Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

Im kinda on the fence about this game. I think they could have done a little more, to make it more exciting. I do like the idea that we can pin other bots, and ramming is allowed. I havent really read all the rules yet, so if im wrong about the ramming, could somebody clear that up. Anyway, I guess i just have to wait till the play day to see how it all plays out. It will be interesting. Knowing my luck though, it will probably snow here in Baltimore, and I wont be able to go to the play day

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

This is one of my main complaints too. Obviously it's not a huge deal, but this game seems to have more of an FLL-style theme than past games. Now there's nothing wrong with FLL for its age group, but I would like to think FRC is a little more mature.

The shared resources is always a welcome competitive aspect to a game which should provide some great excitement as teams scramble and claw for the remaining balls as time runs down. The only other gripe I really have is the lack of a secondary goal that would require the use of a specialized manipulator. I've always enjoyed games that allow for big, diverse manipulators, which is why I ended up loving last year's game despite my initial wariness. I'm sure Lunacy will grow on me in the coming time, especially as I start to see pre-ship robot videos surface on youtube.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

I've complained at 2007, and while I still never liked Rackn' Roll, I have to admit that it was not a failure. I was also very much against last year's game to begin, but once the regionals started I fell in love with it.

My first reaction to Lunacy was not that positive...but the more I get involved with it, the more I can't wait to see competition.

The reason why I like it, is probably because it reminds me of my rookie year's game Zone Zeal, and there is nothing better then reliving one's FIRST past.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

Hmm I have not really decided yet wether I like this game or not. I usually do that when it actually comes time for the competitions. Because I start out saying hmmm this isnt gonna be fun but than by the end of the competitions I realize how fun the game actually is. I think that this game has a lot of potential to be fun.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

Poor Royal Assault (356), we feel for them as fellow users of custom wheels.
Hahaha

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

*clears throat* 357 *clears throat* :rolleyes:

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

My views towards Lunacy have changed vastly.

While watching the animation and for the rest of Saturday I flat-out hated it. I hated the simplicity and the design restrictions. The only thing that seemed cool was the drifting and no ramming/pinning penalties.

One day later while designing the robot and after sleeping on it I am really looking forward to it. I think that it will still be a good game to watch/play and that there will still be plenty of great/cool robot designs out there despite the limitations.

I do however have one thing to say as a team that hosts a pre-ship scrimmage:

120 Wild Time Orbit Balls ................ ~$1200

24'X50' of Regolith ................... ~$1300

Knowing that you will most likely never need these again....... Priceless

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

I believe Theo the word used to describe that is PAINFUL.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

I think the people who are decrying this year's titles like "commander" and "mission specialist" as "too immature for us adults" need to stop taking themselves so seriously.

One, FRC is designed for pre-college students so nobody playing the game can consider themselves a legal adult.

Second, these names are ripped directly from the titles used for NASA astronauts (and they don't seem to mind them).

Third, if the idea is to simulate a real-world challenge (such as moving/mining on the moon, which thousands of "real" engineering are currently working on), then its appropriate to used the correct vocabulary to extend the metaphor.

Fourth (and MOST importantly), I think you'll find that so-called "adults" who are so full of themselves as to think they're "above" a little goofyness like special titles aren't much fun to be around anyway.

In fact, I think the only real criticisms could be that (1) it makes the game less accessible to the general public (since they have to learn vocabulary), and (2) at first it's harder to talk about with teammates (though that will fade quickly).

My $0.02

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

I wouldn't worry too much about it. IMO, worst case scenario: Incredible teams and their machines will always be chosen as alliance partners in the end, regardless of whether they managed to finesse the scores in every match. Scouting generally takes those things into account.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

I agree with you about <G14>. I was wondering if anyone else noticed the correlation between it and Kamen's speech. Both seem/seemed to have very subtle socialist overtones....:cool:
I can easily see discussion of this rule turning into political debate as the season progresses :eek:

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

Who said 397 would design a box on wheels? Trust me, I had a mentor on 2337 have to explain the KISS (Keep it simple Schreiber) principle to me earlier today. The answer to that is I will push our students to do more than that.

I am saying that I don't want to see a world where doing the bare minimum is rewarded. If you want to compete w/ less resources FIRST just isn't for you. FIRST is for those teams that partner w/ a corporate sponsor. If a team doesn't have a sponsor why is it FIRST's job to design for them? Remember, FIRST is not about teaching students. FIRST is all about partnering students with industry and making kids realize engineers are a hell of a lot better role models than Paris Hilton. Why should FIRST encourage these teams by saying it is ok to not do what FIRST was designed for?

Now, if a box on wheels could be a competitive robot, I am ok with that, but I have to say it is a pretty poor design when a box on wheels can be a competitive robot.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

This is my beef as well. I don't think its fair how much humans will be able to score this year, it's supposed to be about the robots.

I especially dislike the super cells. I think the bonus points idea is great, but they are located behind the alliance station wall. There is no way to get the ball on the field, without throwing it. Unless the balls are thrown in the hopper of an alliance robot, super cells will only be scored by humans, which I predict will be the difference in winning in many games.

I like the challenge of the new surface (I hated it at first), but there is way to much human scoring this year.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

Andrew, I can understand your point of view to a point. I'd love to say that in our area of Texas, we have corporate sponsors coming out of the woodwork. That's not necessarily the case. We have teams in the central Texas area who are working very hard to make that ideology a reality, but it takes a lot of effort and hard work. In the meantime, teams are encouraged to find businesses to work with them, obtaining smaller donations/sponsorships, that help add up and help support the teams. There are areas in the FRC communities, globally, that don't have a lot of technical mentor support. The teams work on that but some struggle with it year after year. There are threads in CD that discuss the struggles. Do teams that struggle for corporate sponsorship, that lose corporate sponsorship, that struggle to obtain and retain technical sponsors, fail to belong in FRC? Who decides that? Inspiration is available to everyone. Teams that compete in regionals/competitions and those who are able to go to the Championship, are exposed to incredible mentors. Many of them are the inspectors that work so hard to help the teams qualify. Many are refs, many are field volunteers, coaches, emcees, announcers, pit admins. The teams that are not flush with resources, still have equal access to the experience... to inspiration. To scholarships. To internship opportunities. That's real, that's not ideology.

As far as boxes on wheels... good things happen with boxes on wheels. Ask anyone who was at some of the regionals around the world in 2008. There was a lot of inspiration occurring, a lot of community development going on, a lot of fun happening in a lot of places. I could write a book about OKC's inaugural regional last year and the transformation of some of the teams from Thursday to Saturday. None of the rookies, who formed the majority of teams at that regional, left the competition or the field empty handed. They walked away having gained experience, confidence, a sense of achievement and wonder. Working with mentors like Andy Baker as your head ref can do that.

I will never be convinced that FRC is for an elitist group of mentors or students with deep pockets in the resources area.
--
As for judging this game so early regarding robot design and strategy - I have a feeling that this game, like the others, is layered with possibilities, and teams who think carefully and consider many options, will come up with lots of surprises and innovative ideas. And, regarding labeling the positions with the appropriate titles given - it is going to make it so easy to help explain the game to fans, guests, and viewers. I think it is great.

Re: Anybody really dis-like the game?
 

Andrew, I think you're making a grave error in your assessment of the purpose and structure of FIRST. FRC is broad enough to encompass the well-sponsored and highly organized as well as the rookie team made up of a couple kids and a Literature teacher who got a scholarship from NASA. We should celebrate the achievements of both extremes, and the progress made by those who are moving more towards the model you put forth. For nearly all FIRST teams, it takes (many) years to achieve steady corporate sponsorship and consistent mentoring. As far as I'm concerned, this game, and the way it was presented by Kamen et al, is an acknowledgment and affirmation of this aspect of FRC, and I like it.:D