Re: Team Update #18
 

Now i've kept up with most of what has been going on since this update was released. A lot of people are talking about it disrupting a teams strategy, however that is not the biggest concern here.

Everyone should be concerned with the GDC committee creating rules halfway through the season that affects teams that cannot compete in a certain match. I must once again bring up the issue of the Wildstang match. Both of their partners were 'broken' (i use that loosely because i do not know exactly what was wrong with them). However Wildstang and that alliance decided to place the 2 robots that could not operate onto the field in an orientation that would eventually give their alliance a 30 point bonus. Now this is not a garunteed bonus, because a robot may enter the opponents homezone at anytime before the last 15 seconds. Given that this team disabled themselves to make sure they would not move and cost them the 30 point bonus, one of the 3 teams could have easily driven over to the homezone and push them out, causing the 30 point bonus to disappear.

As far as i can see there should not be an issue of where or how a robot starts the match. FIRST is about inspiring, and if you spend one match just sitting on top of a robot and helping your alliance win just 1 match, that is more inspiring than sitting in the pits unable to fix the problems you are experienceing with your robot. (believe me i have seen it all in FIRST both as a mentor and as a high school student)

But come on, I must reitterate this once more. This is not about winning or losing, its about the GDC creating rules that a formal representative of theirs said in the FIRST Q&A did not exist. The rules need to be set up, and clarified within the first couple of weeks of the build to prevent issues such as this from happening. Rules should not be changed after Regional Competition starts.

And a note for those that think we should let this go.

We are the customer, it is our responsiblity to voice our concerns when we see something that we do not like.

Re: Team Update #18
 

This situation is nothing new to many of you folks who have been involved with FIRST for more then a few years. So why the "uproar" if you could even call it that? I could see much more of a legit gripe with Update 16 issues, but this just seems to be nit picking. Its an almost non-existent strategy that has seen use in less then 5 matches in the "1500" that have been played already this year. So why can't people seem to drop the whole discussion?

Also, their was only 1 known phone call made to FIRST about the previous update 16 issue. If it was such a hot button, why such a lackluster response from teams?

Re: Team Update #18
 

Please give some benefit of a doubt to the GDC in the Q and A. At least when I read the Q and A I assumed that a robot would be placed a reasonable distance above the ground. Say ...a little over 12 inches to get 30 points, wouldn't that be OK? What happens when a 6' high robot sits on top of a 6' high robot? If that combination was pushed to the side and the upper robot fell off, how far into the isles would it land? Judges table? TV camera operator? Ref? What if the upper robot were to fall over the 6'6" alliance station wall while a defending robot was trying to push 230lbs + out of the end zone? For me it comes down to basic safety. I applaud 111, 1755, 1850 for thinking outside the box. I also applaud the GDC for recognizing what could be a safety factor IMO and preventing it before something bad happens. Besides, how many teams out there said hey, we want to build a robot that sits on top of another robot for 30 points? No body is realistically going to be hurt (pun intended) by making this change.

Re: Team Update #18
 

Chief Delphi is a wonderful place for discussions regarding topics pertaining to FIRST but it isn't FIRST. I would think that if folks want to voice complaints regarding updates, that they would contact FIRST directly.

Re: Team Update #18
 

There is nothing more depressing than finsihing below a team in the standings that never came out of the pits like what happened to us in 2002.
It was very clever to discover the loophole but it needed to be changed.Have a little pride and put some effort into your points.

Re: Team Update #18
 

It may be depressing, but its part of the game. I know i wouldn't like finishing below nonfunctional teams, but obviously this wouldn't even be a factor. The thing is, if at this point another update came out saying that stacking is ok, then it should never be used. So many people on CD and amongst each other have discussed the fact that this strategy is RIDICULOUSLY EASY TO STOP. You slide them out. Or even better, you drag them across the full field into your home zone, thus incurring 60 points of penalties against the opposing alliance. That, in many matches, will guarantee you at least a tie, if not a win. It's not something to be legislated. its not required that teams have a drive train, but its something that people realize is fairly necessary. Teams will realize that stacking is not practical. It's a last ditch effort.

Re: Team Update #18
 

Well of course, but the assumption I was making was that this was only a strategy that would have been used if an alliance had 2 dead robots and thus there would not be a third partner to push one dead robot onto a ramp/lift (assuming one of the robots had a ramp/lift).

Re: Team Update #18
 

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1280

If this isn't the GDC changing the game midseason, I don't know what is. If it was a mistake in the rules they could have fixed it two months ago. If the GDC's repeated willingness to change the rules midseason isn't enough of a problem, the fact that they do it to prevent a situation that has happened so rarely and really hardly warrants prevention in any way....
If.

Re: Team Update #18
 

The fact that it happened so rarely isn't the issue here. The new rule was made by the GDC to avoid having stacked robots become common. I don't think that the GDC envisioned this as a game strategy - even after ship date. I think that getting 30 easy points by basically doing nothing is not good for the game. The GDC recognized this and put an end to it.

I've asked this before, but nobody has answered:

Would you put your FUNCTIONAL robot on top of another and sit there for the entire match to "earn" 30 points?

If so, then why spend six weeks building a robot that does nothing??? I could do that in a day.

Re: Team Update #18
 

I don't see why you'd ask the question of the case of the functional robot. The nature of the game makes scoring/defending then getting on top of a bot a better choice than sitting on top the whole time, if possible.

At any rate, I find it hard to believe that the GDC couldn't have envisioned this when it was mentioned and responded to by the GDC in Q&A days after kickoff (see the link in my previous post...)
This, like several other recent GDC decisions are changing the game for poor reasons. The rule regarding tubes under ramps is flat out lawyering and in contradiction to the spirit of several other rules.
This rule, while it would have been fine early in build season, is completely unwarranted now. It doesn't break the game. It would probably rarely to never decide the course of elimination matches, and if a team wins a qual match on it, they deserve it for designing a robot such that there is space to do this and recognizing the usefulness of this strategy. Nothing there outweighs the negative impact of changing the game this late.