View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-01-2017, 10:38
mrnoble's Avatar
mrnoble mrnoble is offline
teacher/coach
FRC #1339 (Angelbotics)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: denver, co
Posts: 984
mrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why I like the last 2 games--dual challenge levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Siri View Post
My current conjecture is that we simply like the balance between the two tasks better in terms of match effects and design prioritization. This, for instance, is something 2013 arguably really struggled with in the point/complexity difference between 10, 20, and 30 point climbs. This year teams that might otherwise say "but we have to shoot high to be worth it" are saying "yay, passive gear mechanism" simply because of the point potential they're anticipating.
I totally agree that the balance appears much better this year than in 2013. Teams sometimes chose a dedicated climber because they thought it might be a low scoring game, and that climbing and putting their discs into the top of the pyramid would win matches. They turned out to be woefully incorrect, and ended up losing as a result. This year, it seems that both main tasks have the potential to win or lose.

I've been trying to force myself not to say that I still think 2014 had the potential to be the best robotics game ever. Sorry, I can't help it folks, I still think that.
__________________
http://www.angelbotics.com

Remember why you're doing this.
Reply With Quote