Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me
That's a ridiculous assumption (and in my mind, completely uncalled for). You're criticizing something none of us know anything about because you think it might be like an unpopular rule from the previous year. You don't even know what Coopertition points are.
I've got to ask you where you've read that the definition of coopertition is "punishing the teams that do well" and "rewarding teams who score for their opponents", because I've heard a bunch of people claim "coopertition is scoring for your opponent!" when that goes against everything I've ever heard the word used for. Scoring on your opponent isn't coopertition at all, it was (in 2009) a move motivated entirely for each team's self interest (not getting a <g14>) and had nothing to do with coopertition.
Note: I've always understood coopertition to be fiercely competing on the field, and assisting and working together off the field, going hand in hand with gracious professionalism. If I'm completely off base, someone correct me please.
Maybe you should wait to find out what the award is before you very harshly criticize it...
|
I believe this all stems from a misinterpretation of the award. In my opinion the award is meant to award teams that care more about a fair game, or that go out of their way to help an opponent with technical difficulties (similiar to veteran teams helping rookie teams make their bots functional). Although I agree with ggdoc, that last years "leveling" rule is complete bull, I don't think that the coopertiton award is there to award teams who back down from winning or lessen their abilities to allow other teams feel good about themselves.