Quote:
Originally Posted by dlavery
Heh, yeah, like we aren't going to do that anyway...
And, yes, we have noticed that this has been suggested for at least the past two years in the "So you design the game" threads. And thought of by some others for several years before that. 
-dave |
So... Dave posts in a thread
about the game and no one tries to finagle some abstract meaning out of it? What is the world coming to?!*
*Some semblence of sanity perhaps?
On a more serious note, I don't think "optional" autonomous is very plausible for two reasons. One, is it creates more work for the field (and more things to go wrong). Additionally, if my robot is operating in autonomous, and it's got human drivers blocking me, I'm not going to score. They'll get in the way every time.
Amateurrobotguy, you talk about how its hard enough for teams with predefined positions. Here they get to pick their position. For example, consider Aim High (2006). Let's say that autonomous is at the end of the match, and balls scored during this period are worth 2x what they were during the teleoperated period. So, now you can drive your robot right up to the goal, line up, and then the only thing the robot has to accomplish autonomously is shoot them. That's surely easier, isn't it? Plus those teams who are good at autonomous can show off their skills (and gain a relative time advantage during the match), by being able to be in a larger area, and less precisely lined up when autonomous starts. This gives them an additional gameplay bonus (you can continue to play after your opponents have gone to line up for the autonomous portion of play). Also, in the world of strategy, it makes choices that much harder. Do you continue to block Team X, in hopes of preventing them from scoring, or do you go line up for your autonomous, in hopes of outscoring them? Decisions, decisions, decisions...
Also, I didn't mean to imply that autonomous at the end of the match was my idea, as I'm positive I read about the idea on CD and became a convert.
