Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetraman
I usually consider the first "Modern" game to be Aim High, which was a year later in 2006.
It's not that big of a surprise to me that many like Stack Attack...but I find it interesting how many want to see the game be upgraded and replayed. I wouldn't want to go anywhere near that game system again...but I would be interested in trying to figure out a better way to play it. I'll make it a side project.
|
One could debate the start of the modern era starting in 2005 with the introduction of the Kitbot as we (roughly) know it and 3v3 play, but no matter.
As for Stack Attack, I think it's because of three things:
1) We haven't had anything like stacking bins on the field in the cRIO era. You might (might!) be able to argue tetras in 2005...but that was eight years ago. It's a fresh challenge.
2) The robots are way different now than they were in 2003. Back then, you didn't have AndyMark (they were just then shaking off the Small Parts era), you had the obnoxious drill motor gearboxes, there were no bumpers, and you definitely didn't have anything like the modern kitbot. With some semblance of stack protection, you take that fresh challenge and make it a
very fresh challenge.
3) FIRST hasn't really had that many games in recent years where there was more than one right answer (you could argue the 4334 and the mailbox dumpers this year, or 469 in 2010...but those were exceptions). With a hypothetical Fixed Stack Attack, you have a lot of answers--arm knock-down, big-sweeper knock-down, stacking specialist, king of the hill control. There are trade-offs to each approach, and that is what has me geeked about the idea.