Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gdeaver
I'll go with Lavery's wish to restrict the materials and methods. Give the students a box of raw materials that includes all permited parts. This will stress thier brains instead of the teams pocket book.
|
I disagree.. I don't want to see cookie cutter bots. Although, the financial advantage for a "kit bot, and that's what it would be.. a kit bot, would be a good thing.
But still.. I don't like the idea of a "kit bot".
Take this year for example, I was glad that FIRST offered the kit chassis for teams to use but I would HATE to see the mandatory implementation of that chassis alone for every team. I personally hated working with the kit chassis for the simple reason of loose nuts and screws and washers to affix things together with. When crunch time comes in the pits, a neat robot (custom machined by your team) helps you and loose hardware that is hard to work with hinders you.
While something may be said about keeping the rules fair and making robots uniform for fair play, I think that weight, and size restrictions make that possible.
As for rule changes. I agree with Billfred.. I want to see what teams want to do with the shipping containers and other "currently non kit" things that our parts come in.
I mean c'mon.. we let that tape measure rule slide in 2002 for the reason of "we wanted to see what the teams would do with them." ie: explore creativity.
Why not do the same and make up for that horrible idea for legality of tethers announced so late in build way back then by letting the same apply for the packing materials. But this time let it be known the rules of that on day one of build.