Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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".

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.

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

Yeah, dimensional weight and oversize surcharges are a pain. Sorry about that!

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

Because it's much easier to buy footballs in the states :)

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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?

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

My point exactly:

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.)

Re: [FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option
 

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.