Quote:
Originally Posted by StevnIndustries
Echoing a whole bunch of other people:
|
Apparently I'm not one of them
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevnIndustries
1. Not getting penalized for being good! (Is your boss going to punish you for blowing away the competition and making the company a lot of money?)
|
I've said it before, and I'll say it again ... That rule is not a penalty, it is a condition. Teams need to pay attention to that condition and make a decision as to if it's worth it or not to 2x or 3x their opponents score.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevnIndustries
2. A game where the robot is more important than the human player (isn't this the FIRST Robotics Competition?)
|
FIRST is about people and inspiration, not robots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevnIndustries
3. A game where we can unfold again! (I understand why they did it this year, but the games were a lot better when we could unfold.)
|
On this, we completely agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevnIndustries
4. A game where autonomous and the end mode matter more. (This year, autonomous and the end mode amounted to "let's run away so we don't get score on more").
|
I'd like to see this as well, however the last few times that the endgame mattered people complained that it was worth too much (ramps in '07, hanging in '05).
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevnIndustries
Definitely seemed like this year's game was meant to even the odds between rookie and veteran teams.
|
really? Then please explain 67 and 217 dominating their tournements. This year threw a curveball at the veterans, true ... but it, in no way, leveled the playing field, nor should the GDC try and level the playing field. IMHO