Just an observation based on what our kids had been designing, but GS10 is a pretty significant alteration of the game rule strategy. The modification of GS3 hits them as well, but could have been anticipated (although they didn't expect quite that extreme of a shift considering the initial wording e.g. *no* limit). Was this just oversight on the design team's part? The kids picked up on the no-limit part right away?
GS11 will be interesting to enforce since there are multiple pathways and in the past, it hasn't been necessary to provide the most optimal. If a robot is parked at the middle of the crater wall and is blocking the small portion between the crater rim and their *own* alliances hold, if the other team has to move from the crater wound the lander to their own holds, does that constitute blocking? It wouldn't have in prior years. GS5 and GS6 are clear, but I think GS11 will require some scenario diagrams to clarify.
GS11 will be interesting to enforce since there are multiple pathways and in the past, it hasn't been necessary to provide the most optimal. If a robot is parked at the middle of the crater wall and is blocking the small portion between the crater rim and their *own* alliances hold, if the other team has to move from the crater wound the lander to their own holds, does that constitute blocking? It wouldn't have in prior years. GS5 and GS6 are clear, but I think GS11 will require some scenario diagrams to clarify.
Comment