I don't know exactly how to put into words how that change feels to me. It's almost catering to a certain robot design and leaving every other robot out there that has won events in the traditional game out in the cold because they didn't design their robot perfectly enough to play IRI.
If these rules were in place at the beginning of the FIRST season, you'd find very few long-bots at all, since being able to balance 3 robots at any time is worthwhile enough to design a small robot from the get-go. Additionally, you'd find fewer teams that go for only the 2-point basket, as that 1 point less each score isn't worth it when obtaining the maximum score is so critical.
There is only one reason I would like to think this change was made for, determining for the GDC whether or not the Coopertition points would make a difference. If that's the reason I say go for it. But otherwise it looks like the only way to make top 8 is to go undefeated, which even in the event where "the best teams should win" doesn't stack up, as FIRST has always been "The best alliance should win".
What ever happened to the Money Ball? It was a very well received component.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Baker
I vehemently disagree.
All these changes do is alter the method that teams are ranked at the end of the qualification matches. Scoring for the Elimination matches are exactly the same as they have been for the entire season. I would contend that we (the IRI committee) changed this game less than previous seasons. Point values in the finals are the same. Hybrid mode values are the same. No rules regarding robot interaction have changed. The only thing that has changed is that we removed a method for ranking that was a robot task that was not ever used in the finals.
Andy B.
|
The problem is that teams are given randomly generated allies in qualifying rather than in elimination matches where having the right alliance is something a team can build. If Team 0000 is forced into battle with two teams that are unable to complete at an even higher standard than normal, yes Team 0000 can move on to their next match and are still allive in the competition, but their hopes of being a seeded team are done and over in just one loss. With Co-op points, there is the opportunity, granted not much but still the opportunity, that they can bounce back and make top 8.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BJC
The point of qualifications is to see who is the best. If the system worked perfectly the best 8 robots would be 1-8 every time. The Co-op bridge allowed an avenue for teams who were not the best to seed higher than teams who were better than them. Some people liked it because the powerhouse teams didn't always seed 1-8. You say your team would have no chance if they went to IRI without the co-op bridge. That may be true with your current robot, however, every team has the opportunity right now to work on their robot to their heart's content. If your team was going there would be nothing stopping you from making your robot more competitve so that you could rank higher.
Of course, these are only my opinions. Feel free to disagree with me, its certainly an interesting topic with several points of view.
|
I'd argue that the point of qualifications is not to see who is best. Elimination matches are to see who is best. The point of qualification matches is to earn seeding points and be ranked based on your robot's and your ever changing alliance's results. Why are we punishing teams that can make it to a top 8 but are just inferior against the other robotics teams? You have every right to turn a team down - it's part of the competition and we saw it a lot this year as "lower" power teams are passed up because other alliance captians bet their skills can be utilized on their own with their own alliance rather than with them. Again, why punish teams that can make it to a top 8? Is it just because they aren't "good enough"?
And yes, you are very right that our team can make any and all tweaks we want to better our robot and ensure a higher competition robot - that doesn't mean the finished product will be that way, or that we would have the money and resources to pull it off, or time allowed by our school to use the shop facilities during the summer.