[Knufire]

Note that the 2016 ranking system was very much tied to the 2016 game. If you want to apply the same ranking system to future games, you need a game with several different major activities. Applying the same concept to a similar game, such as 2014, might prove difficult (RP for assists, trusses, and winning?).

These are what I look for in a ranking system:
1. Produces rankings that correlate closely to individual robot ability.
2. Simple enough to explain to a general audience who may not be invested in FRC.
3. Universally applicable to different game types, such that FIRST could just use the same ranking system year after year.


Given these criteria, I am a very big fan of the 2015 ranking system. 2016 was definitely fun to participate in but not easy to explain to a more general audience.

I also agree with Caleb on "changing the game" between qualifications and eliminations; however, I see this as a game design issue and not a ranking system issue.