The problem with this years game was that it was very poorly thought out. The rules were filled with contradictions to what was said on the kickoff video, and it was, in my opinion, a very, very thinly veiled tankbot war.

If FIRST wants a "Thinking Man's Battlebots" game, they found a perfect combo over the past two years. Think about it: all you need is a drive train to score points. You shove bins into zones, you shoved heavy goals into zones. All it is is pushing.

How would you change this year's game (or last year's) to make it better?

(Who knows. Someone may bring up your ideas at one of the post season team forums.)

I regret that I never saw Hammond in action this year. However, some other dominant teams were seeded low at LA, and some nondominant teams were seeded high.

At first, team 60 (Bionic Bulldogs) were seeded low. Some of the mentors and I were talking and we decided that the lack of the flow of bins was the reason. Since 60's strategy was to get to the top and stay there, they did not get much of a total because they did not have any boxes on the opposing teams side. This meant that they did not get much of a doubling from the other side, thus averaging about 100 Qps.

Team 968 (RAWC) were the number 1 seed at LA. We had the privalege of being their alliance partners in one of the qualifying matches along with the elimination rounds. They averaged over 200 QPS, and in the qualifying rounds, we got 240 QPs with them. The reason for this was an excellent strategy of leaving opponents stacks when they did not threaten them, and letting them on top. Letting them on top got them another 50 points, a crutial part on why they won at AZ and were in the finals at LA. Since 60 blocked the entire ramp, they did not get the extra points, unless someone spun them (not likely with their grippers) or climbed on top of them (like we did).

I hope some of this will help you, and answer your question.