View Full Version : [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
2017 International Game Piece Option (http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/frc/blog/2017-international-game-piece-option)
Posted Nov 3
2017 International Game Piece Option
Written by Kate Pilotte, Kit of Parts Manager.
International teams (i.e. non-United States based teams) experience significant challenges in sourcing game elements from FIRST Choice: both in shipping time (~3-4 weeks for the items to arrive in their home countries) and extra fees associated with importing such items.
In response to this issue last year, FIRST added an option (http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/frc/blog/2016-international-game-piece-option) for those teams to devote an inflated number of FIRST Choice credits in exchange for receiving an extra set of game elements with their Kickoff Kits. The number of credits for this option is greater than the number of credits teams spend if using FIRST Choice normally (i.e. inflated) because we recognize the advantage inherent in the timing of early receipt, thus appropriate to reflect that in the FIRST Choice credit cost.
Teams who exercise this option will have their round one FIRST Choice credits reduced by 20%.
The option window is open for non-US teams only between 12:00 ET (Noon) on Tuesday, November 8 and 12:00 ET (Noon) on Tuesday, November 15.
In order to opt-in, a Lead Coach/Mentor 1 or 2 must
log into your team’s registration account,
click on the “Extra Game Piece Set Option” button on your Dashboard
select “Yes” or “No” in the pop up window
You can change your team’s selection if you like, but only until the window closes.
The default option, and the result if you do nothing, is to not receive an extra set of game pieces at Kickoff and receive the full allotment of FIRST Choice credits.
We hope that this option will continue to mitigate some obstacles faced by non-US teams. As always we look forward to feedback about the implementation in the post-season Kit of Parts survey.
"Game pieces", with an "s", meaning there may be more than one in the kit. IIRC, only one boulder came in the 2016 KOP. I'm not sure what was in the kit in previous years, but I'm guessing that it was one of each game piece, so in 2015, there was one tote(or the one(s) containing the Kit could be used), one trash can, and one noodle. So if there are game pieces in the 2017 Kits, there might be more than one type of game piece. Which seems to also follow a pattern, now that I think about it.
Cothron Theiss
03-11-2016, 18:15
"Game pieces", with an "s", meaning there may be more than one in the kit. IIRC, only one boulder came in the 2016 KOP. I'm not sure what was in the kit in previous years, but I'm guessing that it was one of each game piece, so in 2015, there was one tote(or the one(s) containing the Kit could be used), one trash can, and one noodle. So if there are game pieces in the 2017 Kits, there might be more than one type of game piece. Which seems to also follow a pattern, now that I think about it.
Haha, you may be reading a bit too much into the use of plurality. It's referred to as both a singular piece and multiple pieces throughout the blog post. However, the fact that the button is quoted as being the "Extra Game Piece Set Option" is a bit more convincing. A set removes some of the ambiguity, but to be honest, I doubt they're going to such pains about releasing info. There may be more than one unique game piece for 2017, there may not.
Matt Ciprietti
03-11-2016, 19:14
Yeah, don't read too much into that. Likely you're only going to get one more of whatever the game piece(s) are that are included in the basic kit of parts. This was the case in 2016 - the kit contained one boulder, and we received one more boulder by opting in to this. Which, by the way, was a terrible deal for 20% of your FIRST Choice credits.
I was hoping that they might try and address this lack of value this year, but it seems that they have doubled down on it - apparently the "inflated" cost is intentional? That doesn't sound too logical when you think about it. The whole point of the option is to rectify an inherent disadvantage that international teams have. So if you opt in to get a game piece, you aren't so much getting an advantage over other teams, you are just not at a disadvantage in comparison.
So for Canadian teams at least, I'd think twice about this. If nothing else, there are lots of cross-border pick-up options if you feel you need more game pieces quickly and don't mind going for a little drive.
Yeah, don't read too much into that. Likely you're only going to get one more of whatever the game piece(s) are that are included in the basic kit of parts. This was the case in 2016 - the kit contained one boulder, and we received one more boulder by opting in to this. Which, by the way, was a terrible deal for 20% of your FIRST Choice credits.
If this means that the game pieces are similarly expensive this year, that too is terrible.
Andrew_L
03-11-2016, 21:22
If this means that the game pieces are similarly expensive this year, that too is terrible.
My favorite game pieces are the kind exclusively sold through AndyMark.
Chris is me
03-11-2016, 21:32
I still have no idea why this is limited to international teams.
alectronic
03-11-2016, 22:15
I still have no idea why this is limited to international teams.
Doesn't it explain this in the blog? There's a practical reason the international friends need it. Domestically, this would probably be too hard to scale and have a "different thing for every team" compared to normal kickoff boxes. It's a very different scale.
Chris is me
03-11-2016, 22:17
Doesn't it explain this in the blog? There's a practical reason the international friends need it.
Which isn't really an argument against it being for domestic teams at all - this is only an argument in favor of the option existing for international teams.
Domestically, this would probably be too hard to scale and have a "different thing for every team" compared to normal kickoff boxes. It's a very different scale.
This is exactly what happens already with the KoP opt-in / opt-out program as it is. FIRST already handles "different thing for every team" just fine, with much bigger (generally), heavier, more expensive things. Different teams get different selections of stuff. Without knowing the game piece it's hard to say for sure but for example last year, it can't be that hard to throw another dozen balls in the shipping container for your local Kickoff.
If this means that the game pieces are similarly expensive this year, that too is terrible.
It could also mean that shipping is just expensive for a bulky item. So big game pieces?
My favorite game pieces are the kind exclusively sold through AndyMark.
I also love when this happens. My favorite part, however, is when their shipping algorithm charges substantially more than the cost of the item.
Access to plenty of gamepieces early in the build season really does make a difference for teams. In 2015 it was difficult to design a robot to build multiple 6 stacks when we didn’t actually have 6 totes for a long time. Having just a few gamepieces at the start of the season( for a week or so) can narrow down your strategy and robot to working with only a few game pieces as you don’t get to see the bigger picture.
You can try substitute the official gamepiece with something similiar( such as the 2013/2014 KOP totes) while you wait but there are always differences( such as tote height etc.).
The system of trading FC credits for an extra boulder seemed reasonable this year. As the value of the FC credits would probably equal the price from Andymark+express postage
AdamHeard
04-11-2016, 01:22
I also love when this happens. My favorite part, however, is when their shipping algorithm charges substantially more than the cost of the item.
When has it charged more than the cost of the item? Not even 2015 was that way for within the US.
I still have no idea why this is limited to international teams.
It explains in the post.
(I'll use my country, Australia, as an example here)
It's hard for us to source parts from overseas, and even harder for us to source them locally, especially game pieces.
The added costs that we have that 'domestic' teams don't have to deal with include: Shipping, Exchange Rate, and other charges. What's more is that some suppliers straight up won't ship overseas. There's also a lot of delay with it going through customs / postage here, which can be possible trouble. Allowing us to purchase these through FIRST choice doesn't necessarily eliminate this, but it does make it a bit easier on us.
Also keep in mind that we don't get our KOP on start build day. They're shipped out express on start build day. For us over here in Western Australia, I believe they are shipped to Sydney, and then sent to us over on the other side. This adds at least a couple days before we even get our hands on the Kit of Parts, scratching what could be prototyping time.
Game pieces are a specifically tricky thing to get, because we have to balance "one extra game piece, but all these extra costs, time and trouble".
We already have so much trouble compared to 'domestic' teams with a lot of stuff, is it really all that bad if we get one thing nice?
My favorite game pieces are the kind exclusively sold through AndyMark.
I, for one, hope the 2017 game piece is an am-0096a hex hub.
My favorite game pieces are the kind exclusively sold through AndyMark.
It must have been really great when in 2012, 2013, and 2014 you could get more game pieces by walking into a sporting goods store.
(Of course, in 2015 most teams already had the game pieces on hand and the cans could be bought at most stores that sold trash cans)
(Of course, in 2015 most teams already had the game pieces on hand and the cans could be bought at most stores that sold trash cans)
There were quite a few subtle differences between the Official Tote and the ones that had previously been used to distribute the KOP. There was a difference in height and also a significant difference in the moulding under lid of the tote, depending on the method of grasping the totes in the stacking mechanism this could have had a significant impact.
Products like the Rubbermaid bins are difficult to find quickly and economically for international teams.
My favorite game pieces are the kind exclusively sold through AndyMark.
My favorite part, however, is when their shipping algorithm charges substantially more than the cost of the item.
Hmm... the only time I have seen an AM order cost more for (non-express domestic US) shipping than the cost of the item was when I queried shipping prices for the pool noodles a recentTuesday when they were one of the "deals of the day".
It must have been really great when in 2012, 2013, and 2014 you could get more game pieces by walking into a sporting goods store.
(Of course, in 2015 most teams already had the game pieces on hand and the cans could be bought at most stores that sold trash cans)
While we could get the cans locally (I bought one to make into a practice Oscar the Grouch can before mutilating a game piece), I never found those lids locally or even on-line except as FRC game pieces.
I, for one, hope the 2017 game piece is an am-0096a hex hub.
Given the age of steam theme, it's more likely to be a brass-plated version of am-2630, the 240 tooth turret gear.:]
I am encouraged by the fact that the extra game piece option is "only" 20% of the FC points - in 2015 it would have been much higher. Since 2012, the only game piece we have found locally was the Frisbee, and that wasn't as easy as it should have been; most stores just had the knock-offs.
Chris is me
04-11-2016, 09:29
It explains in the post.
(I'll use my country, Australia, as an example here)
It's hard for us to source parts from overseas, and even harder for us to source them locally, especially game pieces.
The added costs that we have that 'domestic' teams don't have to deal with include: Shipping, Exchange Rate, and other charges. What's more is that some suppliers straight up won't ship overseas. There's also a lot of delay with it going through customs / postage here, which can be possible trouble. Allowing us to purchase these through FIRST choice doesn't necessarily eliminate this, but it does make it a bit easier on us.
Also keep in mind that we don't get our KOP on start build day. They're shipped out express on start build day. For us over here in Western Australia, I believe they are shipped to Sydney, and then sent to us over on the other side. This adds at least a couple days before we even get our hands on the Kit of Parts, scratching what could be prototyping time.
Game pieces are a specifically tricky thing to get, because we have to balance "one extra game piece, but all these extra costs, time and trouble".
We already have so much trouble compared to 'domestic' teams with a lot of stuff, is it really all that bad if we get one thing nice?
Once again, while all of these are great reasons for the program to exist for international teams, none of these are reasons for the program not to exist for domestic teams.
I've certainly never said (nor would I) that if domestic teams can't have access to this, then nobody should. Of course as many teams as possible have this option - international teams shouldn't be denied something out of spite because domestic teams don't have it.
What I'm saying, once again, is that FIRST already has experience and a structure in place for giving teams KoP packages that vary based on team preference, and that working toward expanding this option for everyone should be somewhere on their priority list. For the past two seasons they haven't even mentioned this possibility, as if there's no reason domestic teams would want this, when people have been asking for years.
My favorite game pieces are the kind exclusively sold through AndyMark.
Even when they're not exclusively through AndyMark (and when is the last time they were?), AM has always had the best combination of price, shipping rate, and shipping speed for me. I don't get the hate here; they're a great company that responds to the needs of FRC teams unlike any other.
Chris - I really don't follow your reasoning.
To make a really awful analogy to how I interpret your argument, if vision-impaired people get eyeglasses, then everybody should get eyeglasses.
Domestic teams already have access to the parts, by virtue of them being in America. Those teams not in America have limited or difficult access, so the FC option helps level the field.
Andrew Schreiber
04-11-2016, 10:17
Once again, while all of these are great reasons for the program to exist for international teams, none of these are reasons for the program not to exist for domestic teams.
I've certainly never said (nor would I) that if domestic teams can't have access to this, then nobody should. Of course as many teams as possible have this option - international teams shouldn't be denied something out of spite because domestic teams don't have it.
What I'm saying, once again, is that FIRST already has experience and a structure in place for giving teams KoP packages that vary based on team preference, and that working toward expanding this option for everyone should be somewhere on their priority list. For the past two seasons they haven't even mentioned this possibility, as if there's no reason domestic teams would want this, when people have been asking for years.
Even when they're not exclusively through AndyMark (and when is the last time they were?), AM has always had the best combination of price, shipping rate, and shipping speed for me. I don't get the hate here; they're a great company that responds to the needs of FRC teams unlike any other.
What's the average shipping time for you for any in-stock part from McMaster? I'm going to guess 3 days unless you pay extra, in which case you can have it next day. AndyMark is pretty similar, VP as well.
Now, remember last season when Ron waited 3 weeks for a McMaster order that he never ended up getting? I'm not sure what his AM/VP situation is like but once you start dealing with international customs life gets really bad really quick. Prototyping with 1 game piece sucks and puts those teams at a distinct disadvantage, this is meant to address that.
If your team wants a second game piece they can get it at some semi reasonable date without actually having to fly someone stateside to pick it up.
Billfred
04-11-2016, 10:31
Hmm... the only time I have seen an AM order cost more for (non-express domestic US) shipping than the cost of the item was when I queried shipping prices for the pool noodles a recentTuesday when they were one of the "deals of the day".
Yeah, dimensional weight and oversize surcharges are a pain. Sorry about that!
Chris is me
04-11-2016, 12:11
Chris - I really don't follow your reasoning.
To make a really awful analogy to how I interpret your argument, if vision-impaired people get eyeglasses, then everybody should get eyeglasses.
Domestic teams already have access to the parts, by virtue of them being in America. Those teams not in America have limited or difficult access, so the FC option helps level the field.
That analogy isn't great, because glasses correct vision to normal levels, they don't make vision better than normal.
Two people get boxes of things on a certain day. The system that brings them boxes brings everyone Box A and Box C, and some people also get Box B.
Both people immediately want another Box C when they receive their other boxes.
One person can get Box C a week later for $X, another can get Box C four weeks later for $4X dollars. This is obviously unfair.
Now the system is modified, so that when everyone gets their boxes of things, people that had to wait four weeks can get another Box C on the same day! This is an improvement, and not something anyone, at any point, is suggesting we roll back or otherwise remove.
But one person still has to pay $X dollars and wait a week to get the second Box C that they already know they want. And the box-delivering system already has infrastructure in place to handle requests for additional boxes.
I don't know how many times I have to say this - I'm happy this program exists for international teams! I don't want it to stop existing just because it can't be done for domestic teams! I'm just asking if it can also be done for domestic teams! That's it! Saying "well it was bad for international teams" has nothing to do with that question - we know, that's why the program exists and we all agree it is better than it was before.
All I really want to know is, they considered it and ran into some unforeseen roadblock that prevents them from doing this, and that they heard the concerns of domestic teams whom have been asking for this since forever, and definitely asked for this last year the first time this program was announced. This hasn't really been acknowledged by FIRST.
Roboshant
04-11-2016, 16:15
I still have no idea why this is limited to international teams.
Because it's much easier to buy footballs in the states :)
Jon Stratis
04-11-2016, 16:35
I have to agree with Chris here... Yes, it was bad for international teams and ok for domestic teams. But now it's ok for domestic teams and even better for international teams. Sure, international teams have issues with other aspects of being involved, like the lead time on orders from AndyMark, Vex, McMaster, etc. Is giving them access to a second game piece before domestic teams can get access to one supposed to make up for those difficulties?
FIRST should, and I believe does, prioritize fixing the worst issues for the largest amount of teams. When it comes to obtaining game pieces, that obviously meant helping international teams. But, in my mind, addressing such a problem means bringing that portion of teams up to the level of everyone else, not making them better - if you make them better, all you've done is reverse the inequality. The end goal here should be to put all teams on an even playing field, and that could be done by expanding this program to include domestic teams as well. In fact, I think that would be an interesting experiment - expand it to include everyone, and see how many teams opt in. Would there be some threshold where FIRST would say "ok, we get it... we'll give everyone two sets of game pieces next year"?
In short, I would simply say that if FIRST expanded the program to include domestic teams, my team would opt in. I think the only years we haven't obtained additional game pieces were Arial Assist and Overdrive.
jeser#1772
04-11-2016, 18:10
FIRST should, and I believe does, prioritize fixing the worst issues for the largest amount of teams. When it comes to obtaining game pieces, that obviously meant helping international teams. But, in my mind, addressing such a problem means bringing that portion of teams up to the level of everyone else, not making them better - if you make them better, all you've done is reverse the inequality. The end goal here should be to put all teams on an even playing field, and that could be done by expanding this program to include domestic teams as well.
Sorry Jon but looks like you dont have idea in how is to be a international frc team.
Did you ever travelled 9000 KM (yes we use KM! :) to get 1 spare game piece? I did
Did you ever travelled 9000 KM to get your kit of parts? I did 7 times!
Did you compete in 2009 being in a country where the field floor didint exist?
or where a good anual salary is less than the regional registration?
or did you never get you robot back from custons because the taxes for it are bigger than your anual salary + regional registration?
or the pain that is when just US uses imperial units and these are not avaliable in most countrys
I understand your point but basicly FRC is not getting close to "making them better" is just a simple fact of logistics, so teams from brazil for example can have a spare game piece in time for build season (brazil can take 3 weeks to clear custons) and if they start doing this for everbody now it will cost money and people dont want an increase in the regional registration price.
Hmmm,
If my magic wand's batteries were charged, in order to create game-piece stockpiles around the globe, I would send a dozen or so game pieces to whoever is the local FIRST representative in each country/region.
Then I would let them ship those stockpiled game pieces to the teams that want to "buy" them.
I wonder why that isn't happening? FIRST must have considered doing something like that. I would guess that the cost to FIRST would be modest.
Maybe there is just no no time available in this season's schedule? Maybe the local reps aren't actually "local"?
Maybe some other fly-in-the-ointment that I'm overlooking?
Maybe next year?
Regardless, the wand is currently dead. I hope the method FIRST announced works out well-enough.
Blake
If I am reading this correctly..
Jon and Chris are not trying to offend international teams. Far from it actually- they agree this option for game pieces is great for you guys. We all want to support FRC teams abroad.
However, they are arguing that opening the option up to EVERY team, Domestic and International, would be even more beneficial. Why can't every single team have the option to get extra game pieces with their kit if they are "paying" for the logistics to do so with FC points.
Why does this HAVE to be limited to International teams- can it not be open to everyone?
Hmm... the only time I have seen an AM order cost more for (non-express domestic US) shipping than the cost of the item was when I ...
My point exactly:
Yeah, dimensional weight and oversize surcharges are a pain.
Yeah, dimensional weight and oversize surcharges are a pain. Sorry about that!
On the other hand, it IS what I expected, having shopped pool noodles on-line a few years ago. It's not an AM problem, its a shipping cost problem.
Please note that in the next paragraph I am not begrudging the international teams having access to the "extra game pieces" pre-order; this is definitely an offset of a disadvantage. On the other hand, I think that extending it to everyone would be a help to everyone, including those who do not take advantage of the opportunity.
If the extra game piece(s) option were available to US teams, we would almost certainly take advantage of the opportunity; I wouldn't be a bit surprised if half of the US teams took advantage of it. The reason I believe it should be extended to US teams is this: If AM (or another supplier) could reliably expect 2000-3000 orders of the game piece sight unseen (perhaps back in October), this would significantly ease the regular chicken-and-egg problem of FRC game pieces -- the global demand is usually 1500 units per year, then suddenly, in one month, there's a demand for 10,000 of them. The global stocks disappear in a day, and it takes a week or more to spin up the factory on the item. US teams get it in two weeks, and other teams in four (or more). Front-loading the demand would reduce the problem for EVERYBODY.
(And OBTW, I expect that the same would hold true for FTC.)
Is giving them access to a second game piece before domestic teams can get access to one supposed to make up for those difficulties?
If getting an identical gamepiece a couple of days late for you is higher on your list of priorities than us waiting a few weeks and spending a lot more money for the exact same thing, I think you might need to rethink your priorities.
Let's say FIRST adds this choice for domestic teams, too. Suddenly this very imbalance everyone is so sensitive about comes back.
In the US, you get your KOP on day one. In Western Australia, we get it about 3-4 days into the season (if we're lucky, in 2015 it took 1.5 weeks, that's 1/4 of the season).
Now you not only have everything you need to prototype, but an extra gamepiece as well, 3-4 DAYS MINIMUM before we do.
When you take all this into account, US teams getting 1 game piece 3-4 days minimum before international teams get 2 game pieces seems like a pretty good tradeoff.
Let's say FIRST adds this choice for domestic teams, too. Suddenly this very imbalance everyone is so sensitive about comes back.
In the US, you get your KOP on day one. In Western Australia, we get it about 3-4 days into the season (if we're lucky, in 2015 it took 1.5 weeks, that's 1/4 of the season).
Now you not only have everything you need to prototype, but an extra gamepiece as well, 3-4 DAYS MINIMUM before we do.
When you take all this into account, US teams getting 1 game piece 3-4 days minimum before international teams get 2 game pieces seems like a pretty good tradeoff.
I think pretty much everyone in this thread agrees that non-US teams have many huge disadvantages, in ways US teams can't even understand. But no good comes from lowering the ceiling, we need to raise the floor. Instead of limiting pre-orders to only international teams to balance the disadvantages, we (and FIRST) should work to make it easier for international teams. Perhaps that means shipping you the kit of parts early and trusting you not to open it like they trust you to bag the robot on bag day. Perhaps it means providing dimensions for parts in metric so it's easier to find locally sourced parts. It is impossible to make it completely even for non-US teams, but that doesn't mean we have to make it harder for everybody when we can make it easier for everybody too.
PS - this will be my first year as a mentor of a non-US team after 4 years on a US team so my opinion may be very different this time next year
jeser#1772
05-11-2016, 09:40
I think pretty much everyone in this thread agrees that non-US teams have many huge disadvantages, in ways US teams can't even understand. But no good comes from lowering the ceiling, we need to raise the floor. Instead of limiting pre-orders to only international teams to balance the disadvantages, we (and FIRST) should work to make it easier for international teams. Perhaps that means shipping you the kit of parts early and trusting you not to open it like they trust you to bag the robot on bag day. Perhaps it means providing dimensions for parts in metric so it's easier to find locally sourced parts. It is impossible to make it completely even for non-US teams, but that doesn't mean we have to make it harder for everybody when we can make it easier for everybody too.
If the extra game piece(s) option were available to US teams, we would almost certainly take advantage of the opportunity; I wouldn't be a bit surprised if half of the US teams took advantage of it. The reason I believe it should be extended to US teams is this: If AM (or another supplier) could reliably expect 2000-3000 orders of the game piece sight unseen (perhaps back in October), this would significantly ease the regular chicken-and-egg problem of FRC game pieces -- the global demand is usually 1500 units per year, then suddenly, in one month, there's a demand for 10,000 of them. The global stocks disappear in a day, and it takes a week or more to spin up the factory on the item. US teams get it in two weeks, and other teams in four (or more). Front-loading the demand would reduce the problem for EVERYBODY.
(And OBTW, I expect that the same would hold true for FTC.)
The problem in applying this option to all teams in my point of view:
1-First choice credits are not money
as I understand the items on first choice came from donations, and the risk involving the game pieces market is 100% on Andy Mark (they need to supply the market but they hold the risk of not selling part of it) so FIRST dont need to deal with it.with save costs and time
2- shipping costs
how can FIRST deal with shipping? since this will not fit into the box (depending of the game) and will be so much work if they need to charge differently for each team or kick off (it looks simple but if i know that all the boxes will have the same weigth probably is easier since we are talking about +2000 teams)
3- sorting
sorting orders is not included in what FIRST does as an organization. and Andy Mark for example cannot sell game pieces before kick off
4-time is money
anything that increase the amount of time or work in a operation will cost money, in my point of view First is trying to keep it working without increase the registration fee, it didint increased since i started in 2006
So, in my point of view what they are doing is working a solution that help the teams that have huge problems with "working case by case" (since is a qty of teams that dont demand a huge change in the way they work)
But yes is possible to give access to all teams, but it will cost money, and the only way i see it now is incresing the registration fee, and who wants it?
Chris is me
05-11-2016, 09:48
The problem in applying this option to all teams in my point of view:
1-First choice credits are not money
as I understand the items on first choice came from donations, and the risk involving the game pieces market is 100% on Andy Mark (they need to supply the market but they hold the risk of not selling part of it) so FIRST dont need to deal with it.with save costs and time
These items are already available on FIRST Choice - if FIRST loses money by offering this option they are already losing the money.
2- shipping costs
how can FIRST deal with shipping? since this will not fit into the box (depending of the game) and will be so much work if they need to charge differently for each team or kick off (it looks simple but if i know that all the boxes will have the same weigth probably is easier since we are talking about +2000 teams)
FIRST is already in the business of shipping 3,000 kits of parts, which all weigh substantially more than the game piece, and are usually substantially bigger than the game piece. They even have different weights and boxes per team already, with the kitbot opt-in or opt-out. This would be the same amount of effort as that - an extra game piece opt-in or opt-out with extra boxes for some.
3- sorting
sorting orders is not included in what FIRST does as a organization. and andy mark for example cannot sell game pieces before kick off
This is indeed exactly what FIRST does every year. There are several possible configurations of the kit of parts - rookie tote, veteran tote, KoP drivetrain - all of which involve taking parts from dozens of suppliers and packing them together. One of those parts is even the game piece. This is literally adding one item to that list. This is something they do.
3-time is money
anything that increase the amount of time or work in a operation will cost money, in my point of view First is trying to keep it working without increase the registration fee, it didint increased since i started in 2006
The KoP drivetrain opt-out increases the amount of time and work on FIRST's part and didn't cost teams money. The entire FIRST Choice system increased the amount of time and work on FIRST's (and AndyMark's) part and didn't cost teams money. This is an argument vague and broad enough that it could be applied to almost any suggestion of change at all, but it isn't true in all cases.
So, in my point of view what they are doing is working a solution that help the teams that have huge problems with "working case by case" (since is a qty of teams that dont demand a huge change in the way they work)
But yes is possible to give access to all teams, but it will cost money, and the only way i see it now is incresing the registration fee, and who wants it?
This can be handled the same way it is for International teams - it can cost teams FIRST Choice credits. This is part of the value teams are purchasing when they register and get a kit of parts.
I am not confident that this change absolutely will result in increased registration fees at all - that implies, among other things, that FIRST is just barely breaking even on FRC, that FIRST Choice credits aren't part of the KoP cost (I understand most FIRST Choice parts are donated), that the increased cost is substantial, that teams who don't opt for this feature would have to subsidize the teams that do, and a bunch of other assumptions that may or may not be true. If it costs FIRST more to the point of which they have to ask for more money, a huge assumption, they can simply charge the teams who ask for more game pieces!
jeser#1772
05-11-2016, 10:02
FIRST is already in the business of shipping 3,000 kits of parts, which all weigh substantially more than the game piece, and are usually substantially bigger than the game piece. They even have different weights and boxes per team already, with the kitbot opt-in or opt-out. This would be the same amount of effort as that - an extra game piece opt-in or opt-out with extra boxes for some.
Sorry but I see this one different, since the Kitbot option just reduce the amount of work FIRST apply to it, is one box less and not one more
But yes you are right they arealdy have 3 options of packages, including the game piece will be 6 different packages.
MARS_James
05-11-2016, 13:30
So while this is getting heated I think there is a few things we can all agree on:
1. International teams are at an inherent disadvantage to teams based in the United States
2. This is a good thing for anyone who can take advantage of it.
3. It being implemented for teams in the US would not be a bad thing but it is also not as necessary as for international teams.
So my 2 cents on this is two fold:
1. I think that being a team in the United States that 1/5th of my credits is a little steep for one extra game piece since it isn't that bad for me to get more. I think it would have been more fair for them to price out how much they would charge them if they were just a regular FIRST Choice item and teams just buy them that way, it's not like teams can grab much from how many credits they are. As a team who hosts a kick off it seems pretty simple for how FIRST can do this, either have a different colored tote for teams who wanted an extra game piece, or just mark it by having different colored zip ties.
2. The idea of shipping a lot of game pieces to the international regional directors and allowing them to become the shipper for the game piece seems fair and simple:
- FIRST ships a large amount (lets call it 3 per team) of game pieces very early to the regional directors (Who sign NDAs and whatever else FIRST wants) with hopefully a prepaid return label
- Teams post kick off can log on to Andy Mark (or whoever distributes the game piece) and purchase as if they are a US team (Limited by how many game pieces available).
- When it comes time to select shipping have a drop down box that lists international locations to ship from
- Teams select their location and get charged for the game piece and it is not refundable
- The regional director then gets an email and it will either contain the contact of who is coming to get the extra game pieces, or the shipping location to send said pieces
This should not be that challenging it is like either in store pickup or ship from store which is fairly common in retail these days. You keep the game pieces limited to say week 4 then it is free game for whoever wants however many they want. When stop build day comes around the RD can then choose to keep the extra game pieces (and pay for them) for their events, or return them to FIRST.
I really feel like either of these options above is not to challenging to implement nor that unfair.
Jon Stratis
06-11-2016, 10:14
Thinking more about this, why doesn't FIRST just take themselves out of the equation all together? The biggest issue with game pieces, typically, is them being sold out. So, lets get AndyMark to set up a pre-order system. Starting in November or December, I can order a "set" of game pieces for $X (where X is obviously different every year, depending on the game pieces). I could even have an option to by a "complete field set" of game pieces for $Y, that would let me run a full week-0 event (and let me decide if I want to invest in that full field set, or start trying to raise funds for it early). Then, just like numerous companies do when they have a big release of a new product (like the annual iPhone release), they work with Fedex or UPS to ship everything early so it's delivered world wide on the Monday after kickoff. That way, everyone can get as many game pieces as they want, production companies can tool up and produce extra numbers a month before kickoff based on pre-order demands, and we avoid selling out during the season.
Steven Smith
06-11-2016, 10:41
Thinking more about this, why doesn't FIRST just take themselves out of the equation all together? The biggest issue with game pieces, typically, is them being sold out. So, lets get AndyMark to set up a pre-order system. Starting in November or December, I can order a "set" of game pieces for $X (where X is obviously different every year, depending on the game pieces). I could even have an option to by a "complete field set" of game pieces for $Y, that would let me run a full week-0 event (and let me decide if I want to invest in that full field set, or start trying to raise funds for it early). Then, just like numerous companies do when they have a big release of a new product (like the annual iPhone release), they work with Fedex or UPS to ship everything early so it's delivered world wide on the Monday after kickoff. That way, everyone can get as many game pieces as they want, production companies can tool up and produce extra numbers a month before kickoff based on pre-order demands, and we avoid selling out during the season.
I like the idea. As you suggest, FIRST/AM could probably take a pretty good stab at some breakpoints for what an "average team" wants, based on prior year spending number as well as the game design, and offer a few packages at different price points. I know I for one would be to pre-order ~$300 of whatever the game piece(s) are this year, and just add a few more on later on the open market if I'm short.
Instead of limiting pre-orders to only international teams to balance the disadvantages, we (and FIRST) should work to make it easier for international teams. Perhaps that means shipping you the kit of parts early and trusting you not to open it like they trust you to bag the robot on bag day...
What if the kit was shipped early but with a combination lock on it, and the code for the lock was give out after the broadcast, similarly to the game manual password? Just an idea. Good luck with your new team! :)
What if the kit was shipped early but with a combination lock on it, and the code for the lock was give out after the broadcast, similarly to the game manual password? Just an idea. Good luck with your new team! :)
Not a bad idea. My only problem with this is that some teams might be accused of using bolt cutters to prematurely open the kit. I'd have to have yet another controversy about something as silly as this.
The manual password is different because the only way around it is brute force, which is near impossible given the time frame between when the manual is released and when the password is released.
Not a bad idea. My only problem with this is that some teams might be accused of using bolt cutters to prematurely open the kit. I'd have to have yet another controversy about something as silly as this.
The manual password is different because the only way around it is brute force, which is near impossible given the time frame between when the manual is released and when the password is released.
I considered this, but maybe if the locking part was hidden inside the box it would discourage cutting the lock. A barrel-type lock might work if those exist with combos, as the only way to break in would be drilling, and that would run a high risk of damaging something in the kit. The possibility of damaging kit contents and reusability of the tote should discourage cutting the plastic.
I considered this, but maybe if the locking part was hidden inside the box it would discourage cutting the lock. A barrel-type lock might work if those exist with combos, as the only way to break in would be drilling, and that would run a high risk of damaging something in the kit. The possibility of damaging kit contents and reusability of the tote should discourage cutting the plastic.
There would be no need to defeat the lock explicitly.
Just cut a hole in the side of the box, or take apart the hinges, or ...
There would be no need to defeat the lock explicitly.
Just cut a hole in the side of the box, or take apart the hinges, or ...
Yes, but if the contents are packed very tightly, you would run a very high risk of damaging them by cutting into the box. It would also limit the ability to reuse the box for storing the kit items or storing other things. I don't think this risk would be worth it, since you wouldn't really know what you should do with the parts until Kickoff.
Yes, but if the contents are packed very tightly, you would run a very high risk of damaging them by cutting into the box. It would also limit the ability to reuse the box for storing the kit items or storing other things. I don't think this risk would be worth it, since you wouldn't really know what you should do with the parts until Kickoff.
There would be no need to defeat the lock explicitly.
Just cut a hole in the side of the box, or take apart the hinges, or ...
I considered this, but maybe if the locking part was hidden inside the box it would discourage cutting the lock. A barrel-type lock might work if those exist with combos, as the only way to break in would be drilling, and that would run a high risk of damaging something in the kit. The possibility of damaging kit contents and reusability of the tote should discourage cutting the plastic.
Not a bad idea. My only problem with this is that some teams might be accused of using bolt cutters to prematurely open the kit. I'd have to have yet another controversy about something as silly as this.
The manual password is different because the only way around it is brute force, which is near impossible given the time frame between when the manual is released and when the password is released.
What if the kit was shipped early but with a combination lock on it, and the code for the lock was give out after the broadcast, similarly to the game manual password? Just an idea. Good luck with your new team! :)
I think you're thinking too hard about this. Instead of creating an impenetrable box, FIRST should de-incentivise breaking into them.
FIRST already trusts us with a lot of the rules of the game. Bag and tag is all on the team's honor to uphold the rules. There are many rules that teams could violate and get away with; I'm sure most teams have come across a few of them and hopefully they made the right choice. FIRST even allows some people to see the field elements and game pieces before kickoff to set up kickoff locations.
At a certain point, FIRST has to trust teams to do the right thing. If they aren't in a trusting mood, they could write up some kind of contract that teams' who get early kits must sign similar to the NDAs kickoff-builders might sign.
At a certain point, FIRST has to trust teams to do the right thing. If they aren't in a trusting mood, they could write up some kind of contract that teams' who get early kits must sign similar to the NDAs kickoff-builders might sign.
At least in the United States, minors cannot be bound by NDAs. There could be some kind of disqualification involved, but then we would get into a hairy mess of refunds, cancelled travel plans, etc. Even then, how would they determine who actually broke into the box? I think it gets too thorny to be worth it.
Come to think of it, what's the deal with teams who host kickoffs in the United States? Kits come to the kickoffs before Christmas. Is there any kind of NDA there? I should probably know this, as the president of a team who is hosting a kickoff...
At least in the United States, minors cannot be bound by NDAs. There could be some kind of disqualification involved, but then we would get into a hairy mess of refunds, cancelled travel plans, etc. Even then, how would they determine who actually broke into the box? I think it gets too thorny to be worth it.
Come to think of it, what's the deal with teams who host kickoffs in the United States? Kits come to the kickoffs before Christmas. Is there any kind of NDA there? I should probably know this, as the president of a team who is hosting a kickoff...
I would check out this thread (https://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151933&highlight=NDA) from a few weeks ago if you want to know more about FIRST's NDAs for kickoffs.
I would check out this thread (https://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151933&highlight=NDA) from a few weeks ago if you want to know more about FIRST's NDAs for kickoffs.
Sorry, I should clarify. I was referring to the kickoff kit NDAs.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.