View Single Post
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-12-2014, 20:41
dellagd's Avatar
dellagd dellagd is offline
Look for me on the field!
AKA: Griffin D
FRC #2590 (Nemesis) #2607 (The Fighting Robovikings)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: PA
Posts: 890
dellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond reputedellagd has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Would you like End Game back?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samwaldo View Post
From a drivers standpoint (one who has driven 2011-2014), No end game was interesting. The endgame, meant a clear finish to the match. Without a endgame, there was no clear end, except for when the time ran out. I liked NO endgame, because it forced all teams to focus on the main task/game, instead of dropping the tube/not shooting all loaded balls or discs, and going to focus on the mini-bot/bridge/pyramid.
After experiencing the end game for a few years, I felt that not having one was kinda nice. IMO I always thought the end games just never worked with the main teleop period, always being under or over valued. Its not hard to see why, since in order to balance the amount of points for the end game (usually single action) with the main teleop (usually multiple actions), the GDC would have to have a pretty good idea of exactly how much the average team is going to score in the main teleop, which of course they don't have. I mean, even we don't have that after build season until Week 1 events. Looking back at my time, this is how I think it played out:

2013: "Climb the pyramid" = "Hang from the Pyramid" and get 10 points (Going higher was undervalued for its difficulty)
2012: Co-op bridge and QS points per win/co-op was quite the fiasco.
2011: Mini-bot race overvalued and worth way more than most teams scored in tube points

And back even further there were things as simple as "park here when the match ends and get extra points." I don't know, after designing a robot painstakingly to do complex tasks like pick up and shoot frisbees or fire a foam ball into a hoop, giving teams these points for doing really easy tasks just seems like a detraction from the main teleop.

Now I do see how it allows rookie teams with less experience and resources to still be able to add to their alliance's score, but there are other ways to build this element into the game without an end game. 2014 was a perfect example, with allowing a very modest 5 points for a simple drive forward in auton. Even more so a robot who could just herd balls, but do it well, could be a major contributor to the alliance.

Honestly, I just don't think its necessary. Let teams focus on one element for the whole match. It makes it easier for spectators to understand and enjoy too.

And why not, I'll throw out the ubiquitous "Just my two cents"
__________________
Check out some cool personal projects in computers, electronics, and RC vehicles on my blog!

2016 MAR DCMP Engineering Excellence Award
2016 MAR Westtown Innovation in Control Award
2016 MAR Hatboro-Horsham Industrial Design Award
2015 Upper Darby District Winners - Thanks 225 and 4460!
2015 Upper Darby District Industrial Design Award
2015 Hatboro-Horsham District Winners - Thanks 2590 and 5407!
2014 Virginia Regional Winners - Thanks so much 384 and 1610, I will never forget that experience!
2014 Virginia Quality Award
2014 MAR Bridgewater-Raritan Innovation in Control Award
2014 MAR Hatboro-Horsham Gracious Professionalism Award
2013 MAR Bridgewater-Raritan Innovation in Control Award
2012 MAR Lenape Quality Award

Last edited by dellagd : 20-12-2014 at 20:45.
Reply With Quote