Posted by Mike McIntyre. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Coach on team #1, Juggernaut, from Oakland Technical Center Northeast and 3 Dimensional Services.
Posted on 9/12/99 8:25 AM MST
If the 3 team alliance continues, the greatest weakness I see is the role of the 3rd 'bot. Often, they do not even get out onto the field and are therefore not really equal members of the alliance. My suggestion to FIRST would be to have all robots on an alliance start out in a single area (possible a little corral indented alongside the playing field)and have a simple rule that only 2 robots may be active on the field at a time for any alliance; this way, a damaged robot can come into the pits and be immediately replaced by a substitute. The free substitution would also allow for robots that are ‘dead in the water’ to be turned off and replaced quickly and easily. A disadvantage is the need for 6 player stations rather than 4, but the field design could be planned that way with a single large player station on each side of the field. The 3rd 'bot drivers would start out between the other 2 with their controller all ready to go the moment a switch was needed (it only takes a few seconds to switch control over to another team, but FIRST could have all 3 wired up and ready to go at different frequencies if the delay was deemed to be too long.)What does everybody else think: are you ready for free substitution akin to tag-team wrestling?
Posted by Austin St.Peter.
Other from University of Detroit Mercy.
Posted on 9/12/99 9:03 AM MST
In Reply to: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Mike McIntyre on 9/12/99 8:25 AM MST:
the way i see it, that definitely brings the third alliance partner in to the action, but it doesnt completely eliminate the possability of a team getting a ‘free ride’. Until they can do that with certainty, im really iffy about the three team alliances.
Posted by Steve Shade.
Other on team #7, Firestorm, from Parkville High School and Center for Mathematics, Science and Computer Science and Black & Decker / AAI / Raytheon.
Posted on 9/12/99 5:40 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Austin St.Peter on 9/12/99 9:03 AM MST:
What if all 3 robots were wired up and that after each ellimination match, each alliance would have to substitute one of the robots so that all three robots would have to compete in some combination for each elimination round. For example: if an alliance say teams A, B and C were in the elimination round, the first round teams A and B would be active, the second round either teams A and C or B and C could be active. If a third match is required, you could again play any 2 of the 3 robots similar to the first round. Another option is to use the last possible combination which ever combination wasn’t used in round 2. For this method to actually work, each alliance would have to predetermine the order of their robots, give a card with the order to the ref. before the elimination round begins, so some element of surprise is given to the opposing alliance, but that can make for better competition. Of course if one of the robots would get broken, then the robot substitution can’t happen and the alliance will have to play with just 2 robots for the remainder of the competition. This involves more strategy so when the top seeded teams pick their partners, they have to be more aware that the two chosen teams should be in some way compatable. Either choice of the third round brings more into play.
Posted by Michael Martus. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Coach on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central H.S. and Delphi Automotives Systems.
Posted on 9/12/99 5:51 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Steve Shade on 9/12/99 5:40 PM MST:
You all think that there will be alliances next year!
Are you so sure. To my knowledge the details of the game next year will not be released until kick-off.
Knowing Dean and Woody, don,t get to comfortable with the alliance theme.
There are other ways to skin a Bot.
Posted by Joe Johnson. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.
Posted on 9/12/99 6:58 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Michael Martus on 9/12/99 5:51 PM MST:
This is from the same guy who said, ’ the floor will be flat or I’ll eat my hat’ last year (so you know how much my guesses are worth 
I would be shocked if Dean gave up alliances in 00.
By all accounts Dean is beside himself with glee about how well things turned out in 99.
I would not expect the alliances to disappear…
… or I’ll eat my hat.
Joe J.
Posted by Austin St.Peter.
Other from University of Detroit Mercy.
Posted on 9/13/99 8:40 AM MST
In Reply to: From the guy who said ‘flat floor in 99’… posted by Joe Johnson on 9/12/99 6:58 PM MST:
With or without mustard?
Posted by John Youngquist.
Student on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Interior Systems.
Posted on 9/16/99 3:56 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: From the guy who said ‘flat floor in 99’… posted by Austin St.Peter on 9/13/99 8:40 AM MST:
If i were going to eat my hat, i would rather use ketchup
Posted by Ken Patton. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #65, The Huskie Brigade, from Pontiac Northern High School and GM Powertrain.
Posted on 9/12/99 6:14 PM MST
In Reply to: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Mike McIntyre on 9/12/99 8:25 AM MST:
Hey Mike-
Welcome back. I see you’re wearing your new colors! What more could the ex-national champs do to beef up their squad??? Good luck to you and your team this year (not that you or they need any luck!).
I like the idea, it sounds more exciting than the way it is now, but… One problem I see with it is that one team could send out their ‘scrub’ robot, put it in a defensive spot to mess up the opposing alliance, switch over to the ‘sleeper’ robot, and use essentially 2.5 robots as part of their strategy. That might make for a traffic-filled, and possibly more boring, match.
Ken
Posted by Joe Johnson. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.
Posted on 9/12/99 7:09 PM MST
In Reply to: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Mike McIntyre on 9/12/99 8:25 AM MST:
I have never been a fan of the third bot.
It has some advantages, but I think that it muddies the water too much.
(This is from at team that would not have advanced to the round of 8 without the 3rd partner in our sweet sixteen matchs at the Nationals)
It is hard enough trying to make an alliance work with two teams. It is even tougher with 3.
I know that some alliances worked in all 3. I know most didn’t.
I also know that many sports teams have players with Superbowl rings that never played a down in the playoffs. This is a different situation in my opinion because that player likely has a long term relationship with the team – certainly longer than the 1 hour most alliances had in FL to get to know each other and plan their strategy.
I would really prefer that FIRST just say that broken robots are part of the game.
This would require FIRST to stick to its guns on some time out limits but I think that it would be better than what we currently have.
Joe J.
Posted by Nate Smith. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Student on team #74, Holland FIRST Robotics, from Holland High School and Haworth, Inc…
Posted on 9/14/99 7:42 AM MST
In Reply to: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Mike McIntyre on 9/12/99 8:25 AM MST:
: If the 3 team alliance continues, the greatest weakness I see is the role of the 3rd 'bot. Often, they do not even get out onto the field and are therefore not really equal members of the alliance.
One prime example of this took place at one of the post-season events that I was able to attend. The second selection of the winning alliance never even competed in the elimination rounds.
Posted by mike aubry. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #47, Chiefs, from Pontiac Central.
Posted on 9/14/99 6:45 PM MST
In Reply to: The THIRD 'BOT posted by Mike McIntyre on 9/12/99 8:25 AM MST:
Mike, Hi - Miss ya already! My thought son the 3rd BOT goes something like this.
Let’s get all 3 BOT’s on the floor at the same time. No, it doesn’t eliminate getting
paired or trip’d up in this case with a slug, but at least you have an outside chance
in a 2 on 3 tag team vs. a 2 on 1. The variations of offense vs. defense goes up
exponentially, and it lets teams that built BOT’s that are more defensive oriented
play defense and not feel bad about not scoring! It lets teams that build scoring
machines do that, and those that can go either way - really become a great asset!
No switching, 3 players stations, better odds, more noise - more teams, more matches!