[Jon Stratis]

From what I've seen, I think command-based is easier to use for "simple" stuff. Being able to use command groups, having the built in sequential/parallel functions makes it pretty simple for teams to get fairly complex behavior from their machines.

That said, the implementation of command-based, command groups, and the like does make doing some stuff harder...

I mentioned it in another thread a while ago, but to reiterate... our climbing sequence was really easy to create as a command-based sequence - each step followed the next, and we ended up at the top of the pyramid. However, we encountered some difficulties adding more complex behavior to the sequence. For example, how do we tell it to stop the sequence halfway through and restart? How do we tell it to back up one step? In the end, we determined that adding these behaviors was something we didn't have time to do (including testing to make sure they worked as intended with no side-effects!). As a result, there were a couple of matches this season where we were unable to successfully climb.

Now, if we had set this up iteratively, it would have been a little harder initially, as we would have had to create the sequential/parallel structure we used, using internal variables and conditionals. However, it would have been very easy for us to then manipulate those variables to adjust our position in the sequence.