Mt. Olive 2014 Footage and Match Length Issue

[Brandon_L]

Originally Posted by Ian H.

I think despite FIRST's growing size, FIRST's volunteer culture means ultimately we collectively have the power to fix problems like these. It's kind of ironic to me that nobody noticed for quite sometime, and so we blame FIRST for the mishap. What about all of the people at the event?

I get what people were saying, this was certainly unfair, but it seems unfair in the same way life is unfair. This doesn't ruffle my feathers too much, it seems like I'm in the minority.

The cause of the issue was a fault from FIRST, a bug in the FMS

[Ian H.]

Originally Posted by Brandon_L

The cause of the issue was a fault from FIRST, a bug in the FMS

Yeah, I get that.

[ehochstein]

Originally Posted by Brandon_L

The cause of the issue was a fault from FIRST, a bug in the FMS

Some would call it a feature, being able to change the match time.

[Ian H.]

What I'm trying to say is I know we pay a lot of money to participate in an event every year, but I don't feel like we're paying FIRST to put the event on, I feel like we're paying as a group to make the event possible.

Yes, I know the FMS has an option to set auto time and teleop time. And it seems like maybe it auto reset to 10 seconds for auto and 120 for teleop, so whoever updated the FMS this year, possibly a volunteer, didn't fix this problem. And then Steven made a mistake not realizing the time was incorrect, I'd assume he's a volunteer. And then, what really gets me is that unlike all of the other times that people complain about 'FIRST', this time all any team had to do to fix the problem was realize there was a problem and notify the FTA like Hallry did and they would have fix the problem.

We all volunteer to do this, because another volunteer messed up we point fingers at the big entity that is FIRST as a scapegoat? You wouldn't use Steven as a scapegoat would you?

[Answer42]

I'll add my 2 cents in here. I like this game. It's simple and to the point. It encourages elegant design, allows low level teams to make a useful robot, and can still be dominated by a team that builds a sufficiently amazing robot. Seeding is definitely weird, and not fair in the slightest due to the nature of the game. But with good scouting and communication between teams the right alliances end up forming anyways. And it's refreshing to see 1 picks 43 instead of 1 picks 2, 3 picks 4, ect. G40 was awful in week one, but reasonable now. Defense is huge, but I wouldn't say it's the meta-game. Both the the finals of CVR and IE were primarily offensive matches. So really. The only aspect that's disappointing to me here is that we're hearing about this mistake from a third party source. First should have addressed this publicly, and I hope we'll see a blog post soon explaining why it wasn't addressed.

[Cam877]

Originally Posted by Answer42

I'll add my 2 cents in here. I like this game. It's simple and to the point. It encourages elegant design, allows low level teams to make a useful robot, and can still be dominated by a team that builds a sufficiently amazing robot. Seeding is definitely weird, and not fair in the slightest due to the nature of the game. But with good scouting and communication between teams the right alliances end up forming anyways. And it's refreshing to see 1 picks 43 instead of 1 picks 2, 3 picks 4, ect. G40 was awful in week one, but reasonable now. Defense is huge, but I wouldn't say it's the meta-game. Both the the finals of CVR and IE were primarily offensive matches. So really. The only aspect that's disappointing to me here is that we're hearing about this mistake from a third party source. First should have addressed this publicly, and I hope we'll see a blog post soon explaining why it wasn't addressed.

I completely agree with you on the game. The assists, even though most hate them, add a whole new layer of strategy to the game and ensures that good scouting and strategy is being done to take an event home.

[cgmv123]

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...21#post1358521

[Akash Rastogi]

Frank addressed the issue. It has reportedly been fixed in the FMS.

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...inst-the-Rules

[Brandon_L]

Originally Posted by Ian H.

Yeah, I get that.

Then why tell us to not blame FIRST, when it is clearly an issue caused by FIRST? Sure, a ref/volunteer/someone could have noticed and corrected it, but at the heart of the issue who is at fault?

More importantly, why are we playing on an untested FMS in a game where "what happens if the only scoring object for an alliance becomes stuck in a disabled robot?" was an afterthought?

Originally Posted by Wiifi

Some would call it a feature, being able to change the match time.

To echo what Scott said, while changing the match time is indeed a feature, when the system boots up/restarts/what not, it shouldn't default to the incorrect settings. That is a bug.

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

By that time the GDC cannot make large changes to the game without ticking off lots of people (see last year's rain of discs)

And I thought bad calls/foresight couldn't get worse then that at that point in time.