Daves Game Hint

[XXShadowXX]

Alright where to trains leave us where...:

The game is based on tracks;
-Robots move on tracks.
-Certain robots move on tracks.
-Move on Tracks for Bonus points.

The game involves train like movement;
-Alliance moves like a train.
-We pull trailers (again).
-Alliance moves like a train for a special period (start/end game).

The game involves train-like properties;
-Alliances must use combined force to move game pieces.
-Alliances must pull/push game pieces

Train Construction:
- Alliances need to haul objects, place objects, and hammer objects to score.
- Alliances need to build something out of game pieces.

What else you got?

[Q. Sheets]

Being here for a while, 6,462 mi doesn't seem like much. It's only a distance between these two places.

-.-

[Collin Fultz]

What about 2008's game pieces, the track balls?

Could we see a new use for the old game piece?

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Collin Fultz

What about 2008's game pieces, the track balls?

Could we see a new use for the old game piece?

I thought those things were awesome.

[DannyB1259]

After reading Bill's Blog today and in his past posts he talks about the current field being developed as the "Delta" field this could simply be the forth iteration of the FIRST field with cost savings features added for the expanded number of fields OR it could also mean that the field/field elements will change from match to match or even during the match.

Another possible hint came when he talked about the use of the classmate PC this year as the driver's station, in the blog he said they played some matches, changing sides, and changing alliances with out problems this could mean that alliances will be changing throughout the course of the match.

the Dartfish software that is being tested for this year is used to overlay video replays of multiple actions, it's been used with '06 robots shotting at the goal and I have also seen it used in air racing to compare the path each plane took around the course. This also hints at the changing field, the Dartfish replay would allow everyone to see the robots doing their tasks as the field changes.

Danny B
"67 days until kickoff " Bills Blog

[J93Wagner]

Originally Posted by DannyB1259

the Dartfish software that is being tested for this year is used to overlay video replays of multiple actions, it's been used with '06 robots shotting at the goal and I have also seen it used in air racing to compare the path each plane took around the course. This also hints at the changing field, the Dartfish replay would allow everyone to see the robots doing their tasks as the field changes.

Would teams ever have access to these replays after the match?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by J93Wagner

Would teams ever have access to these replays after the match?

I doubt it. That could be legitimate--a performance review-- but it has the potential--serious potential-- to open up a can of worms that is best left closed. I'm talking, of course, about instant replay.

Danny, I'm pretty sure he's simply referring to the testing; during a competition, each individual control system has to be able to connect to the field from any one of the control stations, no matter what is in the other X stations on the field, and then disconnect and reconnect in any station again, in whatever pattern the field is looking for. I don't think we'll see changing alliances during a match; imagine what that would do to eliminations...

[Don Rotolo]

With all the train references, perhaps we'll need to get some TRAINING this year...

[DannyB1259]

Originally Posted by EricH

I doubt it. That could be legitimate--a performance review-- but it has the potential--serious potential-- to open up a can of worms that is best left closed. I'm talking, of course, about instant replay.

Danny, I'm pretty sure he's simply referring to the testing; ... I don't think we'll see changing alliances during a match; imagine what that would do to eliminations...

I agree that instant replay could get messy; in pro soccer they use instant replay only as treat to the fans, all the referee's calls are final as soon as they are made.

The reason I bring up changing alliances is because it was talked about when designing a VEX game for a local competition and one idea was that if you controlled a certain game piece you could high jack a robot from the other alliance. However without having the VEX bots tied into a field control this would have been impossible to control and difficult to follow for the fans. With FRC though the alliance could be changed, the field used to controls your red/blue LED lights anyways and for eliminations; its all based on what teams are on alliance with the most points at the end of the match and thats the way you start the next match. If your alliance thinks they can win alone this give motivation to prevent a switch and if you think your done for your going to try and switch. the strategy would be all messed up think if red spent the whole match scoring on themselves and then at the end switched sides to steal the win. FIRST is always looking for ways to make things harder and more interesting and this would sure do it.

but hay I could be completely wrong
Danny B

[EricH]

Originally Posted by DannyB1259

With FRC though the alliance could be changed, the field used to controls your red/blue LED lights anyways and for eliminations; its all based on what teams are on alliance with the most points at the end of the match and thats the way you start the next match. If your alliance thinks they can win alone this give motivation to prevent a switch and if you think your done for your going to try and switch. the strategy would be all messed up think if red spent the whole match scoring on themselves and then at the end switched sides to steal the win. FIRST is always looking for ways to make things harder and more interesting and this would sure do it.

Imagine this scenario: You pick your alliance (or, the top 24 robots are chosen and randomly placed on alliances) for the finals. First match comes up, and robots A, C, F win because they're on the same alliance at the end. (Alliances were originally A, B, C vs D, E, F.) Match 2 comes along, and A, B, E win. Now who goes on? A certainly should, because they've won 2 matches. But B, C, E, and F have one win apiece and D has none, so A has to play again instead of advancing. That's the mess you get into. So you have to have a completely new format for eliminations, one where individual teams advance, or alliances are locked after the first match, or some other similar nuisance.

In addition to totally confusing the teams, not to mention the Joe-off-the-street types we want to see us and the VIPs, you have to figure out how to assess the penalties that happen (which alliance gets the disable/DQ when teams are switching) and all the rest of that stuff.

It's not impossible. It's just crazy to do. Technically possible? Sure, if you can tell the robots that they just switched (and the drivers, for that matter). But it's your worst nightmare in terms of tournament play and who advances.

Now if the entire alliance simply switches colors, that's another thing (and almost pointless).

[DannyB1259]

All I'm saying is that it would be possible, it would really shake things up and its not like FIRST hasn't gone with crazy in the past, I know the first time I hear that we would be playing on fake ice I thought it was crazy, six weeks is crazy, helping a team that's your opponent later is crazy but it happens all the time.

it would bring a new level of cooperation to the game and would really make things interesting.

It has more chance than a water game but only slightly, anyways I'm still hoping for it (well both actually)
Danny B

keeping the water game hopes alive

[Nick Lawrence]

What a mess.

I like the traditional round-robin tournament style.

-Nick

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by EricH

Imagine this scenario: You pick your alliance (or, the top 24 robots are chosen and randomly placed on alliances) for the finals. First match comes up, and robots A, C, F win because they're on the same alliance at the end. (Alliances were originally A, B, C vs D, E, F.) Match 2 comes along, and A, B, E win. Now who goes on? A certainly should, because they've won 2 matches. But B, C, E, and F have one win apiece and D has none, so A has to play again instead of advancing. That's the mess you get into. So you have to have a completely new format for eliminations, one where individual teams advance, or alliances are locked after the first match, or some other similar nuisance.

Who says an entire alliance has to advance/win?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Who says an entire alliance has to advance/win?

This is true. What I was thinking (assuming a 3x3 game) is that the first 3 robots to win 2 matches go on and start as an alliance. This would take 3 matches, assuming my above scenario, possibly 4.

Of course, this does introduce the luck factor in a big way, so it may not be feasible.

[J93Wagner]

Originally Posted by EricH

I doubt it. That could be legitimate--a performance review-- but it has the potential--serious potential-- to open up a can of worms that is best left closed. I'm talking, of course, about instant replay....

What I was referring to was if a team wanted to make a video using the video that was shot from the regional authority, would they be able to use it?