Quote:
Originally Posted by waialua359
Brian,
I can see your point........although not saying I agree/disagree with it.
Our program has the resources to build 2,3,4 or even 5 robots if we really wanted to. But we dont have the manpower, passion, or time to make even 1 practice bot at this time.
It also doesnt bother me that other teams do and have a lot more practice/refinement time than us. My body needs a break, my family needs me at home more often, and my day job needs attention after a long 6 weeks and all the preparations leading up to it.
I think the spirit of the build season is as you have described to create an even playing field with respect to time.
But the reality is, over the years, more and more teams have access to better equipment, better design support/capabilities, and more experience to do a second robot while competing in more and more events.
|
Actually, the point I am making is that a team like yours DOESN'T have the resources to make two bots. Manpower is a finite resource just like time is. The old team I was on was large enough, and had enough skilled mentors, that we could work just as productively in tandem on two different robots. We had the money, the materials, and the manpower to do it.
FIRST's ultimate goal however is to create competent and impassioned students, and I am not sure that giving teams who have amassed "access to better equipment, better design support/capabilities, and more experience" an advantage is the best way to accomplish this.
To be fair, I understand that those teams who work the hardest and fight to become successful deserve that success. I think showing students that in reality hard-work brings access to better equipment, design, etc. is a positive thing. I don't, however, think that because they are so successful and large that they should get to continue testing and tinkering on-robot when everyone else is barred from that by their team-size, money, or other factors.