[vhcook]

In my opinion, the mandatory bumpers were a good idea and appropriate for this year's game. Since we have no idea what the next game will be, there's no way to predict whether they should be required again, and I will be reasonably content either way.

It's just another customer requirement. You engineer around it and move on. I strongly disagree with those who feel bumpers take away from the engineering being done. If you do the analysis on needing less structure with the extra defensive padding vs. COG issues, it can result in doing more engineering, not less. So can integration with the chassis. (I really wish we'd spent more design time on quick bumper attachment and removal.)

Given the relative speeds in this game, I can see why the GDC would feel they're necessary. In recent history (I can't speak to pre-2006), the games have been designed such that it was unlikely a robot would spend the entire game moving at max speed on runs the full length of the field -- usually, there would be ore or two occassions for a max-speed dash, with most of the time spent jockeying for position and manipulating of game objects. In this game, extended high-speed runs are a scoring method. A robot can build up quite a bit of momentum if it's been geared for speed (momentum = mass * velocity). They're also a bit harder to steer around obstacles when they're going that fast (although driver practice certainly helps). That naturally results in a game in which speed-bots are bouncing off the field structures and other robots a lot. This might be perceived as more aggressive driving - although I've seen a lot fewer pushing contests than in recent years, so it all depends on what you call aggressive. Having some required ability to absorb impacts has likely reduced the damage to robots and field structures, and is therefore a good thing.