|
Re: Team Update #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldeye
http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1280
If this isn't the GDC changing the game midseason, I don't know what is. If it was a mistake in the rules they could have fixed it two months ago. If the GDC's repeated willingness to change the rules midseason isn't enough of a problem, the fact that they do it to prevent a situation that has happened so rarely and really hardly warrants prevention in any way....
If.
|
The fact that it happened so rarely isn't the issue here. The new rule was made by the GDC to avoid having stacked robots become common. I don't think that the GDC envisioned this as a game strategy - even after ship date. I think that getting 30 easy points by basically doing nothing is not good for the game. The GDC recognized this and put an end to it.
I've asked this before, but nobody has answered:
Would you put your FUNCTIONAL robot on top of another and sit there for the entire match to "earn" 30 points?
If so, then why spend six weeks building a robot that does nothing??? I could do that in a day.
__________________
"There's never enough time to do it right, but always time to do it over."
2003 AZ: Semifinals, Motorola Quality; SoCal: Q-finals, Xerox Creativity; IRI: Q-finals
2004 AZ: Semifinals, GM Industrial Design; SoCal: Winners, Leadership in Controls; Championship: Galileo #2 seed, Q-finals; IRI: Champions
2005 AZ: #1 Seed, Xerox Creativity; SoCal: Finalist, RadioShack Controls; SVR: Winners, Delphi "Driving Tomorrow's Technologies"; Championship: Archimedes Semifinals; IRI: Finalist
2007 LA: Finalist; San Diego: Q-finals; CalGames: Finalist || 2008 San Diego: Q-finals; LA: Winners; CalGames: Finalist || 2009 LA: Semifinals; Las Vegas: Q-finals; IRI: #1 Seed, Finalist
2010 AZ: Motorola Quality; LA: Finalist || 2011 SD: Q-finals; LA: Q-finals || 2013 LA: Xerox Creativity, WFFA, Dean's List Finalist || 2014 IE: Q-finals, LA: Finalist, Dean's List Finalist
2016 Ventura: Q-finals, WFFA, Engineering Inspiration
|