Do we want another game without defense?

[Loose Screw]

Recycle Rush had to be one of the most controversial games since 2009. Separating the field and eliminating defense was a bold decision, and we must now ask ourselves: was this decision the right direction for FIRST?

Let's start with some of the complaints that we originally had. The game would be boring with the lack of defense. This was true for week 1, but as teams made final adjustments, they started to contribute more to their alliances. With the lack of defense, teams could spend less time repairing their robots and more time making improvements. Watching teams constantly improve is very exciting to see, and is a major component of FIRST.

Autonomous mode would be overpowered.
Scoring in autonomous mode was useful, but never was overpowered. Teams that could score 20-28 points in auto were rewarded, but would still have to score their best to win.

Teams can't upset or make comebacks.
This year was rather predictable. In Michigan, 17/18 districts the #1 alliance won. Even at MSC the #1 alliance won. This was reflected at most regionals. However, 4 out of the 8 alliances that won their divisions weren't #1. Upsets can happen. As for comebacks, the #1 alliance in Archimedes scored only 43 points in their first semi-final. They scored 197 in their next, but not enough to bring their average up. It was in their last match when they scored 274 and went on to win their division. Comebacks and upsets did happen.

Now let's look at some of the positives that came from a lack of defense.

Teams could build unique and creative robots
Without robots clashing against each other, teams could build outside of traditional frame perimeter restrictions. Back in 2010, there were two robot designs: 469 and a box. There were very few teams that could have creative designs. This year, however, every team could be a 469. There were teams without drive trains, with unique drive trains, and even dual robots. Teams could focus more on solving the challenge than surviving it.

Teams were competing against themselves, rather than each other.
Teams had to constantly evolve to compete. The high score from last week would be the average for the next. Teams would compete against each other at events, but learn from each other when they're not. Some saw others use a tethered ramp, then proceeded to double their average at their next event.

Scoring was more visible.
In previous years, scoring was in real-time. Soccer balls and Basket balls were automatically counted as they were scored. Frisbees were stored in the goal; the final score being announced after they counted everything. With Recycle Rush, totes stayed (hopefully) where they were scored. People looking at a field could easily see which alliance was scoring more. This is a small nitpick, but looking at a row of perfect stacks your team put up is pretty cool.

I would like to now address the cans in the room.

Recycle Rush was an experiment of trying to have a "competition" without defense. Or that's what it looks like. Recycle Rush had a single element of defense: can wars. If you look at Einstein, the alliances that won were the ones that won the can wars. Once an alliance lost the can war, they lost. They couldn't score anywhere close to the can race winners. This led to matches being determined in the first few seconds. Those matches were still exciting to watch, but you knew who would win.

Recycle Rush was an experiment. I personally enjoyed watching this game. I loved seeing all the creative and unique ways of solving the challenge. Teams could learn from each other and try new things, preparing them for years to come. I would love to see future games without defense. However, if we see another defenseless game, I want it to be free of defense. No can races, no stray litter, just teams scoring their best.

So what do you think, would you like to see a split field in future years, or go back to more outplays and upsets?