View Single Post
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-05-2003, 16:15
Andrew Andrew is offline
Registered User
#0356
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 393
Andrew is a name known to allAndrew is a name known to allAndrew is a name known to allAndrew is a name known to allAndrew is a name known to allAndrew is a name known to all
The KIT rules were outstanding. This year's robot build phase was a lot less stressful due to the elimination of many of the quirky additional parts restrictions.

Areas for improvement:
1. Better rules governing springs.
2. Enforce the "light visibility" and the robot team numbering rules.
3. Add McMaster Carr to the list of vendors

According to all of our on-field people, the game was a blast to play.

Some matches were exciting and fun to watch. Some weren't. I think this falls onto teams' game play more than onto the game design. I saw matches play out exactly the way the game designers intended, and those matches were awesome.

Autonomy was superb. It will get better each year as teams develop technology. The new electronics rules allowed teams to include sensors that had not been considered before. FIRST should include the Grayhill mechanical encoder in the KIT (or some other plug-n-play wheel rotation measurement option). Measuring wheel rotation will become essential in autonomy of the future. Using the optical sensor requires teams to design a custom circuit for pulse counting, which is probably beyond the grasp of many rookies. Unless IFI gives us access to the BS's counter?

Giving the human player access to the playing field was a bold move. I would love to see this expanded. Although putting a human player in a cage in the middle of the playing field is probably too extreme.
Reply With Quote