Team Update #1

[gblake]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

...
Vex doesn't have any other competitions as far as I know. ...

Similar to the proper clarifying point Chris made. Let me remind everyone that Vex is a product line and is used in some TSA competitions, BEST competitions, some PLTW activities, and in the RECF's VRC and VRCC competition programs (did I forget any?).

"Vex" isn't a competition.

The RECF is the Robotics Education and Competition Foundation.

Blake
PS: I think Justin hit the nail on the head here http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...4&postcount=29

[Astrokid248]

Honestly, I didn't even know what an FTC robot looked like until last year. My area (Clear Lake/League City) does VEX. The VEX game is usually more exciting than FTC's, and I don't know about the kits, but VEX is fairly easy to work with. The implication (given by Kamen at kick off) that the only way to do well in this competition is to join with an FTC team is a little...unrealistic, and even a little rude. Is it really for inspiration and recognition of science and technology, or is it for inspiration and recognition of Dean Kamen and FIRST? I think by making the minibot rules so rigid (and so bent towards FTC) it is becoming the latter.

[Alexa Stott]

Originally Posted by SteveGPage

* To those of you who have issues with funding, that it isn't in your budget, what about all those teams who post things like - we just lost our only sponsor - the school system just kicked us out of the building and took all our tools and grants - our lead mentor just left and we have no one to help. What do you all say to them? I've read many of your thoughts on what to do to find help, how you encourage them. Unfortunately, you now find yourself in a similar situation that teams find themselves in every year, and yet find a way to overcome that situation.

The lack of funding for those teams was brought upon them by others, not by FIRST itself. This is FIRST basically telling the already financially strapped teams that they might have to spend even more money on equipment for this year's competition. This is different.

[Nawaid Ladak]

Originally Posted by thefro526

Thank the robot gods for an 84" cylinder.

Agreed: To all the people arguing that 2007 designs will be copied. some of those designs may have issues now thanks to different bumper rules now compared to 2007

Somebody should really do a poll on this: i thin the FIRST community is split on weather the 84" rule is a good or bad thing.

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

FIRST. You made a horrible call, you took what was potentially a good engineering design challenge, and turned it into a last ditch effort to save their inferior (to vex) FTC design competition.

It's now a challenge of who can make the SAME minibot lighter. Yay.

Quoted for Truth

Originally Posted by Cory

I have no desire to watch a battle of who sucks less. It's not inspiring to see whether the robot that takes 16 seconds to hang beats out the one that takes 14 seconds to hang. Slow=boring, regardless of whether it's a scenario where it ends up being a buzzer beater.

my thoughts exactly. I have no desire to watch a football game involving two bad teams, even if that game may end up having the most suspense that week.

a lot of those consistent hangers would still make the match exciting. Instead of going for the hang with 20 seconds left, the would go for it with 5 or 7 seconds left

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Tetraman

I am all for everything in this update.

Makes me wonder if they changed it to 87" because of the fact we caught their mistake and they are going to give us the wider spread for their fault, or they actually wanted it to be 87". I mean...87" is such an odd number...Wonder why 87"....

84" is 7 feet.

[sanddrag]

For years, many items have been included in the kit that many teams never used for anything. This is still the case with several items. My team has piles of them. However, this year, they require some very specific parts to compete in a significant component of the game, yet they aren't included in the kit. Go figure...

Why was it even on FIRST Choice, if it's not a choice to use those parts or not? I don't see simply not attempting a MINIBOT as a choice. At least not to be competitive. It should have just been included in the kit for everyone if they insist on requiring those specific parts.

[Radical Pi]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Why was it even on FIRST Choice, if it's not a choice to use those parts or not? I don't see simply not attempting a MINIBOT as a choice. At least not to be competitive. It should have just been included in the kit for everyone if they insist on requiring those specific parts.

There are probably larger forces at work here than just it being needed for competition. What about those teams who have FTC teams already and have no use for a set like that (although I personally would get it anyways). What if they just couldn't acquire enough of them prior to KOP ship date? There's always a reason for this stuff.

[Hawiian Cadder]

this may be completely stupid, but has anyone considered building a solenoid driver? they have significantly more "initial launch" force and with magnets as well as 24 gauge wire a relatively crude one could be constructed.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Hawiian Cadder

this may be completely stupid, but has anyone considered building a solenoid driver? they have significantly more "initial launch" force and with magnets as well as 24 gauge wire a relatively crude one could be constructed.

I think that would probably violate both <R46-B> and <G19>.

Note: before you complain to me about there not being a rule <R46-B>, it's a separate paragraph from <R46-A>. I think that the GDC just forgot to put a B there.

[Justin Montois]

I've read this entire thread and I can see the points people are trying to make and i'm still on the side of "Both rule changes are pretty poor decisions"

The minibot challenge has been greatly diminished. I see a similar thing happening anyway though, whether you had 3 minibots that can all make it under a second and it come down to whoever can hit the button the fastest or it takes all the minibots about 6 seconds and it comes down to whoever can hit the button the fastest. Same challenge, I just would have really liked to see the minibot mechanisms that launch these things.

The 60" to 84" is a mind blower. I have a hard time believing that it was a typo, so even though they have been working on this game since June, all of a sudden a few days into build season 60 jumps to 84....Seems strange. I see the successful teams in 2007 being successful again. Yes I know the bumper rules are different but When you already know your mechanism and arm, tweaking it to fit around the bumper isn't really a challenge at all.

This game went from being a potential favorite to a potential disaster. I say potential because I withhold final judgement until I see it on Einstein. The way these games are meant to be played.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by 340x4xLife

The 60" to 84" is a mind blower. I have a hard time believing that it was a typo, so even though they have been working on this game since June, all of a sudden a few days into build season 60 jumps to 84....Seems strange. I see the successful teams in 2007 being successful again. Yes I know the bumper rules are different but When you already know your mechanism and arm, tweaking it to fit around the bumper isn't really a challenge at all.

The bumper actually makes one design in particular drastically different than it was in 2007. Can't say which, but your team had it.

[Dad1279]

I believe most of us saw the Minbot rule revision coming.

And many of us have competed in Pinewood Derby Races. I consider this challenge very similar. And think about how exciting the pinewood races were.

In fact, if I was on GDC, I'd have also considered specifying a minimum weight for the minibots.

Now let's just hope we don't have to put bumpers on them.......

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

The bumper actually makes one design in particular drastically different than it was in 2007. Can't say which, but your team had it.

Hahahaha Well ONE of our teams that year had it. The other one is looking mighty tempting....

[Hawiian Cadder]

Originally Posted by EricH

I think that would probably violate both <R46-B> and <G19>.

Note: before you complain to me about there not being a rule <R46-B>, it's a separate paragraph from <R46-A>. I think that the GDC just forgot to put a B there.

ahhh, i forgot that applied to the mini-bot as well.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

For years, many items have been included in the kit that many teams never used for anything. This is still the case with several items. My team has piles of them. However, this year, they require some very specific parts to compete in a significant component of the game, yet they aren't included in the kit. Go figure...

Why was it even on FIRST Choice, if it's not a choice to use those parts or not? I don't see simply not attempting a MINIBOT as a choice. At least not to be competitive. It should have just been included in the kit for everyone if they insist on requiring those specific parts.

Id have to agree with this on the minibot kit as it was my thoughts initially as well.
Why not have it in every KOP?