2013 Game Hint!

[Lambdafreak]

Maybe ice hockey based? The original name of ice hockey is dutch roll, and there is a famous player named Rick.

[karomata]

There have been many ideas that have come forward, and I have noticed that these bear significant weight:

Bowling- Some people believe that it is bowling themed. I say your crazy. Why on Earth would FIRST make such a risky move as to make game pieces bowling balls? That's just asking for somebody to get hurt. Yes, FIRST has had some other elements that we have proven to be possibly dangerous, but bowling balls is just too far. FIRST would never do that, due to the risk of getting injured. It would also be very hard to manipulate, trying to make a robot that can orient and grab a bowling ball in the finger holes is a huge challenge. Bowling balls are also very hard for those of you who have never bowled. Robots would be denting the snot out of each other throughout the competitions. And the risk of a robot malfunctioning and throwing a bowling ball is way to much. What if a ref was hit and suffered an injury? FIRST isn't famous for taking huge risks when it comes to safety. And the basic logistics of it even being about bowling would be very hard. What would happen when all the "pins" were knocked down? And even if it was just the bowling ball used in the game, the danger is just too much for me imagining FIRST being ok with.

Lyrics- Those are way over thought. Enough said.

Picture- The most valid point I could find there is that it is a frame from exactly, and I mean EXACTLY, 3 minutes. This may mean that the game lasts 3 minutes. This seems like a typical FIRST clue, it doesn't give too much away about the game but if figured out can provide a valuable tip. But not enough of a tip to think about designs or game strategies. There may also be a hint in the fact that it's Rick Astley, but it's probably so far out there and complicated that by the time we find it we go right past it and write it off thinking we haven't searched deep enough. This strongly reminds me of the Little Eva picture from 2011, where the message was very simple: Locomotion, External Vehicular Activity, and mirror image. FIRST has found that we think about these things so much that by putting the answer right in front of us they have hid it in the best way possible: in plain sight.

We are strongly underestimating FIRST by overestimating their will to hide things deep in complexity. Usually there is only one "hint" in each clue to come out, so I'm betting that this one's message is that matches will be 3 minutes or something will be relating to 3 minutes, and FIRST decided to have some fun by:
A. Rick Rolling all of us.
B. Putting pretty colored thumb tacks on the wall to confuse us and make us think there was a hidden message there.
C. Showing some of the cork board to confuse us even more!

There is also a theory of a remake of Stack Attack. Stack Attack is the definition of "good on paper, bad in reality." FIRST has learned from that.

There is nothing much to be determined from this until we see another hint. But you guys can keep over analyzing this as much as you want. Best of luck with that!

[Ankit S.]

Bowling- Some people believe that it is bowling themed. I say your crazy. Why on Earth would FIRST make such a risky move as to make game pieces bowling balls? That's just asking for somebody to get hurt.

FTC game last year had a 6 lb bowling ball as a game piece. Granted, it was never more that 1 foot off the ground.

[Siri]

Bowling- Some people believe that it is bowling themed. I say your crazy. Why on Earth would FIRST make such a risky move as to make game pieces bowling balls? That's just asking for somebody to get hurt. Yes, FIRST has had some other elements that we have proven to be possibly dangerous, but bowling balls is just too far. FIRST would never do that, due to the risk of getting injured. It would also be very hard to manipulate, trying to make a robot that can orient and grab a bowling ball in the finger holes is a huge challenge. Bowling balls are also very hard for those of you who have never bowled. Robots would be denting the snot out of each other throughout the competitions. And the risk of a robot malfunctioning and throwing a bowling ball is way to much. What if a ref was hit and suffered an injury? FIRST isn't famous for taking huge risks when it comes to safety. And the basic logistics of it even being about bowling would be very hard. What would happen when all the "pins" were knocked down? And even if it was just the bowling ball used in the game, the danger is just too much for me imagining FIRST being ok with.You're assuming that bowling must be played with bowling balls. Bowling doesn't have to be played with bowling balls any more than basketball has to be played with basketballs.


Note: I don't think it's bowling either (not enough 'constructive' action), just pointing it out. Also, it'd be pretty easy to set up safe pin resetting for human players.

[Savvy578]

On that note, have you noticed a small trend? It seems like some of the games are being traded between FTC and FRC. This year, the FTC game is very similar to 2011 and the FTC game from 2010-2011 had the bridge elements that FRC had last year. It is quite possible that the bowling idea will also be crossed over.

[karomata]

On that note, have you noticed a small trend? It seems like some of the games are being traded between FTC and FRC. This year, the FTC game is very similar to 2011 and the FTC game from 2010-2011 had the bridge elements that FRC had last year. It is quite possible that the bowling idea will also be crossed over.

The FTC Game is also similar in that this year the FTC "theme" is mars rover, similar to 2009's FRC game Lunacy. People have been saying that they see an alternating pattern between sports then FIRST creations in FRC games. This is a very recent trend and I believe that FIRST will break it as to prevent people from thinking that. And this trend is very young, 2002, 03, 04, 05, 06, and even 07 were all FIRST creations, not anything like sports. I don't find it safe to assume that the pattern is intentional.

[MARS_James]

And this trend is very young, 2002, 03, 04, 05, 06, and even 07 were all FIRST creations, not anything like sports. I don't find it safe to assume that the pattern is intentional.

I have to ask how is 2006 not a sport? it more closely resembles the play style of basketball (offence defense swap) then this year.......

[karomata]

I have to ask how is 2006 not a sport? it more closely resembles the play style of basketball (offence defense swap) then this year.......

Well I usually think of basketball as shooting balls through a hoop on a horizontal plane, as opposed to vertical. Because of this, and with the fact that there are no well known sports involving vertical hoops, I consider the pattern to have continued through the 2006 year. If you really wanted to be argumental, I am sure that there is a sport somewhat related to every FRC game, I am sure that somewhere somebody has made a game out of knocking down and stacking back up boxes.

[Jon Stratis]

Well I usually think of basketball as shooting balls through a hoop on a horizontal plane, as opposed to vertical. Because of this, and with the fact that there are no well known sports involving vertical hoops, I consider the pattern to have continued through the 2006 year. If you really wanted to be argumental, I am sure that there is a sport somewhat related to every FRC game, I am sure that somewhere somebody has made a game out of knocking down and stacking back up boxes.

Look up the Mayan Ball Game... It was the first organized sport in known history, and had vertical hoops (although I believe these were added relatively late in the game's history)!

[Mark McLeod]

Does quidditch count?

[Siri]

Does quidditch count?Mark's figured out next year's game!



Yeah, I know, but wouldn't it be awesome?

[karomata]

Regardless, I still stand my ground on the philosophy that the meaning of this clue is that matches will be 3 minutes long. It would be a very subtle hint about the game that does not give away so much that teams can begin thinking about strategies or designs. And seeing that this year could possibly be a year where FIRST wanted to have strategies have a large impact on match outcomes, if matches were 3 minutes, it would allow time for more complex and developed strategies. We would all also have less matches, making it important to utilize any strategies teams can because it is important that they try to win as many of their matches that they can because there are so few. All that is needed is a coopertition system or a new kind of qualification scoring system that makes it so that when you lose a match, you have a chance of coming back from that loss.

[dcarr]

Regardless, I still stand my ground on the philosophy that the meaning of this clue is that matches will be 3 minutes long. It would be a very subtle hint about the game that does not give away so much that teams can begin thinking about strategies or designs. And seeing that this year could possibly be a year where FIRST wanted to have strategies have a large impact on match outcomes, if matches were 3 minutes, it would allow time for more complex and developed strategies. We would all also have less matches, making it important to utilize any strategies teams can because it is important that they try to win as many of their matches that they can because there are so few. All that is needed is a coopertition system or a new kind of qualification scoring system that makes it so that when you lose a match, you have a chance of coming back from that loss.

This seems very likely - the chances of the GDC "accidentally" posting a screenshot from precisely the 3:00 mark without it meaning something seem very small.

With longer matches, a fewer number of them seems like a given (unless they can miraculously speed up the queuing, loading, unloading processes considerably, which seems unlikely given that many events struggle to stay on schedule as it is). Less matches seems like a bad thing at face value. Less time to recover if something goes wrong. But strategy would become more important than ever.

[karomata]

This seems very likely - the chances of the GDC "accidentally" posting a screenshot from precisely the 3:00 mark without it meaning something seem very small.

With longer matches, a fewer number of them seems like a given (unless they can miraculously speed up the queuing, loading, unloading processes considerably, which seems unlikely given that many events struggle to stay on schedule as it is). Less matches seems like a bad thing at face value. Less time to recover if something goes wrong. But strategy would become more important than ever.

I have estimated that if matches are 3 minutes, teams will have approx. 5 matches at Championships, assuming that there are 3 robots per alliance and the divisions are about the same size as last year (100 teams per division).

[bduddy]

When I was thinking of game ideas, the first thing I thought of was "How can you have a longer game without decreasing the number of games?" The answer is simple - more robots on the field. Assuming a fixed 4 minutes between games, a 4 minute 4v4 game gets teams as many games as a 2 minute 3v3 game. Of course more robots on the field may increase the downtime as well, but it's certainly an idea... and hey, wasn't everyone talking about the 4 pushpins like 100 posts ago?

[karomata]

When I was thinking of game ideas, the first thing I thought of was "How can you have a longer game without decreasing the number of games?" The answer is simple - more robots on the field. Assuming a fixed 4 minutes between games, a 4 minute 4v4 game gets teams as many games as a 2 minute 3v3 game. Of course more robots on the field may increase the downtime as well, but it's certainly an idea... and hey, wasn't everyone talking about the 4 pushpins like 100 posts ago?

Every year we keep saying that this is the year where they have 4 robots. I am not sure that 3 minute match would qualify as a reason to have 4 robots, FIRST would have to completely re structure the picking procedure, match schedules, etc. And when you think about it, 8 robots on the field is a lot, with 6 it is already cramped. If they were to have 8 robots on the field, without making the field larger, the game would probably have to be a challenge that does not require precision.

[Alan Anderson]

If they were to have 8 robots on the field, without making the field larger, the game would probably have to be a challenge that does not require precision.

The robots could be made smaller.

[ksc1073]

1073 had a brainstorming session at the end of our last meeting; here's what we came up with:

Robots could be required to utilize sound in some way, since this picture is musically related.
It could be some sort of keepaway game, since we're "never gonna give it up."
We might not be giving up an old game and returning to it.
Pushpins could either signify the addition of another alliance (due to the yellow pins) or that we have to start and end matches on the corners of the field.
Since Astley was dancing at this point in the video, the game could rely on the Kinect.
And hey, it could even be a flying game this year! :) ("Never gonna let you down")

Also, one of our past team leads was interviewed for a FIRST scholarship video. She asked the guy for a game hint, and he sort of gave her one: it's going to be played on a field! Does this mean no water game?

[CalTran]

http://www.vexrobotics.com/vexpro/gearboxes/single-speed-single-reduction.html

Now why would VEXPro, especially after their pledge to FIRST Robotics, release a gearbox that is compatible with 3 CIM motors? When has a team ever used 3 CIMs on one side? Could the be a subtle hint?

[dcarr]

http://www.vexrobotics.com/vexpro/gearboxes/single-speed-single-reduction.html

Now why would VEXPro, especially after their pledge to FIRST Robotics, release a gearbox that is compatible with 3 CIM motors? When has a team ever used 3 CIMs on one side? Could the be a subtle hint?

You might really be on to something. Cue some ridiculously powerful drivetrains in 2013...

[AcesJames]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet, and I don't usually muddle over game hints, but I'll give this one a shot.

The picture is held up with push pins.
The lyrics read Never gonna give you up. Never gonna let you down.

In 2002, Zone Zeal, alliances played a tug of war with movable goals, pushing them across the field and battling for them with grippers, as if to never give them up.

The lyrics also work in another regard, in that if 2013 was a rehash of 2002, we wouldn't be giving up on the original game.

[Andrew Zeller]

http://www.vexrobotics.com/vexpro/gearboxes/single-speed-single-reduction.html

Now why would VEXPro, especially after their pledge to FIRST Robotics, release a gearbox that is compatible with 3 CIM motors? When has a team ever used 3 CIMs on one side? Could the be a subtle hint?

Maybe we shouldn't jump to the 3 CIM motor conclusion too fast. The VersaPlantetary, which is run by either a FP, BB550, or BB775 motor, is designed to mount anywhere a cim motor is mounted and there is an option to have a cim output shaft, making it nearly identical to a cim as far as output goes with the right gear ratio.

Perhaps VexPro didn't want to add the possibility of a smaller motor reduction to the gearbox and instead gave us the option of mounting a 3rd CIM or using a separate gearbox to interface with a non-CIM motor.

On the other hand, the idea that this year's game could warrant a 6 CIM motor drivetrain is very exciting as well.

[pokemonmegaman]

The most logical conclusion (seeing that it appears multiple times for multiple different reasons) would be that the game something to do with the number 3. Whether this is a 3-way match between 3 alliances, triple sided game pieces, or 3:00 matches, we don't know yet. Also, a water match has been brought up several times in this thread, and we are going off of one Facebook post for that.

Alright lets work through this. Never going to give you up was a music video that appeared in 1986, the same year that Denmark won their first gold medal in the summer Olympics in the javelin throw. Javelins were first used by the romans to counteract their opponents calvary. The term "cavalry" originates from the dinosaur "cavelirous ursa". So the only logical thing the game could be is.. Robot dinosaur battle.

Reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PSueHOY-Jk ;)

[HumblePie]

I'm sure I'm wrong, but like everyone else, I like to speculate.......

I agree with others here who think we'll have a 3 minute game. The hint may mean nothing more than that. Just like FIRST to float a tiny tidbit. A longer game may mean a more complicated task, like gathering and/or stacking.

I did a little research into early PC games looking for anniversaries. Turns out that the predecessor to Minesweeper was called "Mined Out" and released 30 years ago, in 1983. So, there's your "water" reference :D

Some might say we're due for a unique gamepiece, maybe like the tetras from the past, or another shape constructed from PVC. Imagine collecting or stacking gamepieces for points, while avoiding the "hot" mines. If you really want to get crazy, you could make the "hot" mines a Roomba. Contact with a "hot" mine would mean having your robot disabled (by means of the infrared remote) for a period of, say, 15 seconds. Another good reason for a longer match?

[Brandon Holley]

You might really be on to something. Cue some ridiculously powerful drivetrains in 2013...

Many, many teams have built 6 motor, tank drive, systems in the past. I can think back to 494 in 2004 I believe (2 drill, 2 CIM, 2FP), and there was probably one before that. We did one ourselves in 2008 using 4CIM + 2FP.

This is more of a feature thats moderately easy to include, so why not offer it?

I personally read nothing into it.

-Brando

[CalTran]

Many, many teams have built 6 motor, tank drive, systems in the past. I can think back to 494 in 2004 I believe (2 drill, 2 CIM, 2FP), and there was probably one before that. We did one ourselves in 2008 using 4CIM + 2FP.

This is more of a feature thats moderately easy to include, so why not offer it?

I personally read nothing into it.

-Brando

I didn't know that teams did do 6 motor tanks. It makes sense to do if you can spare the motors. Guess that means there won't be uber powered 6 CIM drives. Darn.

[Brandon Holley]

I didn't know that teams did do 6 motor tanks. It makes sense to do if you can spare the motors. Guess that means there won't be uber powered 6 CIM drives. Darn.

Many teams in the past few years have built the capability into their drive as well, however to save weight or to use the 5th and 6th drive motors elsewhere, didn't implement them.

[karomata]

Maybe we shouldn't jump to the 3 CIM motor conclusion too fast. The VersaPlantetary, which is run by either a FP, BB550, or BB775 motor, is designed to mount anywhere a cim motor is mounted and there is an option to have a cim output shaft, making it nearly identical to a cim as far as output goes with the right gear ratio.

Perhaps VexPro didn't want to add the possibility of a smaller motor reduction to the gearbox and instead gave us the option of mounting a 3rd CIM or using a separate gearbox to interface with a non-CIM motor.

On the other hand, the idea that this year's game could warrant a 6 CIM motor drivetrain is very exciting as well.

I don't believe that the clue is hinting towards 3 CIM motors. This is enough information for teams to start designing drive trains and other various parts of their robots. FIRST would not let out such a clear hint hinting something as large as that because they do not want teams to start designing things before build season, and as proven on Einstein last year, honor systems aren't fool proof. I still strongly believe that his hint is showing 3 minute matches for the increase of strength by using strategy. If you have no idea what were talking about with 3 minute matches and strategies, or how we came to these conclusions, check a few pages back :)

[Siri]

I don't believe that the clue is hinting towards 3 CIM motors...You know you guys are talking about different clues, right? (They're talking about the VEXpro transmission; you're referencing the 3 minute screenshot. Not that the transmission is actually a game hint.)

[Orion.DeYoe]

Okay lol I've read enough, time for my opinion.
I find the repetition of the number three to be interesting. I think that the 3:00 match idea could be plausible.
Through my own deduction I find it very likely that FIRST will give us some sort of stacking game this year. They've done many games with shooting/herding balls and hanging tubes recently, I think it's fairly likely that we will see some sort of stacking game. The idea of the returning tetras could be the case.
As to the song title, I had the crazy idea that maybe this game will have something to do with robots attaching to each other. I also think that the possibility of having another endgame that involves lifting/positioning your robot could also be likely.

As to the pushpin/thumb tack observation, you are mistaken, they are all the same it's just that the one on the lower left is lined up with the camera. So I don't think that there is anything there.

[karomata]

You know you guys are talking about different clues, right? (They're talking about the VEXpro transmission; you're referencing the 3 minute screenshot. Not that the transmission is actually a game hint.)

Well this is the thread for the rick astley pic, so as far as I know we are all referencing the rick astley photo. But yes, I believe they were talking about the transmission when they referenced the 3 CIMs.

[gabrielau23]

Dean Kamen has got to either be laughing his head off at all these inferences...or genuinely impressed.
To me, probably the hint would be in the thumbtacks. Which, as readers have noted, include one yellow thumbtack. Could the game this year be a 2 Red vs. Blue + Yellow? Maybe the yellow team will be a wildcard that enjoys special privileges?

[dellagd]

I also think that the possibility of having another endgame that involves lifting/positioning your robot could also be likely.

Also, the game that had lifting of robots was called Rack and Roll, which sounds very similar to rick roll. Im on board with this.

Aren't we due for the "real" (as some describe it) hint soon?

[karomata]

Having robots elevate each other is very possible as an endgame. The GDC loved making it the endgame in FIRST's earlier years, and we haven't seen robots elevating each other since 2007. Sometimes it's nice to go back to the basics.

[Siri]

Aren't we due for the "real" (as some describe it) hint soon?Depends:
- For 2012 it was actually a like week before this: 2 Dec, which was a Friday
- For 2011 it was actually December 21: 2nd-to-last Tuesday in December; the 18th this year
- For 2010 it was the 24th: 2nd-to-last Thursday; 21st now
Kickoffs were 7-Jan-2012 (1st Saturday), 8-Jan-2011 (2nd), and 9-Jan-2010 (2nd). This one is 5-Jan-2013 (1st).

So we're overdue by 2012 standards... but relative to 2010-2011, we could even have like 2 weeks left. No worries, we can enjoy the annual red herring thread until then!
On the note of 'this is the rick roll thread'--creating new threads for every red herring--the IR remote, the clear-sensing sensors, the 3-motor gearbox, and whatever else comes out--is a little overkill, isn't it? We've traditionally co-located these up until now.

[hunterteam3476]

Three minute match duration per Rick Astley still photo.
At the centerline of the field there are eight duelling tree targets (something like this: www.kisstactical.com/catalog_detail.php?product_id=11725). On every tree each of the eight individual targets has a different color on opposing sides (red, blue, yellow).
Prior to the match, the red alliance secretly pre-stages colors on targets on four of the eight trees (north side of the field). Blue does the same for the four other trees (south side). Alliances can divulge the target color pattern to the opposing alliance prior to the match or not (aka rick-roll).
The hybrid portion of the match starts when the tarp (www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1192364) is pulled back revealing the trees and target color combinations.
Two of the three alliance partner robots begin the match tethered together (explains the reference to a number of "couplers" in FIRST Choice).
During the 45 second hybrid mode, robots attempt to create columns of targets facing them that match their alliance's color (like the game Connect Four) by selectively shooting targets on the trees. Less advanced teams use the IR remote while more advanced teams use the Kinect to steer, detect color and aim.
A sub-total score is captured automatically at the end of hybrid.
Similar play continues in tele-op.
At the end of the match, Connect Four type scores are tallied. Alliances get bonus points for maintaining their two-robot tether (www.andymark.com/FIRST-Choice-p/fc13-009.htm) throughout the entire match. Extra bonus points are awarded to both alliances if, at the end buzzer, one robot from the red alliance is tethered to one robot from the blue alliance.

Either that or a robot tug of war.

I think you should be apart of game Design :ahh:

[451roan]

Sorry I try not to post unless the info might be useful but is it just me of does the bottom left tack look like a thumbtack(flat) and the others look like pushpins?

I see a bit of shadow under it, so I think it just looks that way because you are seeing it head on.

[Tetraman]

Welcome to the 2013 FIRST robotics competition and this year's game, Eye Spy. Eye Spy is played on a 27x54 foot field. Two alliances of three teams each stand on opposite sides of the field.

Each team will receive in the kit of parts a "Target Board". Surrounded by 3/4" PVC is a 1 foot hard corrugated board with a Sight Target on it, similar to that of the 2010 target, however one side confirms a Red Alliance and the other confirms a Blue Alliance. A Robot must have the Target Board on their robot for each match - it my be placed anywhere on the robot and maneuvered in any way, but can not extend outside the frame perimeter. A robot that plays a match will need the Target Board to be set at the side with their alliance color.

The field contains a number of EYE TOWERS. An Eye Tower is made up of a short-range optical sensor and two LED light bulbs - one Red and one Blue. When the Target Board of an alliance robot is aligned at least 1' away from the optical sensor, the sensor recognizes the target and lights up the bulb of the corresponding alliance color. There is one Eye Tower in front of each Human Player Station, and there are three at various heights on the long sides of the field.

During a 15 second autonomous mode, robots use pre-programed instructions to "capture" as many of the Eye Towers for their alliance as possible. Kinect Drivers can also be used to control the robots at this time. At the end of the PreGame Mode, the alliance that captured the most eye towers gains a 1 point bonus.

During the remaining 2 minutes of the match, alliance robots will do what they can to capture eye towers. Not only can Eye Towers be captured, but also converted from one alliance color to the other. Red alliance will try to convert blue towers into red, and vice versa.

Also during the match, robots will have the option of controlling one of three BASES. These are large octagonal shapes, similar to that of the Zone Zeal goals without the PVC pipes. The Bases are not used until the final 30 seconds of the match, in which robots are able to climb up onto the Bases to score additional points. (The Bases are 2 feet high, and on casters) Additional CoOp points will be scored if two robots of opposing alliances are on top of a single Base.

No rules against pinning in this game, similar to that of 2009.

1 Point is scored for each Eye Tower an alliance has captured AT THE END OF THE MATCH.
1 Point is scored for being the alliance who captured the most Eye Towers in the PreGame Mode. (1 Point for both if both alliances tied)
1 Point for each Robot on the top of a Base at the end of the match.

In Elimination Matches, one of the three Bases will be removed from the field, and one Base will be marked for only the Red Alliance and the other for only the Blue Alliance.

[JOEL340]

I completely agree on the 3 min rounds but the 3 alliances is not plausible. I don't think the game design committee would make that happen if it has been 2 alliances for the longest time.

On what i think about the game i think that for the end game the robots will have to lift each other up because in the song he says "never gonna give you up never gonna let you down and hurt you" which means you will be lifting robots up and if you let the robot down you might hurt the robot.

Also when does another game hint usually come out because the suspense is killing me!!!:ahh:

[dellagd]

I don't think the game design committee would make that happen if it has been 2 alliances for the longest time

Bottom line the game design committe likes to impress. They want the game to be fun to play and fun to watch. They want there to be suspense, anticipation, and excitement. While, yes, using the same alliance setup as last year is easy, what happened in past years doesnt mean certain things cant change. If I was on the GDC, I would love to suprise the heck out of everyone (and rick roll you all). While logistics and practicality may stop me from doing so, Id still like to do it. Plus it would make for some interesting strategy.

While I agree that I think we will have 2 alliances in 2013, anything is possible.

[Racer26]

Welcome to the 2013 FIRST robotics competition and this year's game, Eye Spy. Eye Spy is played on a 27x54 foot field. Two alliances of three teams each stand on opposite sides of the field.

Each team will receive in the kit of parts a "Target Board". Surrounded by 3/4" PVC is a 1 foot hard corrugated board with a Sight Target on it, similar to that of the 2010 target, however one side confirms a Red Alliance and the other confirms a Blue Alliance. A Robot must have the Target Board on their robot for each match - it my be placed anywhere on the robot and maneuvered in any way, but can not extend outside the frame perimeter. A robot that plays a match will need the Target Board to be set at the side with their alliance color.

The field contains a number of EYE TOWERS. An Eye Tower is made up of a short-range optical sensor and two LED light bulbs - one Red and one Blue. When the Target Board of an alliance robot is aligned at least 1' away from the optical sensor, the sensor recognizes the target and lights up the bulb of the corresponding alliance color. There is one Eye Tower in front of each Human Player Station, and there are three at various heights on the long sides of the field.

During a 15 second autonomous mode, robots use pre-programed instructions to "capture" as many of the Eye Towers for their alliance as possible. Kinect Drivers can also be used to control the robots at this time. At the end of the PreGame Mode, the alliance that captured the most eye towers gains a 1 point bonus.

During the remaining 2 minutes of the match, alliance robots will do what they can to capture eye towers. Not only can Eye Towers be captured, but also converted from one alliance color to the other. Red alliance will try to convert blue towers into red, and vice versa.

Also during the match, robots will have the option of controlling one of three BASES. These are large octagonal shapes, similar to that of the Zone Zeal goals without the PVC pipes. The Bases are not used until the final 30 seconds of the match, in which robots are able to climb up onto the Bases to score additional points. (The Bases are 2 feet high, and on casters) Additional CoOp points will be scored if two robots of opposing alliances are on top of a single Base.

No rules against pinning in this game, similar to that of 2009.

1 Point is scored for each Eye Tower an alliance has captured AT THE END OF THE MATCH.
1 Point is scored for being the alliance who captured the most Eye Towers in the PreGame Mode. (1 Point for both if both alliances tied)
1 Point for each Robot on the top of a Base at the end of the match.

In Elimination Matches, one of the three Bases will be removed from the field, and one Base will be marked for only the Red Alliance and the other for only the Blue Alliance.

*claps*. Heard it in Dave Lavery's voice.

[swwrobotics]

Our team thinks that because of the song is titled, "Never Going to Give You Up," we are going to have to hold onto some ball or item and "never give it up," or never let go of it, sort of like keepaway.

[kylie.student.9]

Is there really a 3v3v3? That would be very interesting to watch but also complicated! i am new to this and am wondering....What are the hints? What are they leading to? Is it a hint on how to program a robot? Or is it a hint to the theme of the game next season....that would make sense because water could be a theme, but I'm still confused about the 3v3v3

:ahh: v:confused: v:D

[Whippet]

Dear Lavery Claus, I have been a very good boy this year. Since it's that time of year again, and we've all been good here this year, I would like to request that, if you're planning to say something that sounds even remotely game hint-like, that you would please do so now. My family wants to see me for at least an hour this year. :D

Sincerely,

The CD community.

P.S. A water game would be great, too. :D

[Tetraman]

There will not be a Three Alliance game in FIRST. We already have some teams on alliances that fudge their scores so a top seed doesn't remain so. A Three Alliance match will eventually lead to two alliances ganging up on the other for the mutual benefit in the long term. If they do anything, it will be a return to 2001 where everyone on an alliance works together to reach a mutual goal. And going back to that is a long shot.

Three minute matches are possible, especially if there is an element of "keep away" to the game. Such as, one robot has to make sure they don't give up a Golden Ball because it's worth 30 points at the end of the match and the other normal balls are worth 2. However, I am unsure if going to 3 minutes is a good idea from now on. Consider if every game designed thus far was given an extra 1 minute to play. Logomotion would have the entire racks filled, Rebound Rumble would make bridge scoring either worthless or too important depending on the match, Aim High would have longer periods of play, and Zone Zeal and/or Stack Attack would be that much more boring to watch an extra minute of nothing happening.

there would have to be a good reason to change to 3 minutes, and that would be "because the game as it is designed requires it". I'm going to then guess that if we are headed to 3 minutes, then it will only be for this year and not for future years. (or be an every 4 years thing)

The real question is this: What kind of game can't be played in just two minutes?

[dellagd]

There will not be a Three Alliance game in FIRST. We already have some teams on alliances that fudge their scores so a top seed doesn't remain so. A Three Alliance match will eventually lead to two alliances ganging up on the other for the mutual benefit in the long term. If they do anything, it will be a return to 2001 where everyone on an alliance works together to reach a mutual goal. And going back to that is a long shot.

Three minute matches are possible, especially if there is an element of "keep away" to the game. Such as, one robot has to make sure they don't give up a Golden Ball because it's worth 30 points at the end of the match and the other normal balls are worth 2. However, I am unsure if going to 3 minutes is a good idea from now on. Consider if every game designed thus far was given an extra 1 minute to play. Logomotion would have the entire racks filled, Rebound Rumble would make bridge scoring either worthless or too important depending on the match, Aim High would have longer periods of play, and Zone Zeal and/or Stack Attack would be that much more boring to watch an extra minute of nothing happening.

there would have to be a good reason to change to 3 minutes, and that would be "because the game as it is designed requires it". I'm going to then guess that if we are headed to 3 minutes, then it will only be for this year and not for future years. (or be an every 4 years thing)

The real question is this: What kind of game can't be played in just two minutes?

I was thinking that because of the increased interest in the Kinect, and how almost nobody used it last year, they would use the extra time for an increased Hybrid period.

[CalTran]

I was thinking that because of the increased interest in the Kinect, and how almost nobody used it last year, they would use the extra time for an increased Hybrid period.

That still leads to more watching carpet collect dust. They'd have to make a pretty darned good incentive to get some teams to try it. We had our Kinect working for control, but then deemed it unnecessary as 15 seconds is not much time to do things, as we were able to do everything via autonomous that we would have wanted out of hybrid.

[ttldomination]

Aside from all the spurious guessing, I'd like to take a moment to thank the GDC for waiting to release an official game hint until finals are over. Not sure if that's on purpose, but it ends up working on my end.

- Sunny G.

[dellagd]

That still leads to more watching carpet collect dust. They'd have to make a pretty darned good incentive to get some teams to try it. We had our Kinect working for control, but then deemed it unnecessary as 15 seconds is not much time to do things, as we were able to do everything via autonomous that we would have wanted out of hybrid.


That was my point, having an increased amount of hybrid time means that you have to do something in that time. And a whole minute or so of a robot that can only get info from a kinect means that you are probably gonna want to use the kinect. Id probably want to tell my robot something over the course of a minute. How else do they get people too use a game element? They make it more necessary to succeed.

Though, Im biased, as I am a programmer at heart and would probably rather the whole time be autonomous anyway...

[F22Rapture]

That was my point, having an increased amount of hybrid time means that you have to do something in that time. And a whole minute or so of a robot that can only get info from a kinect means that you are probably gonna want to use the kinect. Id probably want to tell my robot something over the course of a minute. How else do they get people too use a game element? They make it more necessary to succeed.

Though, Im biased, as I am a programmer at heart and would probably rather the whole time be autonomous anyway...

Perhaps there won't be a rule limiting you to one or the other. Completes autonomous task and then activates Kinect.

Even without that, you can still simulate one by linking a command group to a kinect "button"

[Kevin Selavko]

What if the rounds are three minutes long and the first team on an alliance has to use the kinect for the first minute, then the 2nd team the second minute, and third team the third minute.

Forces to use the kinect or just sit on the field for a minute of play, and will still only have one kinect station per alliance.

[BigJ]

I really hope there is not a strong "Kinect Bonus". Professional game studios have problems using a Kinect properly in a controlled living room environment. Some of the most successful Kinect games (Happy Action series from Double Fine) are arguably about making fun of how bad the Kinect is. Perhaps the next generation of this hardware will be more worthwhile to work with.

[dcarr]

I really hope there is not a strong "Kinect Bonus". Professional game studios have problems using a Kinect properly in a controlled living room environment. Some of the most successful Kinect games (Happy Action series from Double Fine) are arguably about making fun of how bad the Kinect is. Perhaps the next generation of this hardware will be more worthwhile to work with.

Valid point, but I'd hardly call a "living room environment" "controlled." There's no telling what size the room will be, distance from the user to the Kinect, lighting conditions, background color, etc. In my playing with the SDK, the Kinect does a pretty good job despite this. That said I'd rather not have my robot's ability to play the game well hinging on the Kinect's ability to respond properly in a given situation.

[BigJ]

Valid point, but I'd hardly call a "living room environment" "controlled." There's no telling what size the room will be, distance from the user to the Kinect, lighting conditions, background color, etc. In my playing with the SDK, the Kinect does a pretty good job despite this. That said I'd rather not have my robot's ability to play the game well hinging on the Kinect's ability to respond properly in a given situation.

What I meant was that the Kinect hardware is more likely tuned to work in a variety of living room lighting situations as opposed to sports arena lighting conditions :p

[dcarr]

What I meant was that the Kinect hardware is more likely tuned to work in a variety of living room lighting situations as opposed to sports arena lighting conditions :p

But what if I have mercury-vapor lights in my living room? ::safety::

I get what you're saying. Lighting can be tricky to deal with, whether the camera is sitting in the Kinect station or on the robot.

[MortarManBro]

Maybe they're Rickrolling us by making us think we're being Rickrolled.. like double reverse psychology... :confused: :eek:

[ratdude747]

Welcome to the 2013 FIRST robotics competition and this year's game, Eye Spy. Eye Spy is played on a 27x54 foot field. Two alliances of three teams each stand on opposite sides of the field.

Each team will receive in the kit of parts a "Target Board". Surrounded by 3/4" PVC is a 1 foot hard corrugated board with a Sight Target on it, similar to that of the 2010 target, however one side confirms a Red Alliance and the other confirms a Blue Alliance. A Robot must have the Target Board on their robot for each match - it my be placed anywhere on the robot and maneuvered in any way, but can not extend outside the frame perimeter. A robot that plays a match will need the Target Board to be set at the side with their alliance color.

The field contains a number of EYE TOWERS. An Eye Tower is made up of a short-range optical sensor and two LED light bulbs - one Red and one Blue. When the Target Board of an alliance robot is aligned at least 1' away from the optical sensor, the sensor recognizes the target and lights up the bulb of the corresponding alliance color. There is one Eye Tower in front of each Human Player Station, and there are three at various heights on the long sides of the field.

During a 15 second autonomous mode, robots use pre-programed instructions to "capture" as many of the Eye Towers for their alliance as possible. Kinect Drivers can also be used to control the robots at this time. At the end of the PreGame Mode, the alliance that captured the most eye towers gains a 1 point bonus.

During the remaining 2 minutes of the match, alliance robots will do what they can to capture eye towers. Not only can Eye Towers be captured, but also converted from one alliance color to the other. Red alliance will try to convert blue towers into red, and vice versa.

Also during the match, robots will have the option of controlling one of three BASES. These are large octagonal shapes, similar to that of the Zone Zeal goals without the PVC pipes. The Bases are not used until the final 30 seconds of the match, in which robots are able to climb up onto the Bases to score additional points. (The Bases are 2 feet high, and on casters) Additional CoOp points will be scored if two robots of opposing alliances are on top of a single Base.

No rules against pinning in this game, similar to that of 2009.

1 Point is scored for each Eye Tower an alliance has captured AT THE END OF THE MATCH.
1 Point is scored for being the alliance who captured the most Eye Towers in the PreGame Mode. (1 Point for both if both alliances tied)
1 Point for each Robot on the top of a Base at the end of the match.

In Elimination Matches, one of the three Bases will be removed from the field, and one Base will be marked for only the Red Alliance and the other for only the Blue Alliance.

That actually sounds like a cool game. Both unique and easy for rookies to compete in. And challenging (sounds a lot like 2005 in some ways).

[pokemonmegaman]

What I meant was that the Kinect hardware is more likely tuned to work in a variety of living room lighting situations as opposed to sports arena lighting conditions :p

Not to mention that if another team decides to use a Kinect you will have interference from their Kinect as well...

[Tetraman]

I was thinking that because of the increased interest in the Kinect, and how almost nobody used it last year, they would use the extra time for an increased Hybrid period.

Teams have gotten so good at dead reckoning, unless they had to maneuver around a maze that changes at the start of every match, I highly doubt there is a team out there that wants to spend more time, energy, students and design to make the kinect work.

So long as the two alliances are not really allowed to touch each other during the hybrid mode (ala a rule that you can't cross the midfield line, ect.) then teams are more confidant in their ability of making one simple back-and-fourth dead reckoning motion with their robot.

You can not simply give a team points for using the kinect, and they can't make it so only one robot per alliance moves in a PreGame mode. The answer to this seems to be in what is moving. If it was an arm that had to pick up and lift an object, then sure more teams would try it (since nearly no one was able to autonomously in 2005). However unless the advantage for making the score was worth it, I'd still see less teams doing it.

What the GDC is probably looking into is Aim High. THAT was a game where the atuonomous mode meant something. If you won, not only did you gain 10 bonus points, but you also had control over the play of the game.

Ever since, Autonomous Mode has never really been important enough. I'm sure it has helped win games, but it never had an impact like 2006 did. If the GDC wants more teams to utilize the kinect, they need to make it not only worth it, but there would be a large disadvantage to not giving it a try.

And I just don't think that is possible.

[jawebste]

Good catch. That metal bar resembles the Bishop Wisecarver track for bushing wheels in the FIRST Choice parts selection.

[Gadeer Zbedat]

maybe , will be third alliance in FIRST , the yellow alliance:]

[dellagd]

Good catch. That metal bar resembles the Bishop Wisecarver track for bushing wheels in the FIRST Choice parts selection.

^ wrong thread?


EDIT: I got it now. Forgot about that theory.

[Alan Anderson]

Good catch. That metal bar resembles the Bishop Wisecarver track for bushing wheels in the FIRST Choice parts selection.

You might want to give a little context. Very few people will recognize that you're replying to post #12 in this thread.

[ipburbank]

That yellow tack looks like a tennis ball.

[gabrielau23]

Ever since, Autonomous Mode has never really been important enough. I'm sure it has helped win games, but it never had an impact like 2006 did. If the GDC wants more teams to utilize the kinect, they need to make it not only worth it, but there would be a large disadvantage to not giving it a try.

And I just don't think that is possible.

I'd argue that in Rebound Rumble the autonomous was slightly more important than in previous years. For Breakaway and Logomotion, the advantage was nearly nonexistent, and the endgame for Breakaway was pitiful. Rebound Rumble, I think, has started (hopefully) a trend towards making it relevant again. But you have to remember that the endgame and autonomous are just components of the game as a whole. The main game is still "the game" and thus, it should be the most important

[dcarr]

...and the endgame for Breakaway was pitiful.

What didn't you like about it?

[CalTran]

Probably the minimal reward and the fact that good teams could score more than 2 pts in those last 20 seconds. At least, we figured out we could.

[dcarr]

Probably the minimal reward and the fact that good teams could score more than 2 pts in those last 20 seconds. At least, we figured out we could.

From that point of view I understand. The scoring really wasn't set up a way to make it valuable. I think the GDC has since learned.

In terms of the challenge aspect and the audience thrill, however, I'd call it a success.

(It was my first endgame, and it was fun trying to make it work :) In retrospect, a more thorough game analysis might have dictated a more singular focus on goal scoring)

[CalTran]

From that point of view I understand. The scoring really wasn't set up a way to make it valuable. I think the GDC has since learned.

In terms of the challenge aspect and the audience thrill, however, I'd call it a success.

(It was my first endgame, and it was fun trying to make it work :) In retrospect, a more thorough game analysis might have dictated a more singular focus on goal scoring)

True. Always fun to watch some wicked fast lifts (1114 & 254) or post game lifting (67). Since then, the end game has definitely evolved into something of a major component of the game, and even into a tipping point for some (Queen City Regional - 8th Alliance rode triples to win)

[Peyton Yeung]

Since then, the end game has definitely evolved into something of a major component of the game, and even into a tipping point for some (Queen City Regional - 8th Alliance rode triples to win)

We (Team 45) recognized the balancing nature of the game a a huge point boost and we chose to focus on that rather than the shooting aspect.

The end game is getting more of a "make it or break it" style portion of the game where it can really turn the tide.

[gabrielau23]

@dcarr
yeah, as noted by other posters, the endgame wasn't very significant for the game as a whole. As long as you could find a way to score 2-3 goals in about 20-25 seconds, that would offset the benefits of lifting. Compare that with 2012's game, where it could literally be a game-breaker. 40 points (triple balance), coupled with even a semi-decent tele-op enables you to beat teams far superior to you in terms of shooting.

[|DELTA|]

In 2003 Rick Astley released his compilation album "3 Originals" including the very first song on the list, "Never gonna give you up."

2003 was Stack Attack... please no...

Also worth pointing out that Stack Attack was played 2v2 so would it really be out of the question to return to the stacking idea of scoring (Last time it was even kind of used was 2005) and adding a third alliance to make it 2v2v2 could make it a very modern version of Stack Attack. Someone else mentioned the Aluminum bar at the top as well, I'm thinking 2003 field but in a triangle formation with a triangle mound in the middle, with a 2004 end game bar in a triangular shape over the top to hang on in the end.

All I have to say is... no more boxes please....

This is an interesting theory. Especially since my mentors had our team re-enact the first week of build season in one day with this as the game. last year, we also did this exercise, and the game they picked was the closest one to last year's game ever. I suspect they have some sort of inside source.

[|DELTA|]

I just hope for a game where I can hold as many game objects as I design for. (2006, 2009) I'm kind of tired of the limits, one soccer ball, one tube, three basketballs. Give me some flexibility :)

YES.

[Ferrosaur]

So i checked the EXIF data on the image for the First game hint, and grabbed the gps data from where it was taken and i found this out.
It was taken inside the SEE Science center in Bedford, NH. and guess who had a fundraiser there last month.

Dean Kamen.
With a Tesla Egg. and a water Purifier.
in New Hampshire.

Just my hunch, but i think there is a connection there.

[279 EMPIE]

So i checked the EXIF data on the image for the First game hint, and grabbed the gps data from where it was taken and i found this out.
It was taken inside the SEE Science center in Bedford, NH. and guess who had a fundraiser there last month.

Dean Kamen.
With a Tesla Egg. and a water Purifier.
in New Hampshire.

Just my hunch, but i think there is a connection there.

Since it is leading towards Dean Kamen, this could be lean towards the FIRST Logo. Meaning this could mean using the Triangle, Square, and Circle in the game some how.

[jlmcmchl]

So i checked the EXIF data on the image for the First game hint, and grabbed the gps data from where it was taken and i found this out.
It was taken inside the SEE Science center in Bedford, NH. and guess who had a fundraiser there last month.

Dean Kamen.
With a Tesla Egg. and a water Purifier.
in New Hampshire.

Just my hunch, but i think there is a connection there.

I see magnets and a water game :D

[ttldomination]

Any takers on how long it takes CD and USFIRST to go down after the first game hint is release tomorrow?

- Sunny G.

[Brandon_L]

Game hint count down clock (http://www.terriblefate.com/)

[dellagd]

Game hint count down clock (http://www.terriblefate.com/)

3AM EST?

[Tornades3386]

There are many lyrics in the songs that can be related to this competition:

"You know the rules and so do I" 0:23

"We know the game and we're gonna play it" 1:13

"Never gonna give you up,
Never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you" This might be related to some of the things that we might have to do in the game. It also kind of reminds me of the minibot from the 2011 competition.

This might seem to be useless, but I think the time has something to do with it. 0:23 1:13 both have 3s in it. Not only that, the picture from the hint is precisely at 3:00. So this might be related to the fact that there could be a third alliance. I've also realized that there are a lot of spinning and flips in the video, all movements of rotation. So rotation or spinning could be a major aspect of the 2013 game. I think there might be some other hidden messages in the time somewhere. I might be over thinking things, but who knows :P

[F22Rapture]

There are many lyrics in the songs that can be related to this competition:

"You know the rules and so do I" 0:23

"We know the game and we're gonna play it" 1:13

"Never gonna give you up,
Never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you" This might be related to some of the things that we might have to do in the game. It also kind of reminds me of the minibot from the 2011 competition.

This might seem to be useless, but I think the time has something to do with it. 0:23 1:13 both have 3s in it. Not only that, the picture from the hint is precisely at 3:00. So this might be related to the fact that there could be a third alliance. I've also realized that there are a lot of spinning and flips in the video, all movements of rotation. So rotation or spinning could be a major aspect of the 2013 game. I think there might be some other hidden messages in the time somewhere. I might be over thinking things, but who knows :P

And the 3rd hint was released on 12/21/12, aka 3/3/3

They're pushing it so hard as to wonder whether it's not purely a distraction.

[Flimsor]

I did some more looking into SEE Science Center. Relevant to the threes that are coming up a lot this year, there's a "Mill Number 3" right below it on Google Maps. Also, they just finished up the "Lego Millyard Project" featuring a model with over 3 million Lego bricks and, get this, it was sponsored by FIRST. Lego also turned 80 this year
http://www.see-sciencecenter.org/visitors/millyard-project.aspx

[Flimsor]

Two years ago, minibots were introduced for the game. The line "never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down" may be saying that it's them bringing back old game elements. The minibots were introduced as an integration of the other FIRST Leages, and some teams got FTC teams to build them a minibot. Maybe we've got more integration, but with FLL. FLL is also the third FIRST league.

[Anthony Galea]

Two years ago, minibots were introduced for the game. The line "never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down" may be saying that it's them bringing back old game elements. The minibots were introduced as an integration of the other FIRST Leages, and some teams got FTC teams to build them a minibot. Maybe we've got more integration, but with FLL. FLL is also the third FIRST league.

Better not be FLL, because our school's FLL team is not very reliable.

[Chimera0x694]

The most recently released hint wasn't technically labeled number three.... by definition of the # symbol, it was labeled "pound 3" Take that as you wish.... :D

[gabrielau23]

Just had something. On the previous hint about the hint, there was something about 12/21 being significant. The "end" of the world. Could it be that the hint has something to do with endgame? If so, it WOULD be like the FTC game, where it would be a challenge about lifting. Holding weight. And with the emphasis on 3, it could be a mix-up of Rack and Roll (Rick Roll'd) and Triple Play.

[ttldomination]

Better not be FLL, because our school's FLL team is not very reliable.

Yes, because I'm sure many FTC teams got involved in the designs of the minibots. I don't know how many teams actually used an FTC team to help design their minibots, but I'm sure you could count them on a handful of hands.

- Sunny G.

[Spectare]

Valve is sponsoring this game http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/325/741/3d4.png ;)

[QutePhantom]

In the song, it says that they know the game, and we're going to play it. What if it is all reversed, what if they are hinting, you can NEVER know the game.
The song talks about games, and never over and over.
So if the game tweaks every single game. By using their older courses, that didn't turn out too amazing.
If they added a new challenge every game, or at least you didn't know which challenge you were going to get that game, you would NEVER know the game.
Changes could be from, adding ramps in one game, you may need an arm in another, or maybe you just need to protect something that game.
You Never know the game.
You have to work with the other teams you have. If no teams build an arm on their robot, than you may need to compromise a little.
but you NEVER know the game! :confused:

[OWilliamson]

Hey, so I think the rick roll involves the new size requirements. I don't know about, but we were rolled back 20 inches on our perimeter from last year. Oh and on week three they will reveal it will be a water game. :cool: