BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
 

Posted by Jon - T190 at 04/08/2001 6:24 PM EST


Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Mass Academy of Math and Science and Worcester Polytechnic Institute.



So on our bus ride home today we did some random post-season brainstorming as to the direction that BattleCry 2 should take...

What do people want to see? original style rules? 2 on 2 action? 2 ramps? moving goals?

i'm going back to bed now.

Re: BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
 

Posted by Jeremy at 04/10/2001 1:27 PM EST


Student on team #95 from Lebanon high school.


In Reply to: BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
Posted by Jon - T190 on 04/08/2001 6:24 PM EST:



do you know when battle cry2 will be.

Re: BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
 

Posted by Deej- T190 at 04/11/2001 12:26 AM EST


Engineer on team #190, Gompeii, from Mass Academy and WPI.


In Reply to: Re: BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
Posted by Jeremy on 04/10/2001 1:27 PM EST:



: do you know when battle cry2 will be.

June 23, 2001 @ WPI in Harrington Auditorium......

Re: BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
 

Posted by Jeremy at 04/12/2001 9:16 AM EST


Student on team #95 from Lebanon high school.


In Reply to: Re: BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
Posted by Deej- T190 on 04/11/2001 12:26 AM EST:



and one more question, when does regastation begin?

About 2 on 2....
 

Posted by Jessica Boucher at 04/10/2001 2:01 PM EST


Student on team #237, Sie-H2O-Bots, from Watertown High School and Eastern Awning Systems & The Siemon Company.


In Reply to: BattleCry 2: the neverending sequel
Posted by Jon - T190 on 04/08/2001 6:24 PM EST:



I really think that the reason why certain major changes have stuck within FIRST is because they stick in the mini-comps. If the house rules arent too different from the competition, then if I was FIRST I would interpret that as a "the community likes the rules".

If it changed drastically (like 2 on 2) I think FIRST would see that as a blatant rejection of the rules by the community.

And Im not saying this as a "I support drastic house rules" or "Im against drastic house rules", but I think whatever you do, realise the reprcussions and the message youre sending.

-Jessica B, #237
the "Pogo Queen" (sorry, this is my first post since Nats and I promised I'd put that in at least once)

Re: About 2 on 2....
 

Posted by Stephen Riley at 04/10/2001 7:30 PM EST


Engineer on team #419, RAMBOTS, from Wentworth Institute of Technology and sponsors? what are they?.


In Reply to: About 2 on 2....
Posted by Jessica Boucher on 04/10/2001 2:01 PM EST:



alright, so i can't pogo, stop rubbing it in :P

Re: About 2 on 2....
 

Posted by mike oleary at 04/11/2001 7:49 PM EST


Student on team #419, rambots, from bc high and sponsors are overrated..go pocket-change robots!!!.


In Reply to: Re: About 2 on 2....
Posted by Stephen Riley on 04/10/2001 7:30 PM EST:



you couldnt even get on the pogo...even ninnies can do that

: alright, so i can't pogo, stop rubbing it in :P

Re: About 2 on 2....
 

Posted by Stephen Riley at 04/11/2001 10:51 PM EST


Engineer on team #419, RAMBOTS, from Wentworth Institute of Technology and sponsors? what are they?.


In Reply to: Re: About 2 on 2....
Posted by mike oleary on 04/11/2001 7:49 PM EST:



at least i'm not known as pliers :)

Re: About 2 on 2....
 

Posted by mike oleary at 04/12/2001 11:11 PM EST


Student on team #419, rambots, from bc high and sponsors are overrated..go pocket-change robots!!!.


In Reply to: Re: About 2 on 2....
Posted by Stephen Riley on 04/11/2001 10:51 PM EST:



touche...but i can still pogo better

: at least i'm not known as pliers :)

Re: About 2 on 2....
 

Posted by Patrick Dingle at 04/10/2001 11:57 PM EST


Coach on team #639, Red B^2, from Ithaca High School and Cornell University.


In Reply to: About 2 on 2....
Posted by Jessica Boucher on 04/10/2001 2:01 PM EST:



I would love to see a change for BattleCry, and 2vs2 or 3vs3 (as I have heard rumored) sounds great to me (although good luck trying to figure out how to get it to work with this playing field). As far as this being considered a "blatant rejection" of the FIRST-provided game, I don't think it is. We have played that game for the last three months, and many of us are tired of it. I don't see any problem in changing rules for non-FIRST post season competition, nor do I think FIRST would be insulted by a change in the rules.

Just my opinion of course.

Patrick

: I really think that the reason why certain major changes have stuck within FIRST is because they stick in the mini-comps. If the house rules arent too different from the competition, then if I was FIRST I would interpret that as a "the community likes the rules".

: If it changed drastically (like 2 on 2) I think FIRST would see that as a blatant rejection of the rules by the community.

: And Im not saying this as a "I support drastic house rules" or "Im against drastic house rules", but I think whatever you do, realise the reprcussions and the message youre sending.

: -Jessica B, #237
: the "Pogo Queen" (sorry, this is my first post since Nats and I promised I'd put that in at least once)

Acceptance/Rejection of the rules...
 

Posted by Jon - T190 at 04/11/2001 2:08 AM EST


Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Mass Academy of Math and Science and Worcester Polytechnic Institute.


In Reply to: About 2 on 2....
Posted by Jessica Boucher on 04/10/2001 2:01 PM EST:



I know that whatever we decide to use will be closely related to whatever we tell FIRST at the summer Forum.

from day one i haven't known what to think about the rules this year, i'm still digesting it...

since i came back people have been asking me how it went and i tell some people it was great and i tell others it was alright and others still that "we've had better years"... and simply, i can't make up my mind... i love having to work with another team because its opened the community up immensely but while its possible to carry the weight of another team, its ridiculously hard to carry two or even three teams.

I have to say, that from the discussions we've had and my stance right now, i would prefer a return to the 2 on 2 approach. as a scout, i like not knowing who my ally is going to be until the instant its go time. its the strategy thing.. the chess-like quality of the recent years games... the game itself goes so quickly but no one can tell me that double trouble was boring.

anyways, just bouncing some thoughts around.

Re: About 2 on 2....
 

Posted by colleen - T190 at 04/11/2001 10:00 AM EST


Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Massachusetts Academy of Math and Science and WPI.


In Reply to: About 2 on 2....
Posted by Jessica Boucher on 04/10/2001 2:01 PM EST:



I wouldn't call it blatant rejection..

Creative difference, maybe...

Rumor has it that this '4-on-none' was somewhat of a last minute alteration to the competition by FIRST.. we just are looking to play around w/ it to see what the alternate approach would look like..

I can't envision FIRST having a major issue with this.. who knows..

Moreso.. as we've discussed, we can see teams whose robots are built for '4-on-0' rather than a contact '2-on-2' game have some issues on that.. but we have already brainstormed methods & rules to alleviate their worries but at the same time, let all of us see if the 2k1 game can handle the rules of the good ol' days..

We'll see.. taking the opinions of the teams who attended last year of what they'd 'like to see' the game be..

Summer games are so much fun! :):)