2015 Lessons Learned: The Positive

[trumpthero786]

Originally Posted by mrnoble

The referees generally don't need services for PTSD as a result of their volunteer work this year, unlike 2014.

I don't know... Noodles to the face can be frightening

[Sunshine]

Lack of size restriction on the field. Hope this stays.

[Jared Russell]

• 8 alliance Einstein was awesome.
• It was cool to see some very effective robots from outside of North America throughout the event and on Einstein.
• The game presented some interesting technical challenges during design and build.
• Great diversity in robot design this year owing to liberal sizing rules.
• The rules were for the most part very well written and there were few ambiguities compared to other recent seasons.
• The conference portion of the Championship event had some really interesting talks and I think many teams found it useful.
• Using Qualifying Average as the first order sort seemed to work well at seeding teams according to their ability, as long as the number of matches was sufficient.
• Despite the number of teams and general level of crowding, the volunteer staff was able to adjust on the fly to fix traffic jams and chokepoints, and helped to cope with the scale of the event over the course of the weekend.

[Koko Ed]

I Love! LOVE! LOOOOVE! having 8 divisions and eight alliances on Einstein! It was so much fun and so exciting. I wish FIRST would do this forever!

This year may not have had the best game but these were some of the coolest robots I have ever seen produced!

Volunteer food was awesome at most of the events I attended.

I have nothing but total love for my fellow volunteers. There is no one else I would willful permanently damage my body through will self imposed torture than every single one of you! I miss all of you guys already and I can't wait to see you in the off season!

[mrgoldtech]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I Love! LOVE! LOOOOVE! having 8 divisions and eight alliances on Einstein! It was so much fun and so exciting. I wish FIRST would do this forever!

I also love the new fields! I especially love the scientists they chose to honor, such as Grace Hopper and Nikola Tesla!

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I Love! LOVE! LOOOOVE! having 8 divisions and eight alliances on Einstein!

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

It was so much fun and so exciting. I wish FIRST would do this forever!

I think the shock to the system in terms of robot design paradigms was a net positive. I like that we're now being kept on our toes the next couple of years in this department. There were elements of the game this year that are worthy of being placed into the melting pot of FRC game design, whether or not a full concept similar to Recycle Rush should ever see the light of day again (Magic 8-Ball says: No, pls)

Growth of the district model is also a good thing. Like with robot design, game design, or team building, it will still come down to execution.

Personally on 422 we removed a lot of negative influences that caused some short term negative effects on performance but will enable us to be a stronger organization in the long term. We didn't play as well as we did last year but everyone finished the season with higher spirits and with stronger determination than last year, and that outweighs the negatives out of my control.

[dudefise]

The new rules allowed a lot of new and unique designs, some totally out-of-the-box.

Teams could focus on precision rather than brute force, leading to more elegant designs and driving.

Using average scores in Qualifying helped make seeding more accurate (though I disagree with its use in Elim, also defense would make this difficult)

Wildcard rules good for many teams attending events with several "powerhouses", allows more good but not quite dominant teams to make WC.

[Qbot2640]

The later start for practice matches at Regionals made Thursday a much more effective day - you could actually make the changes or fine-tunings you needed to, without worrying about missing practice matches.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Qbot2640

The later start for practice matches at Regionals made Thursday a much more effective day - you could actually make the changes or fine-tunings you needed to, without worrying about missing practice matches.

And from an inspection/ref standpoint, we actually had TIME to get people to their matches, get any briefing/training out of the way, and more to the point, there were an awful lot of robots out there with colorful stickers in the first or second match... that stayed for the third or fourth... You get the picture.

[Rachel Lim]

- Seeing the amazing designs that came out of the relaxed rules. I will never forget my awe that night when I first saw 148 reveal of Batman and Robin, or the days that we watched webcasts of GTRC and saw 1114, or seeing the matches that 254 played at SVR. I'm not sure if it came from this being my first year really paying attention to the game, or if the gap truly was larger this year, but I loved seeing what some teams came up with.

- Getting proof that drivetrains really are about implementation, not specific type. (And that WCD can win any game.) We did mecanum this year, and although it was interesting, it's not one I'm particularly interested in repeating...

- Less confusing fouls. They still happened, and there were still some I don't understand (like yellow totes falling over the step), but overall it was an improvement from last year.

- The removal of bumper rules. Numbering wasn't always great, but it was usually easier to read than looking at bumpers last year. Plus then we didn't have to find someone willing to make them.

- New wildcard rules.

- The emphasis on practice. Consistency of stacking, manipulation of the chute door, dealing with noodles (both driving over and throwing), and other things made driver practice really, really important (not saying it usually isn't, but consistency this year was really key). It's a lesson I hope we learned.

---

These are the things I'm either still divided over, or unsure whether they're really "positive" experiences, but I wanted to mention:

- Less dependence on alliance partners to seed high or do well in general. Perhaps way too little.

- QA ranking. On the one hand, I did find it more fair and a better way to identify the top teams than WLT. On the other, it made me feel like we were constantly competing against everyone, and that if others messed up it was a chance for us to seed higher.

- 8 divisions at champs. It was really cool, and we were able to watch two fields at once, but it also made it seems like which division teams ended up in played an even larger role. Anything is better than split champs though.

- Having it to compare to Aerial Assist. I started FRC in 2014, and even though I've read of the other ones, these are the two I know well. It'll be interesting to see what I think next year after having these two extreme games.

[Jardanium]

I really liked the idea of the "engineering challenge" that Recycle Rush created. Totes and Recycling Containers were difficult to manipulate, (as our team soon found out) and seeing the creative solutions people came up with at the Week 1 event I attended was great.

[sanddrag]

I actually liked the game, and the lack of defense. It allowed my team to take risks in the design and manufacture of our machine, that we would not have in any previous game. This years rules created a type of game play where there was a heavy focus on the mechanisms, and we were able to get back to a real engineering challenge rather than just crashing boxes on wheels into each other. This game more closely modeled industrial automation applications than most games of years past, and for that reason, I like it.

Also, not having to make bumpers was a hugely popular and favorable change.

[rsisk]

The extra teams and fields were handled well from what I saw and experienced.

Division playoff pits in the center of the arena were a great idea

Inspections went extremely well considering the number of teams. I know Hopper which I inspected on ran very smoothly.

No bumpers! Best thing to ever happen to the build, the game, and inspection.

[buchanan]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

I actually liked the game, and the lack of defense. It allowed my team to take risks in the design and manufacture of our machine, that we would not have in any previous game. This years rules created a type of game play where there was a heavy focus on the mechanisms, and we were able to get back to a real engineering challenge rather than just crashing boxes on wheels into each other. This game more closely modeled industrial automation applications than most games of years past, and for that reason, I like it.

I agree 100%. Engineering is fun and exciting. It does not need to be shoehorned into the contact sport model to be made so.

Yes, making a robust, survivable robot is an engineering challenge too, but it's a relatively low order one, and tends to be the same from one year to the next. This year was a rare opportunity to devote a greater portion of our energy and creativity to challenges unique to this particular game.

[Sunnykx]

I personally liked the averaged-ranking system for qualifications. It required teams at the Championship level to be excellent every single time in order to advance. I also think the rankings more accurately reflect robot ability than the win-loss system does. In the win-loss system, a robot that wins two matches 50-25 has the same ranking as the robot who wins two matches 150-25. Throughout this season, I felt that the top 8 seeded robots lining up as captains in eliminations looked far more deserving of being there than in past years when I would scratch my head at some of the teams who were represented there after looking past the first three or four seeds.


Perhaps it is more frustrating for teams who go to a single regional or two who don't have the time or the events to incrementally improve their robot and correct problems so that it is consistently performing at a high level. The District model lends itself well particularly well to fielding excellent robots at Championship. Our team competed in three smaller PNW District events before going to the District Championship. Each event taught us where we needed to improve if we wanted to be in contention to go to Worlds. It did not allow for sloppy play and it required us to perform well match after match after match. I think it reflects more the real engineering world as well. I would much rather fly in an airplane or drive a car that is consistently excellent than one that crashes 1 out of 3 times.

I was personally surprised at some of the inconsistent play at Worlds by some of the top robots who are in the Regional rather than the District model. They had become used to dazzling 2 out of 3 times at their regional competitions, potentially falling apart the other time and still being able to make it to Championship.

Our team (3663) made it to Finals in Curie because we consistently performed at a high level and chose partners who also reliably did so. We passed over teams who could amaze at times but imploded at others. We were at an advantage when those teams followed their same up and down pattern of variability in eliminations. We eventually lost to the better alliance, 148 and 1114. The best alliance in our division still made it to Einstein in this year's system.

If they go back to a win-loss model in 2016, we may change our strategy and go more for a high risk-high rewards type of alliance. It makes sense to adjust alliance-picking strategy to the one that helps us advance the furthest. I, for one, however, appreciated a competition that required us to hone our skills to perform well every single time.