Team 121, as some of you may know has offered a petition to FIRST regarding to the restoration of 2v2 and to expand the parts list. If you believe in the restoration of 2v2 or to expand the parts list, or both. Please sign our petitions @ http://www.rhodewarrior.org/Petition.html
Remember it is your voice that is heard in this organization.
We are ending this petition pretty soon, so we can get it in before Dean Kamen makes any final decisions about next year’s challenge.
I admire your democratic approach to the situation. However I think most in the FIRST community well we all like to think we know how Dean works. I can say that after 7 years in the program for me I have no clue what goes on inside his head. However, I wouldn’t be surprised that Dean has already made whatever decsisions that he feels he needed to about next years game and that the FIRST staff’s job now is no longer to question…but to implement.
i think there was a post some time ago (probably in the old forums) to the effect that some one had talked to dean (or someone on first’s staff) and that he somehow hinted that or alluded to the fact that next years game had already been developped. does anyone else remember this?
I have heard some rumors that Dean Kamen usually starts early in planning and developing next year plans. But that doesn’t matter, because you can easily modify the rules of the game. For example, BattleCry II, they took this years game and modified it pretty good. So you can see we can still make a difference. But we have to act quick.
dean wont modify an already developed game because of a petition…at least not significantly, and no matter how you cut it: if the petition calls for a modification, that means the game is 4 vs 0, which is a very large modification. and if the petition doesnt call for modification then there is some sort of direct competition, and all this petition could possibly do is annoy dean
*Originally posted by mike o’leary *
**i think there was a post some time ago (probably in the old forums) to the effect that some one had talked to dean (or someone on first’s staff) and that he somehow hinted that or alluded to the fact that next years game had already been developped. does anyone else remember this? **
I think this is the thread that you were talking about.
I am wondering if the petition has been sent to FIRST¡K Because I am a little concern of this way of expressing opinions to FIRST¡K
Well, I understand this petition will be voices of many people from different teams, and that you think FIRST will HAVE to listen to this petition because there are so many voices. But have you thought about how FIRST will respond to this? So far I heard that some on the FIRST people who know about this petition didn¡¦t even want to look at it¡K And think about how Dean will react to this, do you think he is going to just follow what the petition say, or will he bring back 4 vs. 0 just to show that he is different than everyone else¡K
How will FIRST feel when they see this petition signed by so many people (60)? Plus, They are already having three team forums for teams to offer constructive criticism¡K Is it really necessary to send in the petition? I even heard that Dean have already decided the way the game is going to be next year. Well, not the actual game itself but the format of the game. 4 vs. 0 or 2 vs. 2 or 3 vs. 3¡K So, why not drop the petition and just go to the forum and talk to FIRST directly?
I’m fairly convinced that the game isn’t developed yet. FIRST barely has the game ready in time for kickoff so I doubt it’s developed yet. They may have an IDEA about what they want to do next year but I’m fairly certain they’re going to wait for the team forum to at least get some feedback from the teams.
Being an avid supporter of 2 vs. 2 myself, I just wonder if Dean already knows that 2 vs. 2 is the better way to go, and is coming up with a game that is an exponent of that format. I remember him saying that he gives this years game a “C-” (This was at the UTC NE Regional) and that he promised that he “will have a better game for you” (This was at the closing ceremony at the Nationals).
It know it is too early for the actual game itself, I have a strong feeling that FIRST is going to go back to 2 vs. 2 or 3 vs. 3…
I know this belong to the rumor mill, but I just have to put it in this thread.
Coming up with the idea behind the competition doesn’t necessary mean Dean have the game completed already. I just somehow believe that Dean have already decided to go back to head to head competition next year…
Coming up with the game itself will happen after the forums…
I myself happen to be an avid fan of the old 1 VS 1 VS 1. If informal alliances are what Dean is worried about, then by all means, go with the 2 VS 2. But if he did it just to get more teams out onto the field, then why not go 1 VS 1 VS 1 VS 1 or even add in another robot?