[Keiko]

I think this was very intentional.

I don't see FIRST changing the values either.

This is a game that may not allow powerhouse teams to win every match they play. It's all dependant on their alliance partners. That's why this year the middle to low seeds have been making it farther in the eliminations in comparison to other years. It's also a year where its not so common for the first seed to pick the second seed.

You could argue that loosing due to penalties is discouraging to many teams. But what about the teams on the other side? The ones that are winning?

There are events where the same team always dominates. The creation of the wildcard is proof of that. For teams that may only get to compete in one regional per season, it can be very discouraging to loose year after year. That's discouraging for the students, and ultimately for many of them, to STEM. Winning a regional can make a huge difference for a team. It can kickstart a mediocre team to strive for excellence in future years. If this game is giving a chance for more teams to win, I would say thats a big plus.

On the other hand, teams that have already reached their peak, and are among some of the best, could find very discouraging to loose after all the work and time spent perfecting a robot to play a game which many think is flawed.

It looks to me like this game is giving more teams a chance to win. In a way, this game is levelling out the playing field. Walking into a regional in the past, you may have a good idea who's going to win. This year is the opposite. Its anyones game.

This is a game where your only as strong as your weakest link, unlike other games. It's different, and I believe that it was in the GDC's intentions to have it played this way.