2014 Lessons Learned: The positive

[IKE]

Originally Posted by ElvisMom

Initially was not sure about the "team viewing area" - in theory it made sense, but in practice I was not sure it would work.

...snip...

I heard the same skepticism from a lot of people, and the first day, it seemed underutilized. By Day 2 though, folks really seemed to get it and utilize it well.
Even if it had been a flop, I really appreciate the proactive efforts towards solving problems exhibited. I think this is a great emphasis for them to be taking.

[Chris is me]

Being able to unbag the robot for demonstrations after ship day was phenomenal. We could immediately show off the beautiful, professional looking machine we had spent weeks making, rather than just talking about it or demoing a partially functional old robot. Big help.

Frank has been an incredible "face of FRC" that has been transparent, honest, and always willing to listen. He is a large part of why I have such hope for the future of FRC.

Chairman's at multiple events was fantastic. Totally changed the game and gave our presenters a chance to improve.

Lots of Championship changes went very, very well. Fourth robot was awesome, awards in division elims were awesome, Einstein was very watchable.

The increasing number of Robot in 3 Days projects and COTS solutions for robots is very nice to see and is definitely raising the competitive floor. A distinct middle tier of robots is now the norm at events.

In spite of RI3D, there was a reasonable amount of design diversity this year which was cool to see.

I'll think of more later.

[Gregor]

Rankings shown on the scoreboard were a nice touch.

In championship elimination matches, the match was "QF 1-1" and not "Match 1" (or whatever it used to be).

Alliance selection results directly from the FIRST website for divisions were a much needed change. See here.

4 robot alliances at champs were a nice addition. Alliances with less overall firepower can use it to their advantage to make changes on the fly.

As much as I didn't like the idea of it at the start, the team viewing area at the front actually worked out pretty well.

I didn't die from dome food, so that's always good.

I liked the involved human player aspect. It wasn't as extreme as 2009, nor was it just shoving disks through a slot. Similar to 2011, I think human players had a good role.

45 pounds pretty much saved our build season, and we only lost one day to snow.

The coat racks at GTRW were an excellent touch, I wish they did that for all events.

The Windsor venue was awesome! Very roomy, loads of space in the pits, and a wide open view of the field.

[Hallry]

Originally Posted by Gregor

In championship elimination matches, the match was "QF 1-1" and not "Match 1" (or whatever it used to be).

Just FYI, this wasn't just for WCMP. They definitely were the new format for DCMPs, and for at least a few weeks of competitions before. Either way, a much appreciated change, and it made it so much easier to immediately tell what match was playing during the eliminations.

[DonRotolo]

Frank. Keeping in touch with his customers, recognizing and addressing issues, even admitting he made a mistake (and making it right).

Keeping the 112" perimeter rule (and not the sizing box).

2 new Districts.

It's a little mixed, but the game. I like how no one robot could win it by themselves, don't care how good you are - you need your alliance partners. But, of course, it made for some discomfort among the powerhouse teams.

FMS. It actually worked this year, hardly anyone had comm issues, what a pleasure.

[Charles Boehm]

Originally Posted by asid61

This about sums it up for me. Last year was a lot less interesting in terms of strategy- you picked up frisbees and shot them. Then you climbed. This year, there are many different ways to play, allowing younger teams to do really well.

Quarter final-1 on archimedes really highlights that point. Nobody had seen the 8th seeds strategy yet(at least I havent), and they upset the 1st seed alliance.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Charles Boehm

Quarter final-1 on archimedes really highlights that point. Nobody had seen the 8th seeds strategy yet(at least I havent), and they upset the 1st seed alliance.

While the strategy may have surprised the #1 alliance, the #8 alliance weren't the first ones to use it. I'm not sure who was the first team to use the strategy, but 2771 did is several times at the Michigan State Championship. 1918 used a variation of the strategy in QF 2.3 at the state championship, too.

[wasayanwer97]

A lot. (Most of these have probably been mentioned already.)

1. Mixed point for most people, but I loved the need to work with your alliance partners and the depth of strategy it provided. 1 game piece is the way.

2. Working FMS. Thank goodness.

3. Honesty and transparency from HQ.

4. Champs webcasting was pretty good quality.

5. Auton length was good. So was the mobility option.

6. The low goal. Combined with assists, there was still an easy way to score well and stay in the game without the need for too much technical finesse.

7. Sticking to the sizing perimeter.

8. Stacking Curie. #CurseGoesPoof

9. No ability for a chokehold, or for 1 bot to solo.

10. Much better kitbot.

11. Multiple event chairman's.

[tStano]

Prolly all been said but:

1. Mostly Working FMS

2. Auton was of a great length(although, this isn't a 'one size fits all' thing, it'll be different next year)

3. Mobility

4. Short field reset = TONS of matches. Awesome.

5. "FIRST is the coolest, freshest, dopest, most amazingest experience in the world."

[Navid Shafa]

Originally Posted by wasayanwer97

2. Working FMS. Thank goodness.

Originally Posted by tStano

1. Mostly Working FMS

FMS/FTP problems have been an issue throughout the season. It was a fairly big issue again at champs.

I would have expected instead to see this in the thread Lessons Learned: The negative

[cdogcdl]

A game with no safe zones and where simpler robots could contribute to scoring. I felt that the lack of safe zones made defense very necessary. The fact that every robot could be involved in offense/scoring but all be doing something different opened the game up to tons of strategy where you could be playing a different part in each match. This game also had very intense moments where tons of game-deciding points depended on a single finishing action (scoring the ball and ending the cycle).

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by Navid Shafa

FMS/FTP problems have been an issue throughout the season. It was a fairly big issue again at champs.

I based my comments on the four events I attended. In all of these there were no major issues related to FMS*

*Well, unless you count the shortened match timer at Mt Olive district - but this was as much a human error as an FMS thing.

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

While the strategy may have surprised the #1 alliance, the #8 alliance weren't the first ones to use it. I'm not sure who was the first team to use the strategy, but 2771 did is several times at the Michigan State Championship. 1918 used a variation of the strategy in QF 2.3 at the state championship, too.

And it was no coincidence that an alliance captain from Michigan selected 1918. If we wanted to beat an amazing #1 alliance, we had to get a little out of the box and we knew all of the capabilities of 1918. When our time to pick came around and our two picks were still on the board, we couldn't believe it.

Even without that strategy (i.e. playing a more "normal" strategy), 1918 was one of the best robots and team on Archimedes. Those guys are great.

On to the topic:

- The awards at the divisional level + streamlined Closing Ceremonies / Einstein matches was awesome. This made it my favorite championship event ever.

- The game was one of the best I have ever seen from a spectator standpoint. The assist rules were a little weird for a first time spectator, but after two matches everyone seemed to catch on. Elimination matches at MSC and CMP were some of the most exciting FIRST matches I've ever witnessed. There were some negatives about this game, but this thread is not the place for that. I've long said that the main focus of a good game should be making it spectator friendly, so I think that this game is a success overall.

- Frank has really changed FIRST for the better. FIRST is really becoming a customer focused organization and that comes from the top down. Nothing is perfect, but they seem to be striving for it.

- The human player involvement for this year was almost perfect. A great team needed a great HP and without that component, a great robot did not equal a great team. But at the same time, the HP didn't take focus away from the robots like in 2004.

[Jill_ls101]

1. Being able to submit Chairman's at multiple events. While our team never really was in contention for this award, being able to have our students go through this process was very helpful. I feel all the students who had a hand in the process were inspired through our efforts. I've seen the change in the mentality of members of our team since presenting and like in all things iteration is wonderful. I felt our presenters learned a great deal about themselves and how to present information in a variety of ways. (without stage fright!)

2. Single game piece game. While there were aspects of this game I did not enjoy, requiring alliance members to work together with one object did a lot more (in my opinion) for pushing the spirit of coopertition than the bridge ever did.

3. Frank. You deserve the free corn dogs. (Shame there never were any in the first place…)

4. Volunteers: At the events I attended (Boilermaker and Queen City), the volunteers I interacted with were helpful, well-informed, and nice!

5. Interactions with other teams: Shout out to teams 4028 and 201 for loaning our team spare air tanks at Queen City. I love that FIRST is an environment where you can work together and depend on future opponents and have there be no hard feelings in the process.

[Christopher149]

Having a power outlet at the drive station. Convenient for those with or without a classmate.