction, and now using both. I mean you could go on and on splitting stuff and adding things until you had around a dozen different stat categories much like the original run of FRR tournaments had, but that becomes more of a mess then it's worth. And it's been said over and over again: the stats aren't meant to perfectly replicate real life, so you can't always look at them in a literal fashion
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>But I think there is some value in trying to see how far I can push the stats. I like the idea that there is some leeway for strategy in this tournament, instead of everyone having to have a 1:1 speed traction ratio to even be functional. Well... why even have a traction category if there's no reason to add/remove points from it, and it merely serves to double the points you need for speed? Hey, if I can nip a few points off that stat and put them on other things, great. Worked before; if it doesn't work this time I'll change my strategy. Big deal.[/quote]
I can accept this as a reasonable argument. What I'll say is that part of the reasoning for using Traction as it is was more or less to force rammers to have another stat they really needed to keep an eye on so they couldn't just throw all their points into Speed and Armor like they did for so long. Back when it was just Torque a rammer rarely needed more than 3 or 4 because spinners would never have more than 1 and only the most hardcore rammers had at least 5. In addition, Spinners have more reason to invest in it as it also affects recoil from weapon impacts. So unless you want to get thrown across the room, investing in traction is a good idea.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>And this argument would mean something if anyone had more than 1 point of Torque this time around. In Armageddon, of course, there was no Torque stat. I can't see any present or historical basis for what you're saying here actually. Redemption was a very long time ago and is irrelevant to the subject at hand. [/quote]
Coincidentally I remember calling out Agent X for only having 1 point in Torque early on in the sign-up process. Granted I think some of the rammers would benefit from having a bit more Torque, but this only the second tournament with both Traction and Torque so the nuances of the stats are still being refined. A spinner with no wedge protection still has little use for Torque since any wedge can get under him and push him without fail. It's ultimately still more of a wedge-centric stat. And if it turns out that it's a stat that ends up being universally lower than other stats overall so be it. It has its uses even if not everyone takes full advantage of it.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>If you don't like my design decisions then you're welcome to make me lose a lot. I took a calculated risk. The way I see it, the value of having a bit of extra speed to get away and spin up outweighs the control I would gain if I simply had 5 speed and 5 traction. It could be that speed is less useful this year. I'm not psychic when I lay out the stats at the beginning. I cannot guess the way the writers will interpret the stats or the kinds of opposition I will face. Even though I lost to Cutie Honey, which was the sort of bot I had in mind when I stuck with this philosophy, I still see its value. And if I face Cutie Honey again in the playoffs I will have a different strategy that will still very much hinge on having 7 speed and not being completely overwhelmed.[/quote]
I don't want to create the impression that you need to have a 1:1 ratio to be viable. That would more apply to a rammer anyway. I mean if you have a -1 or -2 it's not going start costing you big time against an opponent. It when you start getting to the -3 and -4 and so on that you can't really depend on stopping/turning on a dime and such.
As for not being able to guess how the stats will be interpreted, I don't really buy that. Traction isn't exactly new and the way it's been treated hasn't really changed at all since it was introduced except for losing any properties of Torque when that was re-introduced. And don't say you don't know how your opponents will stack up. Anyone can edit stats up to the deadline and it's usually not hard to see general trends in how stats are being used. If you choose not to use this a resource that's your own lookout. And again, if you have any questions about anything in the sign-up process (including stats) all you need to do is contact the staff. We have no problem filling you in on how we interpret things. It's not supposed to be a big secret.
And I don't have a problem with Parasite, design wise, or your desire to have quicker bots. I can certainly appreciate the desire to want to be able to keep pace with a bot like Cutie Honey, but bots like that are much more in the outlier realm than they were in the past. Lightning bricks are nowhere near as prevalent. What I take issue with is the way it ends up looking like you want to have your cake and eat it too. If I sacrifice some speed for Ocelot (though he's still faster than a lot of past spinners and he's at his quickest in this tournament) to have a tighter speed/traction ratio, I hope you can understand where my frustration comes from when a bot like Parasite comes up and tries to claim that it actually has superior control because, well, no reason in particular. The argument about design shape would carry more weight if they had the same speed/traction ratio.
Area51Escapee,Jan 30 2011 wrote:It sucks going 0-5. You lose all 4 of your bot fights for the week and you also lose at life.Spatula,Jan 29 2011 wrote: I should go 3-1 this week but it'll probably be something like 0-4 or 0-5.
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
After reading through that reply, I find nothing to disagree with. That is all very, very reasonable. Not much more to add really.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>
I'm not sure where you got that. I was talking in ratios. Both of the scenarios you mention there are the exact same ratio, so they have the exact same control. What I was saying was that a bot with, say, 8 speed and 4 traction does not have the same control as a bot with 4 speed and 4 traction just because it decides to drive slower. You can drive slower, but you have the same base ratio that you're working from.[/quote]
I can see why you'd think the ratio would stay the same even as I decelerate. So for instance, a robot with 7 speed and 7 traction driving at half speed should have better control at that speed, than a robot with 7 speed and 4 traction. It would be as if they had 3.5 speed and 7 traction vs 3.5 speed and 4 traction respectively. What you could say is that the advantage on that stat is maintained even at lower speeds.
If you want to interpret it that way that's fine. That's also the way I interpret it. This does not stop my strategy from being viable, but it just means that bots with better speed/traction ratios get that much more control driving at lower speeds. It is more of a necessity for a bot with poor traction to begin with.
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>
I'm not sure where you got that. I was talking in ratios. Both of the scenarios you mention there are the exact same ratio, so they have the exact same control. What I was saying was that a bot with, say, 8 speed and 4 traction does not have the same control as a bot with 4 speed and 4 traction just because it decides to drive slower. You can drive slower, but you have the same base ratio that you're working from.[/quote]
I can see why you'd think the ratio would stay the same even as I decelerate. So for instance, a robot with 7 speed and 7 traction driving at half speed should have better control at that speed, than a robot with 7 speed and 4 traction. It would be as if they had 3.5 speed and 7 traction vs 3.5 speed and 4 traction respectively. What you could say is that the advantage on that stat is maintained even at lower speeds.
If you want to interpret it that way that's fine. That's also the way I interpret it. This does not stop my strategy from being viable, but it just means that bots with better speed/traction ratios get that much more control driving at lower speeds. It is more of a necessity for a bot with poor traction to begin with.
-
That Kode Guy
- Posts: 9125
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: Canada
- Team: Dissonance-Tek
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
..........................................
:qq: :qq: :qq:
:qq: :qq: :qq:
This account is in a state of dimensional flux
-
GF93
- Posts: 6142
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: The Last Train To Clarksville
- Team: Ice Cubed Robotics
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Spatula</dt><dd>Feb 19 2013, 10:14 PM</dd></dl><div> <blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>GF93</dt><dd>Feb 19 2013, 01:19 PM</dd></dl><div>But yes- if the control issues are there, I'm reasonably confident that I can beat it.[/quote]
Well, good luck other-other Alex.
:lol: [/quote]
Much appreciated, Spatula- ultimately, I think it'll come down to whether or not you can get at my sides before I can KO you via internal damage from my flips. It should be quite an enjoyable match, wouldn't you agree?
And good luck to you too. :P
Well, good luck other-other Alex.
:lol: [/quote]
Much appreciated, Spatula- ultimately, I think it'll come down to whether or not you can get at my sides before I can KO you via internal damage from my flips. It should be quite an enjoyable match, wouldn't you agree?
And good luck to you too. :P
ICE³ ROBOTICS
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
"Tougher than a glacier, more might than an avalanche, more fury than a blizzard, and more burning passion than a volcano."
-
That Kode Guy
- Posts: 9125
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: Canada
- Team: Dissonance-Tek
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
Week 9
LWs
Dr. Robotnik vs. Psyclone
Wedgyness goes to the Botnik. I'd say there will be a massive hit in on the two, then Robotnik will get Psyclone and then wedge him. Think Tax Cutter vs. Sphere O' Fear.
Dr. Robotnik = 75%
Frequency vs. Tartarus
It's such a shame Frequency's out. :(
Frequency = 99%
Pyrite vs. Annoying Box Rush
Nick has this in spades, methinks. The equal speed and ABR's wedge will make a difference.
Annoying Box Rush = 75%
The Servant's Assistant vs. Trans Europe Express
Can you say "clinch"? Right now I have him not clinching yet, but he will... he will. :P
The Servant's Assistant = 99%
MWs
Luna vs. Anthracks
Incorrect spelling FTL!
Luna = 99%
Hubris vs. Hammer & Nails
There goes Lian's play-off spot. :( He's far too outclassed here, sadly.
Hubris = 90%
Stingray vs. Braveheart
Same with Stingray. Try to dent that wedge all you want, Nick... not even the tail will help, sadly...
Braveheart = 90%
WhipCoil 3.2 vs. Brother of Whyachi
Wow. Both the robots that got eliminated last week get free wins this week. Consolation, no doubt.
WhipCoil 3.2 = 99%
HWs
Parasite vs. Camo Alert
Whoever wins this moves on, since they beat Terminal Velocity. Or so I assume. Methinks Parasite has this. Unless Camo can repeat his success against Ocelot.
Parasite = 80%
Terminal Velocity vs. WanderLust
Yeah no.
Terminal Velocity = 99%
Revolver Ocelot vs. Kraze
I see Kraze getting his ass kicked here. Think Luna vs. WhipCoil.
Revolver Ocelot = 85%
Malevolence vs. Cutie Honey
Honey needs to go after those sides, otherwise her abysmal wedge effectiveness will let her down AGAIN.
Cutie Honey = 51%
SHWs
Tax Cutter vs. Hector LeMans
Here's hoping Josh doesn't throw the match, but even so, two things stick out here. Tax Cutter's huge range advantage, and horizontal > vertical. Perhaps Martijn will think differently!
Tax Cutter = 85%
Agent X vs. Thief Pheonic
Agent X has this easily.
Agent X = 90%
Banshee vs. Punch
No comment.
Banshee = 80%
Phantasmic Slammer vs. Lethal Injection
Phantasmic Slammer's speed advantage to help it here. It'll be hard, because he'll be less controlled, but I think he can do it.
Phantasmic Slammer = 55%
LWs
Dr. Robotnik vs. Psyclone
Wedgyness goes to the Botnik. I'd say there will be a massive hit in on the two, then Robotnik will get Psyclone and then wedge him. Think Tax Cutter vs. Sphere O' Fear.
Dr. Robotnik = 75%
Frequency vs. Tartarus
It's such a shame Frequency's out. :(
Frequency = 99%
Pyrite vs. Annoying Box Rush
Nick has this in spades, methinks. The equal speed and ABR's wedge will make a difference.
Annoying Box Rush = 75%
The Servant's Assistant vs. Trans Europe Express
Can you say "clinch"? Right now I have him not clinching yet, but he will... he will. :P
The Servant's Assistant = 99%
MWs
Luna vs. Anthracks
Incorrect spelling FTL!
Luna = 99%
Hubris vs. Hammer & Nails
There goes Lian's play-off spot. :( He's far too outclassed here, sadly.
Hubris = 90%
Stingray vs. Braveheart
Same with Stingray. Try to dent that wedge all you want, Nick... not even the tail will help, sadly...
Braveheart = 90%
WhipCoil 3.2 vs. Brother of Whyachi
Wow. Both the robots that got eliminated last week get free wins this week. Consolation, no doubt.
WhipCoil 3.2 = 99%
HWs
Parasite vs. Camo Alert
Whoever wins this moves on, since they beat Terminal Velocity. Or so I assume. Methinks Parasite has this. Unless Camo can repeat his success against Ocelot.
Parasite = 80%
Terminal Velocity vs. WanderLust
Yeah no.
Terminal Velocity = 99%
Revolver Ocelot vs. Kraze
I see Kraze getting his ass kicked here. Think Luna vs. WhipCoil.
Revolver Ocelot = 85%
Malevolence vs. Cutie Honey
Honey needs to go after those sides, otherwise her abysmal wedge effectiveness will let her down AGAIN.
Cutie Honey = 51%
SHWs
Tax Cutter vs. Hector LeMans
Here's hoping Josh doesn't throw the match, but even so, two things stick out here. Tax Cutter's huge range advantage, and horizontal > vertical. Perhaps Martijn will think differently!
Tax Cutter = 85%
Agent X vs. Thief Pheonic
Agent X has this easily.
Agent X = 90%
Banshee vs. Punch
No comment.
Banshee = 80%
Phantasmic Slammer vs. Lethal Injection
Phantasmic Slammer's speed advantage to help it here. It'll be hard, because he'll be less controlled, but I think he can do it.
Phantasmic Slammer = 55%
This account is in a state of dimensional flux
-
NWOWWE
- Posts: 6889
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
- Location: E-Town, PA
- Team: Team Blood Gulch
- Contact:
Ruination: The Beginning - Spreads Thread
<blockquote class='quote_blockquote'><dl><dt>Quote:</dt><dd> </dd></dl><div>Tax Cutter vs. Hector LeMans
Here's hoping Josh doesn't throw the match, but even so, two things stick out here. Tax Cutter's huge range advantage, and horizontal > vertical. Perhaps Martijn will think differently!
Tax Cutter = 85%[/quote]
What's the difference? Unless I lace Martjin's drink with LSD I don't have a chance in hell. :(
All the same, my names not Anthony, I don't make a habit of throwing matches just because I'm screwed. :cool:
Here's hoping Josh doesn't throw the match, but even so, two things stick out here. Tax Cutter's huge range advantage, and horizontal > vertical. Perhaps Martijn will think differently!
Tax Cutter = 85%[/quote]
What's the difference? Unless I lace Martjin's drink with LSD I don't have a chance in hell. :(
All the same, my names not Anthony, I don't make a habit of throwing matches just because I'm screwed. :cool:
Area51Escapee,Jan 30 2011 wrote:It sucks going 0-5. You lose all 4 of your bot fights for the week and you also lose at life.Spatula,Jan 29 2011 wrote: I should go 3-1 this week but it'll probably be something like 0-4 or 0-5.