View Single Post
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 23:16
Bill_B Bill_B is offline
You cannot not make a difference
FRC #2170
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,099
Bill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond reputeBill_B has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Thoughts on CoOpertition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Compton View Post
So much has been written, well thought out, pro and con, trying to parse GDC intent, effectiveness and outcomes. My thoughts are simple and clear to me, and there are only two:

1. If my alliance wins 19-0, my team seeds less well than if we lose 25-0. At some fundamental level, a system that allows that is grossly defective.
In both cases the winning alliance has FAILED to help the other alliance have a better showing in those matches. For that failure they are not awarded seeding points purely for their victories. Most of the objectors to the coopertition seeding structure have focused almost solely on the robot performance on the qualification fields. If, before that 19-0 win, some part of the alliance had helped (cooperated to allow) the other one score better, their resulting seeding would be improved, right? That help can be in the form of strategy advice or mechanical design improvement, or both. Argue the impracticality or even impossibility of that level of help, BUT that is closer to the spirit FIRST is trying to incubate, nurture and harvest from the various teams involved.

Instead of picking apart this year's seeding method, I'd rather see some thought devoted to a way to award seeding status to those alliances or teams that can be verified as having positively helped their opponents during qualifications. If everyone in the pits opens their crates and shifts directly into eliminations mindset, we're not so far from the battlebots label being assigned to us by a public that doesn't know better. If a potential alliance partner doubts your ability to play a rock'em sock'em game, just invite them to a personal demo on the practice field to prove your "robothood." Or offer a video showing your robot's abilities. I saw a lot of flat-screen displays in the pits; plenty of opportunity for mechanical boasting via electronics. The need for demonstration during qualifications will not suffer for being moderated by seeding considerations.