|
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
All this talk of how to circumvent the rules makes me wonder if people are missing the objective here. I've heard and read repeatedly from the folks at FIRST that the rules are there to provide guidelines on how to play the game and should not be interpreted as an invitation to find ways to circumvent them. While the ideas proposed are all good and sound and would probably result in three bots 'on a balanced bridge' it is clearly not the intent of the game.
I hate to be Negative Nellie here but I strongly believe in letting the intended game decide the results and not a supposed loophole in a set of rules. We are not a bunch of laywers looking for a loophole to get an advantage over others. We are engineers who are supposed to come up with elegant solutions to a problem.
Just my opinion - for what it's worth...
|