I love the 3-on-3 aspect of competition. In fact, I think this is a great game in general. And I think most people agree with me, because the biggest argument we are having is over the wording of a single rule.
Quote:
|
Is it too hard to follow gameplay with so many robots on the field?
|
It is harder, but not too hard. Most spectators I've talked to really enjoy the competition. From the perspective of team coach, yes it makes the game harder to follow, but that only adds to the fun. It also makes the coach position far more relevant than last year.
Quote:
|
Do you like getting extra driving time and experience?
|
I can't speak for drivers, but my guess is they do.
Quote:
|
Is there more room for game strategies with more alliance partners?
|
Yes, and again this adds to the fun. It also makes the game less predictable, because an inferior team can beat a superior team with good teamwork and strategy. It also adds an extra variable to alliance selection, because you are picking a three-robot team. Some scouts rank robots on compatibility (I do too), but you can't rely entirely on those lists in alliance selection after your first pick. You want three bots, each of which plays their own role in your alliance, occupies their own niche. Your second pick should be to a great extent a function of your first as well as your compatibility ranking.
I will be surprised if FIRST does not carry 3-on-3 over into next year's game.