Quote:
Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes
TNA is very interesting to me. I'm still pretty on the fence if I would prefer it changed or not.
However, I find it hilarious that the game piece is named LITTER in a recycling themed game. If these rules are kept the same, here are some things you might hear at competition this year:
"We only want to litter if you litter as well"
"WHY AREN'T THEY LITTERING!"
"Wait, I forget, were we supposed to litter just now?"
"I can't believe they didn't litter."
"You said that you were going to litter and you didn't, we're going to cross you off our pick list now."
"There's only 30 seconds left, quick, litter as much as you can!"
|
See now this is why I love this. Did anyone consider how funny "Year of the Noodle Agreement" sounds out of context?
But in all seriousness I think there is something inherently GP about two opposing alliances agreeing to give each other points. Isolate that, "Red and Blue alliances agree to give each other points".
The other angle is that this is entirely not the point of the game as stated above. However I don't think it is against FIRST values for the reason I stated above. Also could the GDC really miss this? Yet I do think it should be done away with. At this point it is clear that between teams who don't know about this, do know and don't want to, and do know and do want to you will have a lot of salt and confusion.