As I look at the high note process… I feel that the point boost of just 1 point/robot on the chain is a little cheap. I feel that for the skill level required to make a throw that far (with an object of that shape, and bounciness) should warrant a bigger point value… thoughts?
2 Likes
It’s not many raw points but it makes the RP breakpoints way easier.
9 Likes
My thought was that maybe FIRST didn’t want to give too much value to a “Feels bad” task. As in, if they made the spotlight worth a lot, it would cause a “Feels bad” moment if the human missed.
8 Likes
A human player task imo shouldn’t effect scoring too much. It does matter for the ranking point breakpoints. And it’s 1 point per robot.
6 Likes
I actually really like this, it is impactful, but it is not gamechanging on its own.
2 Likes
I completely agree. This is first ROBOTICS competition after all, and something not related to a robot in any way having a larger impact on the outcome of a match just doesn’t make sense. I think FIRST nailed it with how important the high note throw is.
1 Like
Late bump to add this. But also, it seems strange.
It’s a single point. It’s only a point if there’s a robot on that chain. It’s something that visually gets the crowd’s attention while more often than not being 0 value (and rarely 1-2 value).
Nothing about this (or the end game in general) was nailed.
It’s also ignoring a strong human player has a pretty big impact on game piece delivery/etc in every game.
With how this year was setup, there shouldn’t have been anything here or it should have had value. 1pt IFF there’s a robot hanging is silly.
2 Likes
Sorry for the late response, I didn’t see the dates. But like I said, this is a robotics competition. While yes, it is one point, it is potentially the difference between earning ensemble or not. Spotlighting may just be there because FIRST didn’t want the HP’s job to just be pressing buttons. I don’t disagree about the general endgame, but a more valuable non-robot aspect simple does not make sense.
“like I said” is generally poor form. What you said wasn’t missed before. Repeating it didn’t add value.
Robotics is one element of the competition. Would you remove autonomous because someone was programming it or seek to discount that portion of the game? The robot working with the team and the field combine to make the challenge.
It was rarely (if ever) the difference in that RP. I’d feel confident saying “one point” there was never the margin. That would require 3 robots hanging on three separate chains. It’s possible. But, that’s not what I’ve been seeing. And still, that’s not really the point.
Your entire argument “does not make sense.” You’re arguing that because the human player isn’t a robot, the points associated with their tasks shouldn’t be important. Yet, “pushing those buttons” correctly is significant in the outcome. Let’s set that aside and take your assumption. Setting the task to 1pt isn’t a good measure of “nailed.” It’s one element of the design there.
The problem is the visual appearance to the audience combined with its lack of impact in the game. In every match, the audience is watching those high notes fly. They’re engaged. They’re interested. And with how visual it is, the tosses appear to matter. A non-trivial amount of “scored” high notes were for zero points. A design that makes a difficult task have no value but appear to be important is a shortcoming. This is true if you believe human players shouldn’t have a large impact AND if you think it’s ok if they do. It’s not something you can explain away by claiming “this is a robotics competition.” That’s a separate debate.
Things that appear to have value should have value. Things that don’t have value shouldn’t appear to. It’s a confusing design.
Before considering the degree of impact, that simple piece needs to be fixed. As an example (not entirely thought out), landing on a microphone without a robot is 1pt and with a robot is 2pts per robot. It’s still a small value. But, it at least has some impact. The spectacle has some meaning.
There isn’t a reasonable argument to be made claiming this was nailed. It was a miss in every way.
This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.