FRC Blog - How We’re Doing and FIRST Babies

[Mike Copioli]

I think if a survey was sent to drive coaches only, the results would be much different.

[magnets]

Originally Posted by Mike Copioli

I think if a survey was sent to drive coaches only, the results would be much different.

Agreed. The game is actually quite fun, but after a frustrating, FMS and referee error filled match, there is nobody on a team that has been inspired. If anything, kids are discouraged from putting hours and hours of work into FIRST after playing this game.

In fact, I am wondering if there is a single drive coach (with a few years of FRC experience) of a competitive, elimination round, non rookie team that is happy with the game.

[pntbll1313]

Originally Posted by magnets

In fact, I am wondering if there is a single drive coach (with a few years of FRC experience) of a competitive, elimination round, non rookie team that is happy with the game.

I'm sure I am in the tiny minority (especially here on CD) that has actually found this game the most challenging and strategic in recent years. I have had fun devising strategies that get "box bot's" involved in the action. Last year we had a great robot that could win matches by itself. This year we have a great robot as well but we need everyone to do their part. I am easily one of the most active coaches on the floor running to and from alliance driver stations. It's fun trying to choreograph a match, especially because the dynamics change so often with defense. Last year was a fantastic game, (my favorite) however we could simply run cycles, tell our partners to play defense, and win. This year has so much more involved.

Of course there are many bad aspects of the game. Losing a match because of a bogus call, missing assists points, and other things that I'm sure this thread will evolve into as most other threads have lately, are so frustrating when they happen. I agree there are a ton of things that were not thought out and should have been improved with this game. I just thought I should say that I still have a great time coaching it.

This is just my opinion of the game and I know most people (on CD at least) hate the game. Please don't bother trying to convince me how much it sucks, I've already read countless pages of that

[magnets]

Originally Posted by pntbll1313

I'm sure I am in the tiny minority (especially here on CD) that has actually found this game the most challenging and strategic in recent years. I have had fun devising strategies that get "box bot's" involved in the action. Last year we had a great robot that could win matches by itself. This year we have a great robot as well but we need everyone to do their part. I am easily one of the most active coaches on the floor running to and from alliance driver stations. It's fun trying to choreograph a match, especially because the dynamics change so often with defense. Last year was a fantastic game, (my favorite) however we could simply run cycles, tell our partners to play defense, and win. This year has so much more involved.

Of course there are many bad aspects of the game. Losing a match because of a bogus call, missing assists points, and other things that I'm sure this thread will evolve into as most other threads have lately, are so frustrating when they happen. I agree there are a ton of things that were not thought out and should have been improved with this game. I just thought I should say that I still have a great time coaching it.

This is just my opinion of the game and I know most people (on CD at least) hate the game. Please don't bother trying to convince me how much it sucks, I've already read countless pages of that

I really do agree with a lot of what you're saying. I had a fantastic time at our first event as the drive coach. The depth of strategy and quality of gameplay were the best I have ever seen. All three robots on our alliance were contributing and smart members of the team.

My perfect and happy time with the game ended at a second event, where bad calls, field issues, and fms problems ruined my day.

[Aren Siekmeier]

Originally Posted by magnets

I really do agree with a lot of what you're saying. I had a fantastic time at our first event as the drive coach. The depth of strategy and quality of gameplay were the best I have ever seen. All three robots on our alliance were contributing and smart members of the team.

My perfect and happy time with the game ended at a second event, where bad calls, field issues, and fms problems ruined my day.

Same.

[Pi3th0n]

Originally Posted by magnets

In fact, I am wondering if there is a single drive coach (with a few years of FRC experience) of a competitive, elimination round, non rookie team that is happy with the game.

I am a drive coach with (now) 2 years of experience on a non-rookie team that made it to elimination rounds at both of our regionals this year. And I have to say... I LOVE this game! I'm a huge fan of everything strategy-related, so the strategy component of this year's game really excites me, especially compared to last year's game.
So yes, there's at least 1 drive coach who meets your criteria.

I've read lots of ChiefDelphi and I understand everyone's complaints about this year's game. However, I think it's important that we don't be too harsh on the GDC. They tried to be different and innovative! Maybe it didn't work this year... but so what? If all we do is say "You did it wrong! We hate it! We liked Ultimate Ascent!", then the GDC will stop trying new and different things, and the rest of the games we play until forever will be largely the same. And sure, Ultimate Ascent two or three years in a row might be ok... but wouldn't it get old eventually? As long as we ask for different games every year, we'll have to just accept that fact that not every game will be perfect.

There's always going to be someone who's unhappy (As evidenced by last year's polls), but if you're the one who's unhappy, lets please please please not bring down everyone else.

[scooty199]

I don't necessarily believe we're mad at the attempt GDC made. It's a bold attempt, I like that. I love the strategic complexity of the game. If I was mentoring a team right now I'd mention a lot of things.

But the idealized, theoretical way that GDC probably envisioned this game and how it actually plays out are two very different things in my eyes.

As has been said before, sports style games are fun, but remember that modern sports and their rules are backed by decades (Some centuries) of observation.

I also fully support *respectfully* criticizing aspects of the game and GDC decisions. There's a difference. We can be harsh towards the GDC.

[bkahl]

Originally Posted by Mike Copioli

I think if a survey was sent to drive coaches only, the results would be much different.

Couldn't agree more.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Mike Copioli

I think if a survey was sent to drive coaches only, the results would be much different.

Do you believe that the drive coach's opinion is more important than the main or alternate contact? If so, why?

[dodar]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Do you believe that the drive coach's opinion is more important than the main or alternate contact? If so, why?

If the NFL wanted to know the effect of new pass interference rules, would they ask someone from the front office of a team or the Head Coach?

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by dodar

If the NFL wanted to know the effect of new pass interference rules, would they ask someone from the front office of a team or the Head Coach?

Both.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

Both.

Use some common sense man. You wanna know the effect of rules on a game, ask the people who deal with them directly on a constant basis.

And those front office people are only on there because of NFL politics.

[Nathan Streeter]

Originally Posted by dodar

Use some common sense man. You wanna know the effect of rules on a game, ask the people who deal with them directly on a constant basis.

And those front office people are only on there because of NFL politics.

I think common sense was used.

There is much more to the success of an FRC game than whether or not the 4 individuals per team around the field thought it was the best game. How about things like student and team retention rate? How easy it is for "outsiders" to watch? How interesting is it for experienced FIRSTers to watch? Is the field affordable, rugged, and able to be reset quickly? The subjective, "Are students inspired?" aspect? Now, I'm not saying Aerial Assist is the best game by all these measures, but it certainly isn't the horrendous game that some people are trying to pretend that it is.

I am honestly tired of hearing people complain about this game... so I guess I'll join the party of complaints by complaining about the people complaining. This game isn't bad.*

- This game provides a way for simple, effective robots to do surprisingly well. I've seen plenty of robots here in New England, particularly ones made by rookie teams, that were designed to do a limited skill set very well... and they've been quite successful. No, not more successful than the more complicated (and effective) robots, but still enough to do very well in their role.

- You may complain about qualification matches being too dependent on your partners' capabilities, but I've seen the WLT ranking system do a great job at putting the best robots in/near the top. This may be partially due to the district system (high match to # of teams ratio), but it's done a very good job. Good teams win more qual matches, even with the occasional tech foul, delayed pedestal, or inconsistent partner. If qual matches are such crap-shoot how are the best teams at many events able to go undefeated?

- Game pieces are robust and (sufficiently) available. Looking back at Rebound Rumble, Logomotion, Rack 'n Roll, or Aim High with rose-tinted glasses? How about the fact that these game pieces actually survive events and don't vary as soon as "fresh" game pieces appear? Yes they can pop, but I think it's probably happened in our team's 38 matches only once.

- Match turnaround is straight-forward and quick (after the first dozen matches). 'nuff said.

- Matches are strategic... match strategy varies and there are several viable strategies for winning depending on your alliance's composition. You don't need to truss and catch and shoot high and get triple assists. You can choose one or two elements and play to your alliance's strength (although I'm guessing this will decline as you get to higher levels of play).

- Auto has a significant impact on the match outcome, but is by no means a lock or insurmountable obstacle.

So there you have it... a few things that are positive about this game. Try to mix things up and think of some more positive things rather than just seething over the fact that you lost matches over weird calls, missed assists, or feel let-down about how your season ended. No, this game isn't perfect... but neither were any of the prior games and don't expect that to change.

Originally Posted by Madison

However, the field does not work and the referees are not able to credit teams appropriately for accomplishing rudimentary game tasks. Can anyone reasonably refute either of these claims?

I disagree with both of those claims. At the 4 events I have attended the field and the referees have generally done a good job; malfunctions or botched calls have been uncommon, not the norm. Yes, week 1 events were rough around the edges, but that's hardly enough to ruin a game.

Originally Posted by magnets

In fact, I am wondering if there is a single drive coach (with a few years of FRC experience) of a competitive, elimination round, non rookie team that is happy with the game.

I haven't drive coached this year (despite being involved with strategy, scouting, and pit work), but I'm happy with the game, and so are other drive coaches I know.

*So you insist, "Well, that's subjective!" OK, well I can insist it's a good game, you can insist it's a bad game... end of story.

For the record, I too find the subjective nature of many rules frustrating. I too think the refs are over-burdened. I too think this game has flaws... that doesn't mean that the sky is falling though.

[Travis Hoffman]

Here's the Week 5 survey link, my people:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FRC2014TeamSurvey-week5

Wouldn't want anyone who competed last week to feel left out!

[DampRobot]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Here's the Week 5 survey link, my people:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FRC2014TeamSurvey-week5

Wouldn't want anyone who competed last week to feel left out!

Uhh... are you sure they want you sharing this? I was under the impression that they limited the survey to 2/team to try to give their sample a more or less even distribution across teams.