Endgame Timing
The last moment you can stop scoring and still make the endgame, from your own timed attempts. Also whether it is worth going at all, once the points you give up on the way are counted.
Inputs
One row per practice attempt: how long it took from the moment you stopped scoring to the moment it was done, and whether it finished. Time the whole thing, including driving there and lining up, because that is what the decision actually costs you.
From your manual. If a partial result scores something, put the full value here and use the reading below rather than averaging the two.
Your points per second of scoring time. The match score model works this out from your cycle times, and it is the price of every second you spend on the endgame instead.
How many standard deviations of headroom to leave above your average time. 0 means you make it half the time. 2 covers roughly 97% of attempts, which is the usual choice for something you only get one shot at.
Used to say where in the match the decision falls.
Results
Leave with this much left
—sec
Average attempt
—sec
Spread
—sec
Finished in time
—%
Across your logged attempts.
Which really means
—%
Points given up going
—pts
Expected endgame points
—pts
Net worth of going
—pts
Break-even scoring rate
—pts/sec
Score faster than this and the endgame costs you points.
How this is calculated
Going for the endgame is not free. Every second spent driving there and lining up is a second not spent scoring, so the question is not whether the endgame is worth points. It is whether it is worth more points than the same seconds would have earned you.
leave with = average time + margin × spread points given up = leave with × your scoring rate expected = success rate × endgame points net = expected − points given upWith your numbers
Why the average time is the wrong number to leave on
If you leave with exactly your average attempt time on the clock, you make it about half the time. That is what an average means. The spread across your attempts is what tells you how much earlier to go, and a mechanism that is occasionally slow needs more headroom than a slower one that is always the same.
Two standard deviations covers roughly 97% of attempts if the times are anything like normally distributed. They usually are not, because the bad runs have a long tail and the good ones cannot go below some floor, so treat it as a guide rather than a guarantee.
The break-even rate is the honest test
Divide the expected endgame points by the time it costs and you get the scoring rate at which the two are worth the same. Score faster than that and going for the endgame actively loses you points. Slower, and it is free money. That number does not care how impressive the mechanism is.
What this does not model
It assumes you can score right up to the moment you leave, which is optimistic if the field is empty by then. It ignores the effect on your alliance partner, who may be waiting on the same structure. And it treats a failed attempt as scoring nothing, so if a failure also costs you position or a penalty, the real net is worse than shown.
Sources & assumptions
Driver control is 105 seconds, which is published.
Attempt times, success counts, point values and your scoring rate are allyours. The interval on the success rate is a Wilson score interval at 95%.
The margin is expressed in standard deviations of your own measurements, not taken from anywhere. It is a choice about how much risk to carry, and the page makes it visible rather than picking one for you.
- V5RC Override Game Manual v1.1 (2026-27) — checked 2026-08-17
- Spartan Design — Override manual summary — checked 2026-08-17
Save this run, and compare
Keeps what is on screen so you can change something and see both sides of the change. Saved in this browser only, never uploaded.
Save this as evidence
Collects what you entered, what came out, how it was worked out, and anything the tool flagged, with a timestamp and a version so someone else can reproduce it.
This is evidence, not a notebook entry. It deliberately does not write your problem statement, your reasoning, or your conclusion, because under RECF rules an Engineering Notebook has to be the students' own work and no tool may generate or organise its content. Take the numbers, decide what matters, and write it yourself.