Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexD744
Oh the long bots woe!
|
EXACTLY. Not a fan
at all of #3. I cannot possibly fathom how a rule that so obviously favors one design over another and ties a team's fate even MORE into the "random" match schedule can be permitted to fly. It's not like we longbots can chop our frames down....
At least give teams who get hosed by incompatible alliance configurations another avenue of combating opponents who CAN more easily triple during qualifying. How about making balls scored in the last 30 seconds of a match worth 1-2 points more each? That would give teams an effective way of combating those who choose to triple. Can the scoring system be easily adjusted to accomodate such things?
Also, as a team who has never been "maliciously hosed" by the co-op bridge and has seen the game played as intended at every single event we've attended (3 regionals, Galileo, MARC), I fail to see how eliminating the co-op point concept to cater to the extremely relatively few who've been hosed by "alternate strategies" somehow enhances the game's quality.
I am EXTREMELY disappointed by the combination of these rulings. I do not pay $700 for a premier offseason event to be forced into playing a game that so obviously disadvantages and discriminates against a specific robot design and so radically diverges from the original game designers' intent. I recognize the right of the committee to make such changes, but they must also recognize the right of the paying customers (who had to pay prior to the changes' release) to voice their concerns/criticisms/disbelief that such changes were implemented.
Are the pansy hands-off triple defense rules of the Championship also going to be in effect, such that longbots have essentially zero recourse to directly combat triples if their alliance is incompatible with the maneuver?
Of course, this could also end up being a boon for the longbots, as those overly confident in thinking they can triple (outside of 3 wides) try it without any practice whatsoever, and end up failing epicly as the little old boring double (...or single...or even no balance) earns the victory.... Could be more bad comedy agony of defeat type moments than oh gee wow how epic moments during qualifying if people try to get too greedy. This rule change could also lead to more robot damage due to bridge tips and falls than many pit crews attending offseason events are prepared to deal with. Many teams travel very light.
Unless you are extremely careful in supervising it, you've also just turned your practice field into a train wreck and a likely safety hazard once the match schedules are released. Hope someone has plans to keep that area monitored and under control such that all teams have fair access to it and none dominate its usage. ORRRRR (my preference - the safe and easy and FAIR route) you flat out deny any triple practice on the practice field (before alliance selections) and require teams to have at it without any prior practice together save for any encounters at previous events.
This ruling is a double whammy against longbots - gives wides a decided advantage in scoring points and winning matches, and removes any co-op recourse needed for longs to still keep pace with them in the standings. I would have accepted #2 by itself, but #2 and #3 combined? I cannot view this as anything but a forced competitive disadvantage for my team and others like us before I even arrive at the venue, and that is a very unfortunate reality.