|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: NASA/VCU field problems
Your robots, they all worked perfectly right? Those failures I saw on the webcast, those were my eyes and ears malfunctioning right? Because I don't think so.
I doubt every team came up with the several thousands required to fund their teams either, so they had some kind of sponsors. Your sponsors didn't pay for a buggy robot. They didn't pay for their logo to be sideways all the time, so since it didn't work the very first time, you get one more, if it doesn't work in your second match, you'd better cough up the money for everything on it and refund the sponsors. Give it a break people. You're being ridiculous, honestly, it's not perfect, it couldn't be, it's brand new and this is the first chance to test it. Just as it's the first chance to test your robot in competition conditions. You think your robots are the only systems that behave differently in competition than the shop it was developed in? Seriously, enough with the ragging on FIRST. You say they should have tested it earlier, how were they going to do that? Pre-ship scrimmages? How many of you had completely functioning robots by then? What makes you think a single day would have done that much anyways? Why didn't you test your robots sooner? Didn't have time? Well neither did FIRST. When did you expect them to test this system? Did you expect them to build a bunch of robots and test it? Hundreds of times over while handling multiple other systems, some of them that are arena specific? We don't build perfect robots the first try, they don't build perfect fields the first try, get over it. You paid $6000 to have an opportunity most people wouldn't get. Life isn't fair, and people aren't going to bend over backwards because something got fouled up, deal with it and move on. If your alliance partners had a nonfunctional robot would you demand they paid your regional fees? Would you demand extra points to offset it so the match is 'fair'? I really hope not. It's not perfect, it's not ideal, it's not something I would wish on any team, but it is reality and until somebody comes up with a better plan, we're stuck with it. And by better plan I mean something fully worked out with a solution to all the logistics problems that I bet most of you didn't think about it. When somebody comes up with a better plan, I'm sure the GDC would love to hear it. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Experiences at BattleCry 6 | akshar | Off-Season Events | 7 | 26-06-2005 17:31 |
| 2005 Rochester off season comp ideas and so thread | Alex Cormier | Off-Season Events | 15 | 29-04-2005 11:13 |
| General Notes from GLR Field Team | Btower | Technical Discussion | 3 | 13-03-2005 11:00 |
| Mobile/immobile objects on field | Steve782 | Rumor Mill | 12 | 08-01-2004 04:15 |
| What happens / why do motors stall? | DanL | Technical Discussion | 19 | 21-11-2002 07:19 |