Quote:
Originally Posted by ideasrule
I know that rookie teams are fairly small, but it only takes one competent programmer to write all the code in teleop and (at least this year) write a successful autonomous. It takes much more than one person to machine the parts and assemble the robot. If a team can't get one competent programmer, there's something wrong with the recruitment efforts.
Currently, teams with great mechanical skills or great strategies dominate the competition. Why shouldn't teams with great programmers be rewarded as well?
|
Uh, I agree with you, great programming teams should be and are quite obviously rewarded just like good mechanical bots. But to continue your analogy, teams can still build the basic kitbot and compete, all I am saying is that you need that same level of head start if you are going to tackle this full auto as a game challenge. This goes back to the needing canned algorithms thing.
And as for recruitment efforts and finding competent programmers let's remember that not everyone has the resources, contacts, or interest and recognize that not every team can get a competent programmer all the time. I live in the real world and there isn't enough time in the day sometimes. As it is, our team does have one competent programmer and its the mentor your chatting with right here. :-) I can name 6 teams in my immediate area that don't have the luxury of a dedicated programmer and they get help where they can. I just think when setting up game designs, the GDC does remember to give a little consideration to smaller teams (which I would be willing to bet is the vast majority of teams, just not the powerhouse known teams) and as such I don't expect to see fully auto as a requirement anytime soon.