|
Re: This year's "game" is a job, not a game
Our team has a "middling" robot - the ones everyone seems to feel get 'left behind' this year. I disagree. This year, for the first time, it seems that we are actually placing where we deserve to be - the middle of the pack. I hope we will do better at our next competition, having had more driver practice, etc., but even if we don't, I really like the new seeding, because a "middling" team gets credit (in terms of points, which increase QA score) for what it DOES do, rather than being shut out from getting any credit just because it's up against a better team. It's really frustrating for a team like ours to work so hard to build a robot that CAN, and DOES, shoot a few balls/frisbees, has a 10-pt hang, can balance on the bridge sometimes, etc., but still gets loss after loss because it ends up paired with similar (or less capable) teams and against more skilled teams. It feels like there is NO reward for all that work. Sure, there is the occasional win, and sometimes we would get that win because of our 'bot, but in our competitions over the past few years, it seems like the downside to a 'win-loss' ranking outweighed the upside. In this year's game, we are racking up points right next to anyone we play with - whether they are the proud owners of a 'toaster' or a total powerhouse.
Also, we get to actually PLAY the game, and have our robot DO what we built it to do (in the Quals, at least - I do understand that we might be asked to 'sit still' or at least 'stay out of the way' if we ever got picked by a powerhouse for the playoffs). We aren't just asked to "play defense" all the time - we get to build stacks no matter who we are playing with. And we aren't getting totally shut down by the other side's defense.
And I totally don't get the "we're losing sponsors because it's not a fun sport to watch" or "hard to describe". Our sponsors help us because of what we're doing for the students, how we're helping them, inspiring them - maybe out of a bit of local pride (we're the only team on our island, and most of our sponsors are local) - I don't think most of them even know what the game is from year to year, and as long as the kids are enjoying the activity, and learning and getting inspired in STEM areas, well, that is what we tell the sponsors and what they care about. I mean, we're not talking sponsors who are really hoping to gain market share because their logo is on a robot, right? This isn't NASCAR or professional sports. No one thinks their company is going to get media exposure because they sponsor a FIRST team, do they? Maybe I'm just living in a different world. We get our sponsors through OUR enthusiasm for the game/activity, not because THEY are excited about the competition itself - is this not the norm?
I do agree that autonomous this year is too much "all or nothing" - it would have been better if there had been a point for just getting YOUR robot into the zone, 2 points for getting a tote or container in, etc., with a BONUS for getting all three (robots/totes/containers). This year's auto scoring leaves a lot to be desired, but I think the GDC will learn from it.
Not sure yet how I feel about coopertition this year. I think the disconnect between having coop points contribute so much toward a high ranking in Quals, and then be completely absent from playoffs, is a bit of a problem. Unless you can get into the top tier (i.e., the "pickers") b/c of coopertition, then there is not much point in doing it, because it is unlikely that a score inflated by coop points will lead to being "picked". I would be happier if the coop task were something that could be used in the playoffs (like the bridge balancing in whatever year that was), and/or if the points achieved were more proportional to the value of the task in playoffs. What if a coopertition bonus were given only if each alliance was able to remove at least one can from the step to their side? To get it at all, red would have to get a can off the step AND blue would too. That could maybe add 10-20 points to both alliances' scores. Just a wild musing...
|