Re: Lunacy = Greatest Game Ever
 

its not penalizing.... it to me appears more as a strategy generator than anything. it causes more heated battles. of course i think it is only a fair rule if both alliances have a real time score in their sight. but i think it is a good rule, because it provides the need for a strategic plan

Re: Lunacy = Greatest Game Ever
 

I'd have to agree. It was a challenge of where to place that last tetra. The Championship was won by one carefully placed tetra that simultaneously destroyed a row and created one. Not a single alliance on Einstein went behind the line. The one who placed last, tended to win. My team placed one tetra in the last seconds of F2, with just enough time to clear it before the buzzer. It was a 23-point swing in 2 seconds. (- 1 row for opponents, +1 row for us, +3 points for another tetra for us) And the whole match had been a race to place and own, as 6 of the best teams in FIRST--64, 254, 67, 503, 330, and 56-- did their best to outscore each other, creating such sights as this and this.

Why do something that gives you a 10-point swing when you can get a 23-point swing?

Re: Lunacy = Greatest Game Ever
 

I agree with JVN, I also really liked Triple Play in 2005. I have coached FRC for 12 years now. 2005 was the probably the only year where you could pretty much always find a strategy to win if you understood your opponent and knew how to play.

All of us are faced with the proverbial "death match" some time during the season... this is the qualifying match in which you have two weak partners and you are facing 3 veteran opponents. In most games, you can figure out on paper beforehand that there is basically no way that you can win this one unless the other team screws up royally. 2005 was different, if you played it right, almost every match was winnable. It was a fun game to coach, since timing and diversionary tactics were a big part of the game.

To comment on the original topic of this thread; No Lunacy was not the best game ever, but it was pretty good. It was fun to play, but hard to follow for the audience. 12 things on the field made it crowded even with no stationary field objects. It had plenty of exciting moments, but also a lot of endless traffic jams.

I didn't really like the smooth surface. It took away a lot of the impressive dynamics of FIRST robots, it cost a lot of money, it had many issues with static, it made the game more boring for spectators, and anyone who thinks it somehow took advantage away from veterns is incorrect...if you look at the final season results you will see that there were just as many carry-over winners as in any other year. Last year, 67 and 217 were in the Finals in Atlanta, this year 67 and 217 were there again. Teams that have a process for solving problems will solve any problem that you throw at them. Nothing the GDC will ever do can magically take advantage away from the experienced teams.

I want to play Lunacy on carpet!!!! ( I should have suggested this to the IRI rules committee :) )

Re: Lunacy = Greatest Game Ever
 

I enjoyed Lunacy more than most people did, but it was not the greatest game ever. I am sure it is hard to watch from the outside, but I loved sitting and watching teams go back and forth in this game. When you put good teams on both sides of the field it was always entertaining. This game rewarded you for utilizing every single member of your alliance, but also allowed single strong teams to be successful. This game is one of my favorites, because it was an interesting challenge that required teams to tackle the challenge from many different angles. I think it was a good way to ease into the new control system, having a challenge that was not as hard as previous years, but still unique and interesting.

Re: Lunacy = Greatest Game Ever
 

I would have to say that lunacy was fun ish to build in, but not spectator friendly. Family members and friends said they saw emphasis on human players and a hard score to follow.

2005 is my favored year. Like Eric said, the last few seconds of the match could really swing the end result. Then would come 2004, 2006, 2008, 2007, 2009, 2003. These are all my personal spectator favorites.

Re: Lunacy = Greatest Game Ever
 

I've only seen Overdrive and Lunacy, and a little of the 07 game.

At the Lunacy kickoff, I think everyone kind of had a "what the...?" moment, but as time went on, it became clear that there was more to the game than met the eye.

I didn't like that the end game bonus (the super cells) was almost entirely human player oriented, but other than that, this made a great game. It was less linear, IMO, than Overdrive, despite having less scoring options, because the movement of the robots was less controlled.

Plus, I've always had a weakness for slip and slide movement.