FRC Blog - How We’re Doing and FIRST Babies

[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.