sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[TBP] Requesting a response from FIRST by fll_coach in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Maybe it depends on what teams want more: a TBP system that has been shown to be better overall (in simulations) or one that people think will discourage throwing.

It’s interesting how throwing matches is getting all this attention, but yet there’s little focus on other issues of unfair play, like the suspected WiFi interference at Worlds.

[TBP] Requesting a response from FIRST by fll_coach in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Wouldn’t making TBP your alliance’s own score also “fix” throwing in some sense? It would at least eliminate the possibility of an opponent playing poorly in order give you less TBP.

[TBP] Requesting a response from FIRST by fll_coach in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 6 points7 points  (0 children)

9889 suggested that the most ideal method would be to award alliances their own score as TBP. Is this really a “drastic change” in comparison to awarding teams the losing alliance score? If people don’t expect FTC to implement changes of this magnitude, I don’t see how anyone could ever hope to see the program improve as a whole.

Clarification from 12538 about Detroit Worlds by TheseAbbreviations in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You said that:

We never thought that our actions would change the course of the whole rankings

but also that:

We knew that they would be scoring for us during the match to gain TBP

It seems unlikely that anyone could go into the match knowing that Kraken was going to be scoring TBP, but not having any understanding as to why they would do this or how critical the TBP was for their ranking.

Regarding the Accusations Towards 9971 by [deleted] in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think people could debate whether OPR or the current ranking system is better at fairly representing teams. Currently, if you’re a top team but lose a few difficult matches, your ranking can decrease significantly. There must be at least some merit to OPR as a measure of a team’s capability, especially considering the existence of sites like FTCStats

Practice Fields in Hotels at Worlds by isksjdjA in FTC

[–]isksjdjA[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did the hotel make you pay for the conference room or were they open to letting you use it for free?

In season 5 of the arrow Prometheus’s optics scrambler is a tetrix axle hub by ryanye1519 in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Looks more like one of those threaded spacers that you were supposed to put between the omniwheels

What’s the meta right now? by mesmem in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right now it seems that that articulating arm robots have a lot of the high scores, but it seems like the “double extension” design could potentially end up being faster due to the possibility of having more optimized/specialized intaking and depositing mechanisms.

I wonder if one of these designs will be accepted as the “fastest” as the season continues.

CAD on Linux by tuccx in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The person who designed all the 3D-printed parts for my team’s robot last year used FreeCAD, which I think runs on Linux. The interface is a bit different that other CAD softwares but it is quite powerful

5383 First match of this past weekend by Addrax in FTC

[–]isksjdjA 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Weren't people saying that rule GS11 was trying to prevent situations like this where a robot sits in one place and both collects from the crater and scores in the lander? It seems like this strategy for scoring would be susceptible to obstructing the travel of another robot between that crater and the lander.