How many people like bumpers?

[diesel]

I don't know why the Game Designers required bumpers. Well, I do, but I thing it is pointless. Let teams decide if they want bumpers.

[SSMike]

But that's not what the GDC chose to do so you don't really have that option. Personally I do like them and am glad that the GDC decided to make them mandatory. Bumpers are safe and allow for less damage to the robots.

[IndySam]

This year is a race format and just like NASCAR FIRST is requiring very strict bumper rules.

Remember: racin'isrubbin'

[Cory]

Originally Posted by SSMike

But that's not what the GDC chose to do so you don't really have that option. Personally I do like them and am glad that the GDC decided to make them mandatory. Bumpers are safe and allow for less damage to the robots.

I think the opposite is true. I think in 2006 and 2007 they encouraged aggressive and at times destructive play, under the guise of being "protected" from such play by bumpers.

[wilsonmw04]

I like the idea of bumpers but why make the bumpers part of the over all length of the robot for all intents and purposes? The 80" rules makes wrapping around a 40" ball nearly impossible with a KOP frame. (unless you drive it on the short axis)

[Urban Hawk]

I like the rule since it keeps all the robots more protected, besides.... we were planning to put them on anyway.

[Koko Ed]

We used bumpers since FIRST allowed teams to use them. I don't understand why some teams don't use them. It's a free extra 15 pounds and protects your precious toy from those mean old competitors.

[cziggy343]

the only part of the rule that i dont like is that it is added into your total profile... if it wasn't, then it wouldn't be so bad... but we wouldn't use them b/c (at least last year) we made our robot pimped out and wanted to show it off

[DarkJedi613]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

We used bumpers since FIRST allowed teams to use them. I don't understand why some teams don't use them. It's a free extra 15 pounds and protects your precious toy from those mean old competitors.

I agree 100%. Its an added 15 pounds to help lower your center of gravity. Only issue I ever had with it was that it made it kinda difficult to go up the ramp in 2006.

Overall I think bumpers are a good idea. Although I'm not positive they should be required.

[Billfred]

I've been of the position that teams should have the choice. Bumpers make sense in some occasions, and absolutely none in others.

That said, this year bumpers make sense for me. If I'm stopped on the track trying to hurdle, I neither want nor need a robot to plow into me at 16.18 feet per second without at least a modicum of protection. And since FIRST required them this year, I'm certainly not in a position to argue about it now!

[Zyik]

I like the bumper rule personally. Yes it's a little annoying because of R16, but that's really the only downside I can find. Having bumpers on your robot not only allows you more weight down low but also protects you from the other robots that are going to be speeding around the track. They also protect the work you've done on the robot in case the your driver is going to fast and hits one of the walls.

Bumpers also allow you to add a splash of color onto your robot. I love how we have bright orange bumpers every year. If you get creative they can look really nice in addition to being helpful.

[1086wulf]

Bumpers encourage bumping. I think there should be no bumpers. They increase your footprint and really don't do that much. The robots are made out of metal I mean come on what's gonna happen?

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by 1086wulf

Bumpers encourage bumping. I think there should be no bumpers. They increase your footprint and really don't do that much. The robots are made out of metal I mean come on what's gonna happen?

It is what it is.
--
You may have joined FIRST post bumpers. I can remember games before bumpers and metal is not impervious to damage and rough treatment. Neither are the other parts of the robot that are attached to the metal. The GDC members are reflective of what young people on FRC teams aspire to be and they know what they are doing. If they make a rule that says the bumpers are mandatory this year, I would wager it is for good reason and we will begin to understand that reason more fully as the competition season begins to play out and we have 6 robots on the field along with those mammoth balls.

[AdamHeard]

I'm a fan of rough games with lots of interaction (one of the reasons I like this year). I don't like them for the sake of destruction, but for how much more difficult it makes the game objective. Now, I see bumpers as a way to increase the level of interaction without risking destruction.

Combined with the 15 pounds down low for CG, I'd say I'm a huge fan.

[wilsonmw04]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

It is what it is.
--
You may have joined FIRST post bumpers. I can remember games before bumpers and metal is not impervious to damage and rough treatment. Neither are the other parts of the robot that are attached to the metal. The GDC members are reflective of what young people on FRC teams aspire to be and they know what they are doing. If they make a rule that says the bumpers are mandatory this year, I would wager it is for good reason and we will begin to understand that reason more fully as the competition season begins to play out and we have 6 robots on the field along with those mammoth balls.

Jane,
Bet you are right, but why do they have to count in the size of the robot? They don't count in the starting box, why do they count when you are playing the game. Those 3.25-6.5 inches (depending on how many sides of an axis are covered) can make or break a design. My request is simple: if bumpers are going to count in the size restriction, make it count for the starting size too. It would make my head hurt less.