Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

This is a poll, vote your opinion. I'm not going to post my opinion (yet) for fear of skewing the poll results.

By "affect outcome", I mean that you think that missing a supercell will generally cause a team to lose that would have otherwise won. I know there are lots of cases where this may or may not happen, but this poll is about the general case.

Edit: Assume that by supercells, I mean "supercells or empty cells". There wasn't any room to put that in the poll.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

Boring games as good teams try not to score too much.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I really don't see the 2x or 3x score happening very often.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I have feeling that many matches will see a 2x or 3x score, but I don't think the supercells will be an important part of any matches until late in the season. You aren't going to see all of the supercells being scored probably until a Atlanta or IRI, so I don't see this rule having much effect.

That said, I still think it is treading on thin ice.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

My personal opinion is option 1: Teams will fairly commonly break the 2x or 3x barrier (especially with the QA clarification that 2-0 scores are >3x), and since the 3 teams on the alliance that does will be scattered among several subsequent games, it will be very common to have matches with 1 or more removed supercells or empty cells. However, I don't think scoring 3 supercells is entirely likely. 20 seconds is a very short period to score them.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

:) In my opinion, I feel the rule is poor, but we will have to live with it, I guess. If the penalties occurred during the match that was played that caused the lopsided score that would be one thing. But carrying over a penalty that will affect two other teams in an alliance that had nothing to do with that score goes beyond any rationale I can provide. :confused:

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

So long as they don't remove more than the 2 super cells, i don't see this rule being a huge issue.

If all three members of an alliance get caught being completely dependent on scoring 80 points in the last 20 seconds to win, they probably have a very poor strategy to begin with.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I still think it's ridiculous that FIRST plans to punish teams for doing the assigned task TOO WELL. I mean honestly, this game has started to tick me off a little bit. First they lock the bumper rules down enough to limit any major chassis innovation, next they punish teams for being good at what they're told to do?

I guess no skill goes unpunished...

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I'm sure many will throw rocks at me for this, but I think you're totally missing the point. The culture WE are RESPONSIBLE FOR CULTIVATING according to our founder and national advisors dictates that we find ways to compete like crazy and treat each other well in the process. This game has most clearly represented that ideal. If you choose to pummel an opponent, then there is a corresponding consequence. That consequence may or may not happen often at events.

Secondly, the challenge we are given this year is different than in the past. If chassis innovation isn't it, then....I dunno ... maybe spending our time ensuring all teams can move well on this slippery surface might be a good use of our time??? Maybe looking into these cool traction control systems?? Maybe scheduling a few more outreach demos?

Sorry for sounding snide, but I see this whole thing as a wake up call. If we continue down this road and get too focused on our individual robots then we run the risk of caring too much about winning at the game which, in turn, leads to the same ills we have is sports and popular culture in general.

namaste,
kressly

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I understand the point of FIRST being inspiring innovation and science, and I'm not going against that. However, with any attempted change, you need to penetrate the population before change can happen. If you just start doing something different, you'll be that odd group instead of a changing force. If you instead start with a competition, make it known, and then begin the shift, I'm willing to bet that change will happen MUCH faster.

Already done all this. Is it too much to be allowed to compete like crazy too?

New chassis design: Check.
We can drive QUITE well on slick surfaces. Check.
If there were any rookie teams near us, we'd be helping them. Check.
Traction control: Check.
Outreach demos: Check.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

Looking at things this way, you could potentially say that FIRST has been "punishing" teams since...

2008 - Ranking Points = Loser's Score
2007 - Ranking Points = Loser's Score
2006 - Ranking Points = "unpenalized score of winning or losing alliance, whichever is lower"
2005 - Docs no longer available on FIRST's site (that I can find)
2004 - Same
2003 - "Both teams in thewinning alliance get their own score plus twice the losing alliance’s score in EP's"
2002 - "Each team in the winning alliance receives triple the number of match points of the losing alliance in QPs"

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I know better than to throw rocks at a guy with better aim than me, so I'll lob 'em real easy.
Why does that have to be the case? It seems like I see an article like this every week. The winning coach always says something like this one: "We show the most respect for our opponents by continuing to play hard." I invariably find myself in agreement. It's no fun to get blown out, but if a team is going to slow themselves up because they're crushing you, it borders on demeaning.
I appreciate this sentiment, but I don't think you'll find what you're looking for in <G14>. I'm not going to feel better about losing 29-10 when I know the only reason it wasn't 90-0 is because my opponents found it beneficial to ease up. The culture change has to come from things with no selfish subtext, or no one's going to buy into it. This is the kind of behavior we should be encouraging.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

Like Nate said, in the past, we were penalized for blowing out the opponents through the ranking score. However, the last two years, you were penalized for scoring for your opponent, so there was not much you could do about it.

I think I prefer this year's approach of more directly penalizing you for blowing out your opponents, but making it trivial to score for them.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

Need a new option for this poll: Referees, field resetters and queuers will tear out their hair in frustration while trying to implement it. OK, I know the GDC said the field management system would track it. But there's more information needed before starting the match than with the ball randomizer last year. I see delays while the crews check to see that every team has the authorized number of balls in their stations.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

Also the right kind of balls... I mistook an Empty Cell for a Moon rock a couple days ago while it wasn't brightly lit.

Having the walls be clear will help a bit, and having distinctive team uniforms won't hurt, but it is going to be tricky.

That said, I think the effects won't be felt for the most part, as most teams who get 2x-3x their opponents' score won't need the cells.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

This is very astute, indeed and I agree. However, as FIRST grows we capture fewer and fewer of the "early adopters" and more folks who are from "popular culture." I explained the difference in this thread. With more and more people who are used to the "popular culture" way of doing things we all need to be more diligent about ensuring the real mission remains at heart. I've seen a growing number of people in FIRST whining about referee calls on the field and in these forums and it needs to stop. You heard Dean say, out loud about the elements of luck involved in the "game." You heared Woodie talk about the big effect of the program and you heard Dave talk about mentoring. What more evidence do we all need here until we stop focusing so much of the "game" and whether or not it's good? If we keep doing that, as early adopters, what are we teaching the mainstreamers who have joined us?

It's been nearly 20 years, how long should we wait?

Nope, I see no reason why you can't compete like crazy, but perhaps it's now more of an "us vs. the problem" thing (like many real life robotic applications) as opposed to "me vs. you."

Awesome! You don't need rookies near you to help them. Contact the RD(s) for your event(s) and find out who the rookies/other teams in need are!

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

Or worse, they score in your own goals. You aren't doing the individual teams of the struggling alliance any favors by highlighting just how much they are struggling to the general viewing public.

Instead of penalizing teams for outpacing those who struggle on the field, how about focusing on providing on-field REWARDS for any teams who find ways to elevate struggling teams behind the curtain? Take the Chairman's Award ideals and find a way to break that concept down to where it has an impact on the playing field.

Here's a wild suggestion....

You know how safety judges and individual teams are given "safety tokens" to distribute to those teams who are demonstrating strong safety practices in the pits? Well, perhaps teams and judges are given "Gracious Professionalism" tokens to hand out in the same manner whenever they witness acts of one team helping another in the pits with ROBOT-related activities. These can then be exchanged for whatever units of strategic/scoring edge the GDC defines for use ON THE FIELD, during the match.

• The helped team benefits by receiving better programming, machining assistance, better robot performance - a better opportunity to compete on the field.
• The helping team can exchange their GP tokens for a strategic edge in any match - they would hand it to a designated official (ref, queueing personnel, whatever) just prior to a match, and this would give that team/alliance an additional empty cell/supercell to use. (make it a part of strategy - we see that we have a tough match coming up, so we want to employ the token then to give us the best opportunity to succeed)
• Granting the ability to exchange these tokens in any match a team chooses will minimize their use against the "weaker" alliances they face. They will be used when facing the better teams. More available points in the best matchups seems to be an exciting prospect.
• Each team on an alliance can only use one per match, and the one they use cannot be from a team on their alliance. [Thanks, Bongle!]
• Your team would have a cap (3-ish) on how many GP tokens you could exchange for empty/supercells at any one event. This limits "collusion", "nepotism", and all other dark side of humanity issues many of you are thinking of as you analyze this concept.
• Once you use up your 3 tokens, you must politely refuse any further tokens or "regift" any excess - no hoarding of tokens such that other teams cannot benefit from them.
• The GP tokens would have the team number of the granting team on them to prevent any miscreants from exchanging their own GP tokens.
• Even the most inexperienced team would be eligible to receive tokens for finding their own way to be technically helpful to other teams at an event.
• Emcees and announcers would undoubtedly have to explain this concept to the crowd, which gives them a great excuse to talk about all the positive stuff that goes on "behind the curtain", which at least in my memory banks, is not something that is frequently brought up to the public while the matches are going on, relative to all the other discussion.

Could this not accomplish the same objective, and more, than the current rendition of G14?

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I like your idea, but it is a bit too susceptible to teams only appearing to help. What if the teams themselves rather than the judges were given a few tokens (labelled with their team number) that they then distributed to helping teams. If you wanted a team's tokens, you help them in a useful fashion. I could show up and appear to be helping another team on their laptop, but maybe I can't understand their code and can't actually help. It wouldn't be terrible if a judge gave me a token for appearing to help (after all, trying to help is a good thing to do too), but it could be gamed.

Rules for deployment of GP tokens could say: "each team on an alliance can only use one per match, and the one they use cannot be from a team on their alliance". This would prevent teams from spending their own tokens, and would prevent an alliance from swapping tokens beforehand.

On the dark side, however:
-What if someone helps, but a team deems it 'not enough' to hand out a token? Bad feelings would come up pretty quick in that situation
-A problem with both of our ideas: Teams seem to be pretty good at helping each other right now out of altruism. Putting a "they're only doing this because they want the in-game bonus" slant on it might actually depress GP.

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I'm not 100% sure this is true, Joey, but I appreciate you being kind to an older guy :)

In the context of winning a sporting event, under the rules that govern their games, you are correct. The coaches and players who make these statements on a regular basis are doing so as part of a culture that values working one's butt off to win a championship for that one team. The example article you point to should be troublesome. Clearly, there are many ways to play hard and work on your game without running up the score. I was a coach for nearly a decade and one of these athletes from age 8 through high school. I remain a big sports fan. This, though, is NOT our culture. Dean talks about borrowing from the excitement of sports, NOT from the "we are here to kick your butt" part. It's unfortunate, but there are very few professional, major college, or even high school/youth sports programs out there anymore that exist for the overall development of a healthy citizen in a global society that has really pressing problems we need to solve.

Joey, I love this ESPN article and yes, that is the world I believe we need to see a LOT more of. Beyond sports on this planet, what value does the "blowout" model have at all? I'd also point you to this example that brought major attention from media outlets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODqjUqW3c0U .

I sit my boys down in front of these examples and try to teach them that these are examples of what it REALLY means to be a champion. Also know that if ALL of your examples come from the world of sports, then you're really missing the big picture. Go find the real world engineering examples of collaborative efforts and you'll be closer to what we're supposed to be getting done.

This year our team learned about and began to support local chapters of Engineers Without Borders. All of the college participants that we met talked about the need for them to use a lot less of their technical expertise and a greater need to help in third world situations by utilizing the available materials smartly while building systems others, with far less education, could maintain. Communication becomes even more important than the engineering. Funny, all of these students and professors "feel" great about what they are doing - in fact I'd use the word "fulfilled." If you're worried about how you might "feel" during or after a match, maybe you and your team is focused on the wrong stuff. "Compete like crazy" but, always, always have a sense of why you are really there - especially in the heat of battle.

namaste

Re: Poll:What do you think the effect of G14 will be?
 

I've edited my post to include this.

Inevitably, regardless of how many bullet points are applied, any such program would require some trust by the community, IN the community, to not abuse the system.