Wow, I’m going to make some new enemies with this post, which is fine by me, I need some new ones anyway. Here it goes, brace thyselves:
#1: XRaVeNX
Claws that grab opposing robot's structure: What if these claws, in the finals, hit a pneumatics line, basically crippling the other alliance? Non intentional, of course, but in effect taking away their chances, if a key robot was the one you disabled. Don’t give me the "there shouldn’t be a weakest link" story, either. You are taking a major risk, and an error could take out the opposing team, permanently.
#2 tinyfarnsworth (again!)
QUOTE BY tinyfarnsworth: “our ideas as a ROOKIE TEAM that could not spend more that 400$ on our robot made simple and effective use of our robot.” END QUOTE
Would'nt a hook to grab a claw be MUCH easier? You guys went OUT OF YOUR WAY to use other robots as game pieces, which I feel is completely against the spirit of FIRST. The chances of your team, ANY team that lifts other robots to damage other robots is far greater than normal play. Gambling with other people's time, money, and resources like that is irresponsible, you could put a team out of a competition, and THEIR 6 weeks would be meaningless, in terms of recognition at the competition. FIRST was not meant to be like Battlebots, but with folks like you, we’ll have Carmen Electra at the Nat’s’ in not time, thanks a lot.
#3 Jnadke (becoming like the chapter names of Catch-22, here)
QUOTED FROM Jnadke: “They purposely added the lifting clause because they wanted a team to do it. As long as you "Handle with care," they'll let you do it. If you drop the robot, you get disqualified. “
So, if the team that gets lifted gets damaged, then they get compensated. DQ gives that team 3 times their own points...” UNQUOTE
Number 1, who are they, and WHY do they WANT you to do this? And why have'nt I met these mysterious people that think risking another teams robot, that you didnt build, to be encouraged and praised? ANSWER THAT?? or can you...?
Number 2, sure, you get DQ’ed, and if the opposing alliances robot is permanently out of the competition, these points are going to do them real good…as they sit in the bleachers. The risk is their, and by gambling, you jeopardize those you play with in an irresponsible manner.
QUOTED FROM Joel Glidden
”IMHO, forklifting other robots (safely) IS a very elegant solution to score points. There are three point scoring resources on the field; goals, balls, and the robots themselves. The great majority of teams have completely ignored the 40 point differential and host of added strategical benefits that come along with forklifting opponent robots.
I don't think this tactic comes anywhere near violating 'gracious professionalism' or the spirit of FIRST if done in a non-damaging manner. I think that perhaps some react to it with hostility because they fear and envy such a potentialy powerful tactic.”
#4 That’s wonderful, disabling other robots is a very elegant solution, that’s what first is all about. The board of director would never be happier seeing 2 robots lifting up the other 2 and running into their endzone. As for strategic benefits, of course, by taking out ½ the opposing team, you’ll get major benefits. (and I didn’t even have to whip out my calculator for that one, har har har!)
I think George180’s got the idea: This sort of thing IS frowned upon, and I wouldn’t be surprised if relations between fork lifting teams, and other teams suffer.
This all reminds me about 2 years ago, when 303 (decent machine) bashed Chief Delphi (awesome machine) at the J&J Mid Atlantic. I wasn’t on the team at the time, but Delphi’s never been back. Too bad, their robot’s are always awesome. Perhaps someone who was there can tell you more. I only watched a video of it, and I cringed, I BECAME ASHAMED OF MY 303 SHIRT, after watching that video.
If your going to play FIRST the way it was meant to be played, good, we want you here. If you’re going to turn it into Battlebots, play that instead. Using other team’s robots I find to be immoral to the spirit of FIRST, and distasteful as a 2nd year FIRSTer. Play the game nicely, get some balls (pun intended) grab some goals, and give the audience a show. I would take no pride in a robot that wins by disabling others. It is in no way, shape, or form, and elegant solution.
For this post, I will say I am intentionally discouraging this sort of behavior. I think Joe Johnson said that this was perhaps the “End of Elegance” in FIRST. With such support for this loophole of gracious professionalism, I now 100% agree with him. Hopefully the acidic nature of this post won’t send anyone over the edge. (ouch, it burns!)
(Someone out there back me up on this one. After this post, I’m going to need it)
--Ben Mitchell
<<Faint hearts don’t win fair lasses>>
|