Make the control system smaller, easier to wire, and more ESD-resistant, as well as improve overall control responsiveness to expand the set of viable sensors. V*x and Rev proven that more centralized “plug-everything-into-one-brick” type solutions make more reliable robots than the more decentralized electronics of the HiTechnic and Modern Robotics systems. I wrote a thread on this particular topic here
There’s a balance between “what’s available” and “what’s good for the program” – if something is legal but imposes a financial burden, it can have troubling downstream effects. While the current meta of Axon servos is cheaper than $200 Savoxes, the overall growth and competitiveness of the top 10-15% of teams means on balance these teams are spending more on servos than ever. I would not be surprised if the program imposed price limits on servos – which FRC already has.
On the other side of the coin, 3d printing and custom fabrication-as-a-service has only gotten better and cheaper over the past decade. Teams are way less reliant on kit parts today than they were 5-10 years ago. If you’re on a tight budget and stuck with secondhand parts, one of the best investments you can make is a good 3dp.
Then again, you’re from Minnesota and have probably already noticed this.
Larger events, more events, maybe even a few select longer events. FTC needs more Championship presence but I think there’s also room to increase the production value of state and inter-regional-level championships to try to recreate a more Championship-like experience closer to home. Making events feel more like “DCMP” than “Big Qualifier” can go a long way.
Some places like Texas have already re-formed themselves into super-regional type events with other multi-region states like California announcing intentions to follow. In terms of advancement and overall team experience Texas currently has the best deal in the program; while competition is fierce for Worlds slots there are still a lot of slots to make it into the 72-team pan-state championship that is similarly competitive.
People also bring up reordering advancement but it doesn’t do much if only 2 teams advance. Having only Inspire nominees advance creates an “all-or-nothing” mentality when teams go for awards; 10 years ago you could get to Champs by focusing hard on the Think award and winning it at every level but now teams are forced to take more generalist approaches.
I’m personally a little conflicted about the role of Inspire 2/3 at the qualifier level because getting a team to cook at both mechanical and outreach categories is much less approachable versus advancing WA2s which can take a much more Kanagasabapathian “do one thing within our means and do it well” type approach and does not require the team to be terminally online and up to date with the meta.
I think more to the topic of “First is a monopoly”, FTC is too small and FRC is too big and both their presences in their current state do suck oxygen out of the room to experiment with other approaches.
FTC teams are small enough in scope that some of them sidestep the “team” part so to speak; 1-2 students with the right set of brainworms can (and have) designed, built, and programmed top-level robots by themselves. These teams often die when the leads graduate and don’t necessarily require funding, mentorship, or other program-building outside of a parent’s garage or wallet. Funding an FTC team relative to a US techworker’s salary is pretty cheap, all things considered — yet another point that makes these teams typically fairly privileged.
FRC has bigger robots and bigger budgets. One or two technically talented students is not enough; you still need to do some STEM-program-building to secure big enough budget, shop space, persistent technical knowledge, and organization to succeed.
In the best case scenarios, it lets public schools build fantastic programs reaching kids of practically any background (and anecdotally these teams are a lot more diverse than the average FTC garage team) and pair them with life-changing mentorship.
In the worst case scenarios, you end up with a massive burn-out and drama fest trapped in incompetence, trauma, and abuse which relative to FTC is much harder to jump ship from while still participating in the program. In FTC, it’s a lot easier to make a brand-new team out of people fleeing an old one. In FRC, that’s much more difficult.
I think there’s a hypothetical competition with bigger robots than FTC in a 3v3/8 alliance format that keeps costs lower and keeps the scope of the team vaguely garage-sized. Something where a team of relatively little human or financial capital can still have a good experience but one that still advantages sustainable program-building from a competitive perspective. FTC tries to rely on awards to do this but I think it’s a crutch compared to FRC’s “you cannot be a powerhouse without a good program to back you”
Starting a new FRC team on CD or Discord has the energy of making a massive hole in the ground that can set you and the rest of the team up for a terrible experience. That energy doesn’t exist in FTC. Things do not have to be this way.