Quote:
Originally Posted by Anteprefix
This is exactly what 1678, 254, and probably many other teams did to ensure that they would have competent alliance partners during quals. While this might not be a feasible option for every team, I do feel that forcing teams to help other teams improve their robot and code helps create strong partnerships. Many of our mentors now adore the rookie teams that they have "adopted" and are striving to keep in contact with them to help them in the future. I think that, intentionally or not, the assist point aspect of aerial assist helped transform the culture of our team, and possibly many others.
|
The irony with this game is that for a game intended to help out the less fortunate teams, all it really did was screw over the middle of the pack.
The powerhouses will always find a way to win. If you're talking about teams as excellent and dedicated as 254, 1678, 971, 33, 2337, etc, they'll find a way to win even if the game requires them to bake a cake in the middle of a match. Because they have so many resources and so much experience, they'll be able to come out on top almost no matter what the game is. And I think that is a good thing. Better teams should be able to win more matches.
What was bad, though, is the fact that this game screwed over a lot of upper-middle of the pack robots. A team as OP as 254 can score their way to victory even paired with two kitbots, especially if they have the resources to get these teams running well before a match. A more middle of the pack team (yes, like 100) can't mentor seven or eight rookie teams over the course of the weekend until they work well. We love to help out, but we barely have enough students to fix our own bot. As such, were stuck in matches where were held back by an inbounding robot that takes 30 seconds to spit the ball out, or by two "partners" who can't drive to save their lives. For teams like 100, how many qual matches you won was basically a function of how bad your worst partner was. We simply can't help everyone we play a match with, even though we'd love to.
Helping the rookies succeed is great, and it's something that a lot of teams prioritize regardless of the game. I remember helping the rookie team next to us get their frame legal and fix their bumpers at Davis in 2013, giving a rookie team our kit bot for CalGames 2013, and getting our rookie partner at 2013 CalGames working well enough that we made the finals. Why did we bother to do these things when we might have been able to win "independently" of the rookies? Because making these teams more competitive can help you in any game. And, at a more basic level, helping out the new kids on the block is part of what makes FIRST FIRST.
What isn't good is the whole "bringing the bottom up" thing that FIRST tries to push on us through the game from time to time. Remember the new driving surface in 2009 that was supposed to level the playing field, or the Coopertition points in 2010 and 2011, or the Coopertition bridge in 2012? Those were all attempts to bring the bottom up, and really did nothing of the sort. All they seemed to do was bring the middle down, though muddling strategies, obscuring the true quality of robots in the rankings, and generally making competitions a pain.
I love helping rookies. But I don't like it when games try to push helping rookies on us. It just makes the games lower quality, which inspires everyone less.