The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game

[JLiang]

So I was at the Airport today during a layover on my way to St. Louis when I happened to chance on meeting one of the head refs also headed towards the game.

I related to him the entire controversy regarding the truss and simplified game and all the fun jazz and shenanigans that were listed above, and asked him what his take was on it.

His response?

"This year's game was designed by a different group of people than previously."

That's right. It was actually really interesting; a different group of FRC Staff did the game this year, which was why they reverted from sensor scoring back to ref scoring, and the game 'felt' different. It also explains the lack of an endgame.

As for the truss, he didn't offer a direct answer, but it seems to be that it was designed simply to resist hits as well as be sturdy. It was simply the best thing they had that was available and durable.

Nothing he said indicated the addition of an endgame, or even that an endgame was intended to begin with and later removed. It's just a different design of game made by a different group of designers, and there's nothing to fuss over.

I'll see all y'all in St. Louis tomorrow, and hopefully we can see some great games without climbing!

[BBray_T1296]

Endgame is revealed!

[DampRobot]

Originally Posted by JLiang

I related to him the entire controversy regarding the truss and simplified game and all the fun jazz and shenanigans that were listed above, and asked him what his take was on it.

His response?

"This year's game was designed by a different group of people than previously."

That's right. It was actually really interesting; a different group of FRC Staff did the game this year, which was why they reverted from sensor scoring back to ref scoring, and the game 'felt' different. It also explains the lack of an endgame.

Well, I guess that's the reason why this year went the way it did. Can Frank make sure to get a lot of real FRC vets onto the GDC next year? You know, people that actually know what makes for a good/bad game?

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by DampRobot

Well, I guess that's the reason why this year went the way it did. Can Frank make sure to get a lot of real FRC vets onto the GDC next year? You know, people that actually know what makes for a good/bad game?

If this is true (I find it hard to believe that the group was entirely different, and that nothing was lost in translation between JLiang, this head ref, and whoever he talked to), I think that the "new" and "old" groups can both bring something to the table. Yes, this game has a couple of major flaws, but I don't think anyone can deny that there are other areas where it is strong.

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by DampRobot

Well, I guess that's the reason why this year went the way it did. Can Frank make sure to get a lot of real FRC vets onto the GDC next year? You know, people that actually know what makes for a good/bad game?

FWIW, I think that other than the problems with reffing and the pedestals this is the best FRC game of recent memory. It's certainly far more interesting than Ultimate Ascent or Rebound Rumble.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Oblarg

FWIW, I think that other than the problems with reffing and the pedestals this is the best FRC game of recent memory.

And I would say that the major problem with the reffing was that the refs were understaffed and overworked--and everything was a judgment call.

Now if only there'd been 4-6 scorekeepers and 4-6 refs at each event...

[David8696]

Originally Posted by EricH

And I would say that the major problem with the reffing was that the refs were understaffed and overworked--and everything was a judgment call.

Now if only there'd been 4-6 scorekeepers and 4-6 refs at each event...

Apparently, that's just what they're doing this weekend. There'll be 10 refs for each field, with 8 of them active a game. Imo, this game as played at champs will be the best game in FRC history, even better than last year.

[StillDefective]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

Endgame is revealed!

I should really learn to stop clicking on YT links on CD...

[Jon Stratis]

Well, now that Champs is over, does that mean IRI is going to reveal the true secret end game to us all?

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by JLiang

So I was at the Airport today during a layover on my way to St. Louis when I happened to chance on meeting one of the head refs also headed towards the game.

I related to him the entire controversy regarding the truss and simplified game and all the fun jazz and shenanigans that were listed above, and asked him what his take was on it.

His response?

"This year's game was designed by a different group of people than previously."

That's right. It was actually really interesting; a different group of FRC Staff did the game this year, which was why they reverted from sensor scoring back to ref scoring, and the game 'felt' different. It also explains the lack of an endgame.

As for the truss, he didn't offer a direct answer, but it seems to be that it was designed simply to resist hits as well as be sturdy. It was simply the best thing they had that was available and durable.

Nothing he said indicated the addition of an endgame, or even that an endgame was intended to begin with and later removed. It's just a different design of game made by a different group of designers, and there's nothing to fuss over.

I'll see all y'all in St. Louis tomorrow, and hopefully we can see some great games without climbing!

Now that the season is over, I will interject here.

This isnt the original game that was intended.
If what you are saying is true about the scoring, I think this year above all others indicate that we need to change/improve it due to the hundreds of missed assist points that alliances did not earn.