hqureshi wrote:I think that a better tie breaker would be the amount of time taken to complete the tasks, and any time left would be added to the points.
If the duration of run were to be incorporated into the tie breaker, I could only see it as a second tie breaker, behind number of motors. If it were the first tie breaker, we would see the emergence of ultra expensive dual arm robots that could essentially complete the tasks in half the time. If it were a second tie breaker, however, it would only be differentiating the perfect-scoring four motor robots at nationals and perhaps a couple of state tournaments. In my opinion, there would be a large enough difference in run time between these robots to justify the tiebreaker. It wouldn't be trivial; the duration would be proportional to how good of a robot the team has, how efficient their strategy is, and how much they have practiced.
Regionals: 1st Robot Arm, 1st Thermodynamics, 1st Experimental Design, 1st Chem Lab, 2nd Forestry, 4th Gravity Vehicle, 5th Optics
State: 1st Robot Arm, 1st Gravity Vehicle, 1st Optics, 1st Chem Lab, 2nd Experimental Design, 3rd Thermodynamics, 6th Forestry
Nationals: Tie for 1st Robot Arm