Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

You get to say to them, "Put me in coach!"

You get a pretty neat button and get to yell at people. It's really great.

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

Yup. I never knew that side of me existed. I have never yelled at someone as loud as I have at the NYC regional this year.

Lost my voice for over a week, but it was worth it because I got to yell at people with the only repercussion being people saying "hey thanks for that call."

All in all: Coach= 8/8 would recommend m8.

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

Some of the best coaches don't actually yell.

(Source: behind the glass experience)

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

I've found that while you don't mean to yell, if often happens out of urgency.

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

hijacked thread? I think so...
I blame Wil.

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

Tl;dr

YES! All the robots on an alliance have a worth. All the teams deserve trophies. All of them get medals.

((When in doubt, blaming Wil usually works too))

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

i was pretty offended you implied this board was limited to people who were either professionals or students so i took it out on the thread

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

I put you in the "professional" category. Too soon?

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

Nah, he's a professional all right.

At what, I'm not sure yet. Maybe he's a professional amateur? ;) :p

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

It is possible to be both professional AND a student. Trust me on this.
;)

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

As far as I'm concerned, that's the end of the discussion. If the manual says the 4th bot is part of the alliance, then they are. I do think that right now the 4 bot alliance puts the 4th bot in an awkward spot of feeling unworthy and needing to justify why they deserve the win, but people do the same thing to the 3rd bot as well. I do think that something needs to change, whether it's just a culture shift or a change to the system, but overall I like the 4 bot alliance and the potential strategy opportunities. I wish that DCMPs would change to the 4 bot alliances as well.

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

ANECDOTE TIME
Last season, 2338 picked 234 as our 4th bot at IRI. Although 234's robot was never on the field during our elims run, their human player was an absolute monster. 234's HP played an extremely important role in the success of our alliance, by providing us with an outstanding noodle sniper. We dropped our human player into the "no touching things" role, and he helped everyone stay in the loop on where stacks were going, particularly during "where did all the feeder totes go?" incidents.

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

Soon the manual will say that there are two championship events. That'll be "right", but is it right? The manual gets updates during the season. It isn't some infallible, unquestionable document.

Wasn't the decision to switch Champs to 4-bot alliances mostly a logistical one? During elims it's a lot easier to call up a backup bot that already has a mobile pit and to let other teams pack up immediately to make load-out easier. Not every alliance used a backup bot before the change, and I'm sure not all do now.

My team was a 4th bot (thanks 4334, 294, 2013!) that only touched the carpet once during elims (and shredded some gear teeth and could barely drive during our match). If our alliance went on to win the division or Einstein and that was our only in-match contribution I would have felt great about taking home some blue banners, but pretty embarrassed by our own on-field performance. We were definitely a member of the alliance, but we were there as a backup/defense bot, and the first 3 teams deserve basically all of the recognition for the matches the alliance won.

Re: Value & Credibility of 4th robots on an Alliance
 

There is a big difference between saying that 4th bots should not exist and belittling the achievements of the 4th bots that do exist. It is the exact same as the difference between saying that 2 Champs shouldn't exist and saying that the winning alliances don't deserve to be called winners (which will be a thread within 30 minutes of the end of Einstein next year). By saying that the 4th bot shouldn't be considered a winner, you are not telling FIRST that you think that they should get rid of 4 bot alliances, you are insulting a team who already probably is doubting their self-worth. If you don't think 4th bots should exist email FIRST, but right now they do, so according to the manual they are considered a full member of the winning alliance and should be treated as such. Plenty of teams hate the bumper rules, but just because you think the bumper rules should change, does not mean you can just show up for a competition with no bumpers. This is no different.