[archiver]

Posted by Tom Wible.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]


Coach on team #131, chaos, from central high school manchester and osram-sylvania.

Posted on 7/17/99 9:00 AM MST


In Reply to: you make the call... posted by Joe Johnson on 7/16/99 5:43 PM MST:



I as many of you know I have weighed in on this topic before and created quite a stir.
I agree that strategies based on tipping are not in the spirit of F.I.R.S.T.. Look at the majority of the robots out there and you will see robots designed to carry out the tasks that the game required.
All the while maintaining a low center of gravity, and maximizing traction for PUSHING. Some may have even decided to incorporate a device to BLOCK an opponent's basket from raising.
Now it seems that some teams were able to use thier 'floppy picker' for another purpose, like grabbing onto baskets, and then pulling over other robots. This in my opinion is tipping. Also crossing the line
IMHO are robots that threaten tipping by pushing on another robots high point to hold them at bay.
The result of the referee's not calling these tactics are that most teams will design their robots to be more aggressive. I though we were supposed to win the matches by offensive tactics. Raising the most floppies,
getting control of the puck, etc. Attacking other team's robots, and inflicting damage creates a lot of bad feelings. I think the Bengi-Bot explanation sums it all up.
Basket BLOCKING is OK, robots battling for the puck may be toppled IN THE PROCESS, belligerent attacking is a no-no, intentionally damaging another robot(assuming the other robot was reasonably robust) is a no-no.
You can believe me, as a result of the allowance of aggressive attacks on robots, next year's teams will be focusing on keeping their robot alive, and less on designing reasonable mechanisms to carry out the tasks that the game requires.
Did you really think that teams would build a basket that could survive an attack, just to raise a couple of pounds of floppies? I am sorry to say that I think the integrity of the game has been compromised here.
I am thinking now,(going into 2000) that our team will have to take the rules with a grain of salt. Build it to play, but incorporate devices which may cross the line, and see if we can get away with using them for 'getting on the puck'.
It doesn't take much imagination to come up with a few tricky ideas. Our team this year did none of that, proud to say, but I feel that many will. I am still a firm beleiver in the spirit of F.I.R.S.T., play like your grandmother were watching.

Tom Wible
Team C.H.A.O.S.