View Full Version : Week 1 Analysis
BBray_T1296
28-02-2014, 12:00
This thread is to discuss things you have noticed about the game/gameplay from watching the web-streams and/or being at the event in person, specifically related to in match observations.
For me:
-Defense is very important. Even the best alliances have to chase the ball around the field due to a well timed defensive attack
-When the red ball and blue ball are unpossessed and right next to each other, there is total chaos
-Teams that spend 5 seconds gathering a ball really slow down cycle times (because defense strikes at the worst times)
-Human players carelessly (or not very carefully) depositing balls onto robots greatly hinder cycle efficiency.
-Alliances with human players inbounding a ball onto the field (not onto a robot) tend to take longer to cycle
Jared Russell
28-02-2014, 12:02
G40. G40 everywhere.
Nick Lawrence
28-02-2014, 12:08
G40 is so heavily scrutinized and weighted way too heavily. Matches are currently being decided at it.
Also, teams currently are having difficulty simply passing the ball between robots to each other. It's pretty frustrating when a team's only way to remove the ball from their robot is by shooting it.
Teams are also having difficulty with shooter accuracy. It's also incredibly frustrating when a team has 3 assists on the board at the end of the match, after trying to shoot into the 10pt goal 4 times rather than just finishing the cycle by dumping it into the 1pt goal.
-Nick
pwnageNick
28-02-2014, 12:20
I would pay attention to cycles and how many assists should really be awarded. It's tough to tell but it doesn't always seem that the proper assist points are being awarded However watching the webcasts is difficult so it is just something to pay attention to.
Also please make sure your human players don't mess up G40 like it has been previously stated. Stay in that box. And don't reach your hands out too far. It will kill a match for you.
-Nick
notmattlythgoe
28-02-2014, 12:21
The field is very crowded and the self catch over the truss is going to be very difficult.
idahorobot
28-02-2014, 12:31
I am seeing lots of broken parts. Robust construction will help.
JohnSchneider
28-02-2014, 12:31
Tons of balls being missed in auto and slowing down the entire cycling phase.
missing auton can lose a match.
There's just a ton of poor strategy showing so far; I'm guessing people will soon figure out things like G40, but it also looks like teams are trying to take shots they didn't practice, and thus losing LOTS of time, and forgetting basic stuff like you can't get a truss score with a ball left over from auto.
-High goal shots that are off target are horrible time-wasters
-kiss passes are where it's at
-don't take an auto ball unless you are able to score it
-the field is crowded; pushing power is looking better than evasion
Rangel(kf7fdb)
28-02-2014, 13:12
It seems like foul points are the deciding factor of nearly every single match I'm watching. Perhaps add another space between the safety zone and the human player area so fouls occur less?
Considering the amount of time many alliances are taking to line up, shoot, then chase the ball, I'm not sure Truss points are worth it unless you have a reliable catcher.
Thad House
28-02-2014, 13:23
I'm seeing the penalties and missed auton balls are the killer this year. And having a good intake and driver practice is very important.
Caleb Sykes
28-02-2014, 13:38
I find it funny that the present "safety zone" rules were put in place to help limit the penalties. It seems to me that its effect has only (so far) been to increase the number of penalties. I really hope that this will change as the HPs become more aware of their bodies, and aware of how badly they are hurting their alliance.
Jon Stratis
28-02-2014, 13:54
It was added to reduce robot penalties. Human players are a whole other story, and any time we have human players introducing game objects right up to the field we have penalties for it. It hasn't been much in the past few years due to the restriction on entry - discs had slots, and if the cover was on the ray leading to the slot it was practically impossible to get a penalty; basketballs had the long slot, and teams most often were throwing the ball hard through it, which meant their hands didn't come that close to the opening; Tubes were mostly thrown over the top, and not passed through the slot. This year is vastly different, as there's only the low railing separating the human players from the robots.
Wayne TenBrink
28-02-2014, 13:58
On the scoreboard, there is a number adjacent to the team number. What does it represent? Seems too high to be total assists.
Edit: It appears to be the current ranking.
notmattlythgoe
28-02-2014, 14:01
On the scoreboard, there is a number adjacent to the team number. What does it represent? Seems too high to be total assists.
Could it be current team rank?
Nathan Rossi
28-02-2014, 14:01
On the scoreboard, there is a number adjacent to the team number. What does it represent? Seems too high to be total assists.
It's the team's current rank.
BleakRNS
28-02-2014, 14:11
Teams are also having difficulty with shooter accuracy. It's also incredibly frustrating when a team has 3 assists on the board at the end of the match, after trying to shoot into the 10pt goal 4 times rather than just finishing the cycle by dumping it into the 1pt goal.
Yep. Looking more and more like having a strong shooter–even one doing poorly in all other metrics–will be mandatory if you want any kind of success on your alliance for eliminations at a competitive regional.
- The number of G40 penalties is insane. They should either relax that rule, or make a better barrier so it's clear where the human players can't reach. Just some simple tensabarriers would help.
- This year's high vs low goal scoring at the end of the game is like 2012s 1vs2vs3 robot bridge balance. Coaches MUST pay attention to the score at the end of the match to make better decisions about whether a guaranteed low goal or an iffy high goal is necessary to win the match. Bad coaching is costing teams matches.
- There is some great defense being played, and it's making the difference. There is also some poor defense being played. It's not illegal to hit a robot that's taking a shot. If someone is lining up to shoot, don't just sit there in front of them, push them around! Spin them so they are pointing away from the goal! Or, if they are trying to pick up a ball, get in their way.
- Counter defense also works. I've been impressed by the alliances which use the "middle zone" robot to keep defenders off of the goal scoring robot.
- 3 assist cycles rule. When it happens, it runs up the score very quickly. Three assisters, who work together to score 1 point goals quickly, crush the powerhouse truss shooting-high goal scoring bot acting alone. The GDC succeeded with their goal. If you put three of those powerhouse robots together, I expect to see match scores in the mid to high 300's.
- Last second truss launches win matches.
- The design of the high goals needs fixed. Scored balls are bouncing back out of the goals onto the field, with no points awarded. That's just not right.
- Web streaming technology sucks.
- An awesome unveiling video is not necessarily an indicator of onfield performance.
This year, the human player is very similar to 2010. Small mistakes from an HP yield big swings in the score.
The safety zone was created to reduce G21 penalties from poorly designed and/or controlled robots. Instead we now have the G40 which is an automatic technical.
G21 and G40 were created to keep HPs safe and lawyers happy, but it has the potential to ruin this game.
G40 should be changed so that it is only called if a robot has an apendage sticking out of the field barrier in the area of the HP.
nuggetsyl
28-02-2014, 14:24
We learned today people don't read the rules and have no clue how to score.
- The design of the high goals needs fixed. Scored balls are bouncing back out of the goals onto the field, with no points awarded. That's just not right.
I didn't believe it til I saw one go completely through and come back out. Hopefully they modify those shelves with a sheet of lexan or something to avoid bouncing back off the bars.
Ty Tremblay
28-02-2014, 14:26
I didn't believe it til I saw one go completely through and come back out. Hopefully they modify those shelves with a sheet of lexan or something to avoid bouncing back off the bars.
I heard second hand that FIRST investigated that fix and it was deemed too expensive.
Plywood? Corrugated plastic? Anything smooth :p
notmattlythgoe
28-02-2014, 14:31
Plywood? Corrugated plastic? Anything smooth :p
Doesn't even need to be smooth, just somewhat flat.
The_ShamWOW88
28-02-2014, 14:34
I'm seeing lots of "side-coaching" by Human Players with hands pointing and reaching which may be causing some of the G40....Hands in pockets will be implemented in our matches if you're human player. May make more sense to roll ball into our roller system than reaching and dropping ball into the robot.
Definitely agree that Auto is a killer this year if you miss shots. Seems like it's better to leave balls off the field if you can't reliably put the ball in the goal during Auton.
Max Boord
28-02-2014, 14:36
G40. Way too many matches are decided by penalties and with the average match score double that of a technical foul something needs to be done. G40 needs to be changed to a foul. If contact is made to a robot or ball touching a robot technical foul.
Just my $.02
joelg236
28-02-2014, 14:39
Teams either have no driver practice, don't read the rules, or have very inconsistent shooters.
I haven't seen a fluid match yet.
nuggetsyl
28-02-2014, 14:40
Learning also teams feel the need to pick balls up when pushing would work better in most cases.
rcmolloy
28-02-2014, 14:42
The fact that teams can't hold on to the ball. I was seeing this during reveal videos and even practice matches yesterday. Defense is going to be huge this year and you really have to make sure you hold on to the ball well. If not, it will launched out of your robot with one big hit.
The fact that teams can't hold on to the ball. I was seeing this during reveal videos and even practice matches yesterday. Defense is going to be huge this year and you really have to make sure you hold on to the ball well. If not, it will launched out of your robot with one big hit.
^ This. I think part of our scouting needs to be whether a robot securely holds the ball. It will be nice to know if we're up against an opponent we can make fumble just by giving them a good hit.
Learning also teams feel the need to pick balls up when pushing would work better in most cases.This, right here... Herding counts as an assist. I know teams are proud of their grippers, but in a lot of cases they're not necessary...
Rynocorn
28-02-2014, 14:54
This, right here... Herding counts as an assist. I know teams are proud of their grippers, but in a lot of cases they're not necessary...
I'm very happy that my team thought of this :) we can grab onto the ball with our intake without turning the motor so it's still on the ground and we can pass quickly.
I've been watching the palmetto stream and i have seen a bunch of goals bounce out, teams score their balls into opponents low goals, and teams repeatedly miss high goal shots for the entire match. Seems like a very frustrating game so far but I haven't been able to watch dedicatedly
Overall, a very poor performance in week one.
-Lack of decent prep for the majority of teams is costing ALL teams to do poorly
Most drivers don't really know what to do, ever.
-G40 seems to be a real tough rule. While I definitely understand the reasoning behind the rule, I don't think that teams
-Blue alliance gameday is awesome for viewing streams, but few streams are decent. They are of low quality, and often show useless stuff (stop filming the robot signal lights!!!)
-Scores are all over the place.
-Your alliance partners and opponents decide if you're going to win the match, not the quality/skill of your team.
-The high goal sucks. I've watched a team throw a ball, have it bounce out, pick it up, shoot, have it bounce out again, then run out of time. Unless this was an intentional challenge (which isn't at all shown in the team model of the field), FIRST needs to fix this. It shouldn't be too hard, it's just a hole in a wall. It doesn't get too much simpler than that.
Clinton Bolinger
28-02-2014, 15:06
Wayne,
I'm pretty sure that is their current Rank for the event.
-Clinton-
Lots of teams designed their mechanisms to fit underinflated balls. I'm seeing lots of balls getting stuck in robots. (Or maybe it's the same robot multiple times.)
BleakRNS
28-02-2014, 15:12
How often have teams caught truss shots? Catching seems even less common than 30-point climbs at this point...
Ginger Power
28-02-2014, 15:17
How often have teams caught truss shots? Catching seems even less common than 30-point climbs at this point...
I've seen 2 catches in around 30 matches watched. Whether or not this is a true indicator of what is happening I don't know.
How often have teams caught truss shots? Catching seems even less common than 30-point climbs at this point...
I've seen a few teams come close. 33 caught a ball once or twice but it's not going to be easy. Getting lined up takes time which by then, the opposing alliance sees it and can easily race over and knock you out of position. 33 managed to catch one in traffic but it was really tough.
Watching Alamo, teams are getting better as the day goes but G40 is killing teams. It has decided the outcome of a lot of matches.
- I've notice a few teams trussing the autonomous balls that were missed. It was earlier in the day so it looks like it has been fixed.
- I do like being able to see the rankings next to the teams during the match. It'll be more meaningful late Friday/Saturday morning when trying to make the top 8 will heat up the competition.
Side note: 624 and 33 are the top bots so far from what I've seen in my opinion. 33's ability to pretty much shoot from wherever, whenever and 624's accurate shooting are putting them above the rest of the competition at there respective events.
Losing your ball out of bounds during a cycle is killer.
Surprised to see some alliances leaving a human player area empty near the truss...long delay while field personnel walk errant ball to nearest human player..
PVCpirate
28-02-2014, 15:34
I've been watching Alamo and Palmetto for about a half hour. Fouls notwithstanding, here's my observations:
Alliances that have trouble scoring Auton balls are in trouble
Teams with a quick line-up and shot are doing the best, anyone who can't shoot in about 5 seconds gets attacked by defenders
Not a ton of teamwork yet, alliances that get assists and truss shots consistently are winning easily
I've seen a few exciting matches, notably a buzzer-beater shot in the high goal for the win at Palmetto (update, 1772, 3824 and 346 just scored 290 at Palmetto[!] High score so far from what I can see.)
Truss shot to the human player is proving effective early
Many teams can't hold on to the ball, they are not doing well
I really can't wait for elims tomorrow, I think some of the kinks will be ironed out by then and we'll be treated to some really fun matches.
A match at palmetto they just scored 290. Several cycles with catches. 1772 was catching and scoring and another team I forget the number was getting the inbound and throwing over the truss.
PVCpirate
28-02-2014, 15:37
A match at palmetto they just scored 290. Several cycles with catches. 1772 was catching and scoring and another team I forget the number was getting the inbound and throwing over the truss.
that was 3824 inbounding and trussing.
joelg236
28-02-2014, 15:37
A match at palmetto they just scored 290. Several cycles with catches. 1772 was catching and scoring and another team I forget the number was getting the inbound and throwing over the truss.
I just missed this match. Will there be VODs?
Ginger Power
28-02-2014, 15:40
I just missed this match. Will there be VODs?
I missed it as well by about 10 seconds!!! Can anybody who watched it go into detail about how they put up 290!!
wireties
28-02-2014, 15:41
Watching Alamo action....
- G40 is a killer
- shooting on the move is money
- all balls in auto must be made
- holding onto the ball while being hit is important
- gotta finish assisted cycles, high goal or not
- lots of teams not familiar with the rules
- smooth inbound is a key to quick cycle
PVCpirate
28-02-2014, 15:43
There's a goalie bot at Alamo 4219 that's causing some trouble, they're at least getting in the shooters' heads, and making it tough to rebound the ball after a miss.
Alex Cormier
28-02-2014, 15:45
The same as each year, train your HP's. They are a very valuable asset on the field.
PVCpirate
28-02-2014, 15:46
I missed it as well by about 10 seconds!!! Can anybody who watched it go into detail about how they put up 290!!
After auton, 3824 would inbound, turn, and fire the ball over the truss, and 1772 was waiting on the other side to get the ball and score in the high goal. They probably went through at least 6 cycles of this, and I think they had 2 CATCHES in the process. Very light defense on them. Their third robot was either defending or disabled, not sure which.
Chris Hibner
28-02-2014, 15:46
Score keeping has been problematic. Our last match we scored 105, but got credit for 66 (I don't know how with no 1 pt goals). We had 35 in auto and got credit for 15 and lost 20 assist points. I hope the final standings are separated by a larger margin than that.
Ginger Power
28-02-2014, 15:58
After auton, 3824 would inbound, turn, and fire the ball over the truss, and 1772 was waiting on the other side to get the ball and score in the high goal. They probably went through at least 6 cycles of this, and I think they had 2 CATCHES in the process. Very light defense on them. Their third robot was either defending or disabled, not sure which.
Thanks!
We're there any foul points in match with 290?
After auton, 3824 would inbound, turn, and fire the ball over the truss, and 1772 was waiting on the other side to get the ball and score in the high goal...
Third bot 346
Caleb Sykes
28-02-2014, 16:08
I just watcheed a match from Palmetto (Q51?) in which neither red nor blue scored their missed auto balls. One of the blue robots was spending lots of time trying to score those balls over the truss.
We're there any foul points in match with 290?
Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:31:50 +0000 SCMB Q 45 46 290 4516 4243 1648 3824 346 1772 0 50 25 50 21 190
Lil' Lavery
28-02-2014, 16:11
Just watched the last few matches at Alamo. Refs missed assists in each of the past two, on pretty cut and dry plays. Each match had a three assist cycle counted for two.
Like most people said, G40 violations are really big, but over time that will decrease when human players get more practice. IT seems like the other big thing is missing high goal points in auto and in teleop. The best thing this year may be just quick cycles and if a shot is missed, dump it in the one point goal immediately. The biggest killer is the ball being uncontrolled by a robot on the field
Just watched the last few matches at Alamo. Refs missed assists in each of the past two, on pretty cut and dry plays. Each match had a three assist cycle counted for two.
FIRST is consistently unable to create game rules that refs can enforce appropriately and is consistently unable to create a process and system that allows teams to remain connected to the field and operational for an entire match, so of course they'd design a game that relies heavily on each of those things.
SkittlesCharge
28-02-2014, 16:22
After watching Central Illinois on and off for a few hours, here is what I've seen:
Unscored autonomous balls really hurt alliances, as their opponents immediately rush in to play defense, causing the alliance to waste lots of time trying to score the balls.
Many robots are not sturdy enough, making them lose the ball and/or pieces of their bot whenever they get hit.
Truss shots are a very popular method of scoring but catching is rare. I've seen truss shots on the majority of cycles but only a few catches in all the time I've been watching.
Two robots playing defense can often shut down even the best of offensive robots.
Matches are frequently decided by technical fouls, with the most common being G12 and G40.
Matches seem to either be a huge victory for one alliance or very close until the end.
nuggetsyl
28-02-2014, 16:35
Just watched the last few matches at Alamo. Refs missed assists in each of the past two, on pretty cut and dry plays. Each match had a three assist cycle counted for two.
I have seen several matches like this. But what driving me bonkers is the pure persistence of teams wanting to shoot.
Navid Shafa
28-02-2014, 16:41
Just watched the last few matches at Alamo. Refs missed assists in each of the past two, on pretty cut and dry plays. Each match had a three assist cycle counted for two.
Similar happenings at PNW Auburn Mountainview.
I've seen teams wait 20+ seconds for a refresh on a cycle, not to mention the refs take forever to notice calling a dead ball.
Cycles HAVE to get started quicker. It is unacceptable for teams to be waiting 20-30 seconds for a new ball...
Just watched the last few matches at Alamo. Refs missed assists in each of the past two, on pretty cut and dry plays. Each match had a three assist cycle counted for two.Didn't ref and scorekeeper used to be separate positions? I don't know if FIRST has been lacking for volunteers or what, but if there was ever a game where they really needed to be separate...
...as a ref this year, I am not looking forward to trying to operate the scoring screen while watching for fouls...
Ginger Power
28-02-2014, 16:44
One of the volunteers that I saw, while watching Central Illinois, received a ball that was ejected from the field. The volunteer had no idea what to do with the ball and held onto it for a good 15-20 seconds. It didn't cost the alliance the match because two of the robots broke down but it easily could have changed the game.
A huge theme this year is going to be: Be realistic about the capabilities of your bot. So far, I've seen almost every team over-estimate their ability to:
-Pick up the ball
-Throw the ball over the truss
-Shoot into the high goal
-Catch the ball
-All of the above!
...and it really hurts your alliance when you do that. Teams that lack the theoretical maximum of the very 'top' robots, but that are realistic about what they can do, will do very well - including in eliminations.
Caleb Sykes
28-02-2014, 16:55
A huge theme this year is going to be: Be realistic about the capabilities of your bot. So far, I've seen almost every team over-estimate their ability to:
-Pick up the ball
-Throw the ball over the truss
-Shoot into the high goal
-Catch the ball
-All of the above!
and.. score in autonomous? That's the biggest one for me.
and.. score in autonomous? That's the biggest one for me.Oops, forgot about that one... probably the biggest killer of all, especially when combined with the rest...
=Martin=Taylor=
28-02-2014, 17:10
Watched some Alamo matches...
...man this game is slow...
Sometime 148 just spins in place for entertainment while they wait for a ball to get passed to them. When was the last game powerhouse teams did things like that?
Maybe things will speed up in the following weeks, but this passing on the ground for assists is pretty dull. Hopefully when more teams start catching things will move faster
Not really analysis, just the opinion of a spectator.
JohnSchneider
28-02-2014, 17:12
Watched some Alamo matches...
...man this game is slow...
Sometime 148 just spins in place for entertainment while they wait for a ball to get passed to them. When was the last game powerhouse teams did things like that?
Maybe things will speed up in the following weeks, but this passing on the ground for assists is pretty dull. Hopefully when more teams start catching things will move faster
Not really analysis, just the opinion of a spectator.
In an elimination match or at champs you'd probably be playing defense. Alamo's lower half cant even posses the ball...there's nothing to defend. Better offenses will bring better defenses out.
Rypsnort
28-02-2014, 17:22
some matches look like a little kids soccer game.(bunch of bots in a group getting in each other's way)
Rypsnort
28-02-2014, 17:24
should get better as teams get practice.
BBray_T1296
28-02-2014, 17:35
A huge one for me:
Know when to give up!
Trying to get a truss shot 3 times in a row without success is wasting time
Trying to get a high goal 3 times in a row is wasting time
If you fail once (and have to chase the ball back down), just forget it
Jay O'Donnell
28-02-2014, 17:37
At Nashua there were multiple instances of the ball going through the goal, hitting the back bar, and bouncing back onto the field. I can't see why FIRST couldn't cover that back bar setup with a piece of flat cardboard to make it bounce in a direction where the shot counts.
FIRST is consistently unable to create game rules that refs can enforce appropriately and is consistently unable to create a process and system that allows teams to remain connected to the field and operational for an entire match, so of course they'd design a game that relies heavily on each of those things.
It's understandably tough to get all the assists exactly as they happen, especially with good teams playing. What's frustrating is there seems to be no way for a referee to update a score after it happened (or they just don't care). Alamo's announcer called out multiple mistakes and once warned a team to wait a second for the ref to add an assist, but no correction was ever made.
Watching 118's shots bounce out of the poorly designed goal and watching 148 spin in circles because their drivers were bored was real disappointing.
Knowing the rules is really great, especially for the referees, who failed to disable a robot without bumpers.
On a more positive note, the new score display is kind of better. It's no longer 4:3, it's higher resolution, and it's got more info.
One comment- the rank numbers and green assist circles aren't obvious to understand. Also, the matches seem to be roughly 2 sec longer that they're supposed to be.
Daniel_LaFleur
28-02-2014, 18:17
At Nashua there were multiple instances of the ball going through the goal, hitting the back bar, and bouncing back onto the field. I can't see why FIRST couldn't cover that back bar setup with a piece of flat cardboard to make it bounce in a direction where the shot counts.
Seems to me that this is this years 'gotcha'.
Every year there seems to be a part of the field that doesn't play nice ... seems the high goal is this years part.
Week 2 teams, take note ;)
Michael Hill
28-02-2014, 18:23
It seems like gameplay here at Central illinois has been much more violent than in years past. Teams realized when they don't have the ball, you double team on defense until you're open. I hope everyone built a physically strong robot.
Steven Smith
28-02-2014, 18:24
I think there is a misconception among the "kit bot built to defend" populace that defense equals shot blocking (interfering with the ball trajectory).
Many of these robots would have been better suited to avoid building a 60" tall wall that makes their robot top heavy (and the drivers move it around gingerly), but to instead build a basic kitbot with well mounted battery/electronics/etc, a few pounds of ballast, and just get in the way or hit teams as they try to shoot.
I haven't seen many (any?) "swats" of balls. The most effective defense has been pushing a robot as it attempts to shoot and altering the shot trajectory, or knocking it loose.
Any team can do this effectively IMO.
After just finishing watching the 118 vs 148 match, it's very disappointing that the human player can not get a ball until after the ref's light up the post, which takes 10-15 seconds. As soon as a cycle is finished, the alliance should be able to get another cycle started right away.
Also, G40 seems to be the main decider of most of these matches...
OK, I'm confused. What just happened in the alamo regional?
118 sat there for about 10 seconds before the light on the pedestal lit up, and because of that, they couldn't get another shot in before the match ended. Why didn't the pedestal light up? No balls were on the field.
This is looking bad. Bad calls everywhere.
Another question, what was the field fault (alamo)? I'm watching an ad now.
JohnSchneider
28-02-2014, 19:00
Another question, what was the field fault (alamo)? I'm watching an ad now.
refs declared 2 balls dead and then started another cycle
I think too much has been put on the refs this year. I saw several matches where low goal scorers had arms inside the low goal directly in front of a ref. not just in, but like 12-15 inches in and no call. Several long delays on lighting the pedestal after a score, lots of high goal bounce outs, and numerous pickups the in no way were 20" or less outside the frame. I also notice a few games that had scores climbing and climbing when multiple autonomous balls were still on the field. Lots of scoring trouble on top of all that. Several matches where no low goals were scored, but scores were odd numbers.
Overall, I think this game could be great with practice. But, we all might have to wait a few weeks to be truly amazed by it. It will take a lot for teams, refs, and volunteers to get the hang of this one. Even more for everyone to all manage it at the same time.
Thad House
28-02-2014, 19:00
I'm see alot of week 1 similarities between this year and 2010. Both were penalties are too large and ruining the game. For the past few years, it was fairly easy to make up a foul. a tech foul was hard, but still very doable. This year, unless you are an AMAZING alliance, making up a foul is difficult, and a tech is almost impossible. I wouldn't be surprised to see an update next tues with some major changes to the ways fouls work, because right now, it seems broken.
Also similar, is making up a deficit is very difficult, and i have seen very very few close matches so far, which is fairly different from what we have seen the past few years. Since most of the 2010 students have graduated, most students dont remember how bad that really was, and I see alot of similarities right now. I hope they can get fixed.
Something I would like to see, is that if fouls worked like they used to, and took away from your alliance, how many matches would be 0-0. Also, maybe grab that information from the last 2 years, and check those percentages as well. I think those would be interesting to see.
Ian Curtis
28-02-2014, 19:08
I think too much has been put on the refs this year. I saw several matches where low goal scorers had arms inside the low goal directly in front of a ref. not just in, but like 12-15 inches in and no call.
Isn't this legal? You are just not allowed to break the plane of your opponent's goal?
ROBOTS may not break the planes of the openings of the opponent’s LOW GOALS.
Violation: FOUL. If extended, strategic, or repeated, TECHNICAL FOUL.
I think too much has been put on the refs this year. I saw several matches where low goal scorers had arms inside the low goal directly in front of a ref. not just in, but like 12-15 inches in and no call. Several long delays on lighting the pedestal after a score, lots of high goal bounce outs, and numerous pickups the in no way were 20" or less outside the frame. I also notice a few games that had scores climbing and climbing when multiple autonomous balls were still on the field. Lots of scoring trouble on top of all that. Several matches where no low goals were scored, but scores were odd numbers.
Overall, I think this game could be great with practice. But, we all might have to wait a few weeks to be truly amazed by it. It will take a lot for teams, refs, and volunteers to get the hang of this one. Even more for everyone to all manage it at the same time.The problem, in my opinion, is that refs are required to both watch a quadrant of the field that may include several robots and operate the scoring screen. If I recall correctly there used to be separate scorekeepers, and it's still listed as a volunteer position in VIMS; I know there isn't an endless supply of volunteers, but if there was ever a game that needed scorekeepers...
Isn't this legal? You are just not allowed to break the plane of your opponent's goal?
You are right, I wrote too fast for my brain to keep up. But I did notice it happening with defensive bots (that may have sustained a little damage) when trying to pick up a ball by the opponents low goal as well. Not very often, but at least three or four times in all of the matches I saw today.
Laaba 80
28-02-2014, 19:45
Just watched the last few matches at Alamo. Refs missed assists in each of the past two, on pretty cut and dry plays. Each match had a three assist cycle counted for two.
Something I've noticed is many teams inbound the ball to robot A, A passes to B, then B does a truss pass, but B never completely crossed into the white zone before passing so no assist is scored. The team took 20 points off the board for no reason.
Not trying to tell you what you saw, but I thought the same thing for a while until I noticed this. I've actually been pretty ok with the assist scoring so far, the slow cycle restarts are a different story though
I haven't been able to watch a single match due to my day job. But after reading this entire thread, it really seems like typical Week 1 jitters.
Except for that anti-scoring device behind the goal. That really should be fixed. We spend thousands of dollars per year as an organization on FIRST's partners and I'm sure one of them can sponsor a fix.
PVCpirate
28-02-2014, 20:27
I haven't been able to watch a single match due to my day job. But after reading this entire thread, it really seems like typical Week 1 jitters.
Except for that anti-scoring device behind the goal. That really should be fixed. We spend thousands of dollars per year as an organization on FIRST's partners and I'm sure one of them can sponsor a fix.
If you want to see some matches, Auburn-Mountainview in Washington is still running http://www.ustream.tv/channel/firstwa-blue.
If you want to see some matches, Auburn-Mountainview in Washington is still running http://www.ustream.tv/channel/firstwa-blue.
Sweet, thanks!
ehochstein
28-02-2014, 20:33
The problem, in my opinion, is that refs are required to both watch a quadrant of the field that may include several robots and operate the scoring screen. If I recall correctly there used to be separate scorekeepers, and it's still listed as a volunteer position in VIMS; I know there isn't an endless supply of volunteers, but if there was ever a game that needed scorekeepers...
There are still scorekeepers this year. I am just unsure whether your definition of scorekeeper is the same as what it is actually defined as.
There are still scorekeepers this year. I am just unsure whether your definition of scorekeeper is the same as what it is actually defined as.I was referring to volunteers that specifically operated the scoring screens. I thought those used to exist, although it's possible I'm wrong.
Thad House
28-02-2014, 20:37
At auburn, I just saw a robot toss the ball to go over the truss. It arc'd, hit the ground, bounced and then went over the truss. It was in the correct direction, but the Head ref still said it didnt count. What rule would cause this, because that doesnt make sense.
Jared Russell
28-02-2014, 20:38
At auburn, I just saw a robot toss the ball to go over the truss. It arc'd, hit the ground, bounced and then went over the truss. It was in the correct direction, but the Head ref still said it didnt count. What rule would cause this, because that doesnt make sense.
I saw that too, and it was one of many incorrect rulings I've seen today.
eddie12390
28-02-2014, 20:38
I don't want to call out a specific team, but there are instances such as match 34 at the Auburn Mountainview District Event where a robot blantantly stuck it's arm ~15 inches into the low goal multiple times. It doesn't seem like certain penalties are even being watched for due to the complexity of keeping track of things like assists while watching for other penalties.
At auburn, I just saw a robot toss the ball to go over the truss. It arc'd, hit the ground, bounced and then went over the truss. It was in the correct direction, but the Head ref still said it didnt count. What rule would cause this, because that doesnt make sense.
I was wondering about that also, is there anything that specifies that a team must throw the ball to score it? What if a team were to decide that they wanted to bounce a ball into the high goal?
That TRUSS really depended on the interpretation of what "caused" the ball to go over the truss. Seems like the ref used a pretty chicken-and-egg interpretation to me.
A BALL is considered SCORED over the TRUSS if a ROBOT causes a BALL to pass though...
Thad House
28-02-2014, 20:42
I saw that too, and it was one of many incorrect rulings I've seen today.
Yeah I've seen alot of bad rulings today, and it worries me. There is just so much to watch for this year...
Caleb Sykes
28-02-2014, 20:43
I don't want to call out a specific team, but there are instances such as match 34 at the Auburn Mountainview District Event where a robot blantantly stuck it's arm ~15 inches into the low goal multiple times. It doesn't seem like certain penalties are even being watched for due to the complexity of keeping track of things like assists while watching for other penalties.
Which low goal did they stick their arm into? Their own low goal, or the opponent's?
LDiDomenico
28-02-2014, 20:43
After watching the Alamo Regional and Auburn Mountainview District competitions I noticed a few things.
1. Field reset is so much faster than last year.
2. Sometimes assists aren't being called.
3. A lot of matches are being determined by fouls.
4. Too many teams don't know what to do on the field.
orangemoore
28-02-2014, 20:47
I have really noticed that the assists they are scoring are really obvious. Some are not being called at all. I think that this may improve with time through the season but for the teams that are competing now it may be making it a lot harder.
eddie12390
28-02-2014, 20:47
Which low goal did they stick their arm into? Their own low goal, or the opponent's?
I apologize, I was under the misconception that it was illegal to put appendages into either low goal.
pwnageNick
28-02-2014, 21:32
The balls bouncing out of the goals and some assists not being counted have to be the 2 biggest things out there so far. I have especially noticed that the assists that are left out most often are the third one of a cycle, at least it seemed to be the most prevalent.
I think it is true that a lot of teams look like they don't know what to do out there, but I think it already started to get much better by the end of the day. Keep in mind even for teams that practiced a ton before competition, they probably were not able to practice with 5 other robots running around the field getting in the way. This will take some time, like it does with every other game. I t is just more noticeable this year because there is only one game object. By the end of the day a lot of teams were really starting to learn how to trade off between dealing with the ball and playing defense effectively.
Also, while robot catching has not been prevalent due to the middle of the field often having complete chaos all over the place, throwing over the truss to the human player has been an extremely popular strategy and has been pretty effective in a lot of matches.
I think tomorrow will really give us a better idea of how this game can be played now that teams have gotten accustomed to the dynamic. We can't be too quick to judge about everything so quickly.
-Nick
G26-1
ROBOTS may not break the planes of the openings of the opponent’s LOW GOALS.
Violation: FOUL. If extended, strategic, or repeated, TECHNICAL FOUL.
XaulZan11
28-02-2014, 22:29
At Central Illinois, the refs are not calling G3 when teams lose their bumpers. Considering it should be a foul and disabling the robot, this is a pretty big deal.
Michael Hill
28-02-2014, 22:43
At Central Illinois, the refs are not calling G3 when teams lose their bumpers. Considering it should be a foul and disabling the robot, this is a pretty big deal.
Robot parts left on the field seems to be called rather inconsistently. Sometimes it's a 20 point foul. Sometimes it's a 50 point technical foul. Seems REALLY harsh for such a violent game.
I haven't been able to watch a single match due to my day job. But after reading this entire thread, it really seems like typical Week 1 jitters.
Except for that anti-scoring device behind the goal. That really should be fixed. We spend thousands of dollars per year as an organization on FIRST's partners and I'm sure one of them can sponsor a fix.
The fix was estimated even before week zero. I heard that given the number of fields it was estimated at over $60k. Where I totally agree something needs to be done, I also understand FIRST waiting to see how big of an issue it really was. However after week zero, and one day of qualifications, I think they have their answer.
Christopher149
28-02-2014, 23:19
- A beautifully flowing match (for at least 1 alliance) is such a rarity, but it wins matches by a landslide.
- Assist!
- Balls left over from auto are sometimes never scored, and this makes the audience cringe and makes you (probably :o) lose the match.
- Assists plus a fast 1-pointer are better than assist plus a slow/repeated-because-of-misses 10-pointer.
- I hope elims has filtered us down to the competent, so that a match might be a bit more exciting/high scoring.
- There have been matches where a single bot that can 10-point and knows what it is doing can win a match (no assists).
Wayne TenBrink
28-02-2014, 23:25
Is there a way to identify the "un-penalized" score for a match? Does the cumulative "TELEOP" score in the Team Standings on the FIRST website include penalties?
Is there a way to identify the "un-penalized" score for a match? Does the cumulative "TELEOP" score in the Team Standings on the FIRST website include penalties?
Teleop + Autonomous (hybrid) in the twitter feed.
FRCFMS
For example RTS +RHS = Red points scored
Kevin Kolodziej
28-02-2014, 23:38
One thing I noticed that I dont understand at all is why the truss at the Southfield district does not have the vertical posts in line with the field boundary. I've seen at least two TRUSS scores be denied by the ball hitting those posts and bouncing backwards at other events. Why are MI teams playing on an altered field??
Is there a way to identify the "un-penalized" score for a match? Does the cumulative "TELEOP" score in the Team Standings on the FIRST website include penalties?
Short answers: Yes. Yes.
Break down the ways to score into Fouls, Auto, Assist, T&C, and Balls. From the FRC FMS, you have FP (Fouls), HS (Auto), and TS (Assist+T&C+Ball), so you can get unpenalised score from there. In the Standings, you have Assist, Auto, T&C and Teleop. Teleop includes every way to score not previously mentioned, so Teleop = Balls + Fouls. I've done basic comparisons between FMS and Standings pages, this analysis checks out.
One thing I noticed that I dont understand at all is why the truss at the Southfield district does not have the vertical posts in line with the field boundary. I've seen at least two TRUSS scores be denied by the ball hitting those posts and bouncing backwards at other events. Why are MI teams playing on an altered field??
I was told that the FTA said that during the driver's meeting, Southfield didn't receive them in their shipment from Manchester.
It seems like gameplay here at Central illinois has been much more violent than in years past. Teams realized when they don't have the ball, you double team on defense until you're open. I hope everyone built a physically strong robot.
This. I expected a physical game, but wow, this reminds me of the years before bumpers.
I am surprised by the scores this early in the season. Teams are figuring out how to Truss + 2 Assist or to 3 Assist pretty quickly considering it's not even Saturday yet. I haven't seen a ton of matches today at CIR but it seemed like a good bot running single cycles was only effective very early in the day.
Alex Cormier
01-03-2014, 00:44
The balls bouncing out of the goals and some assists not being counted have to be the 2 biggest things out there so far. I have especially noticed that the assists that are left out most often are the third one of a cycle, at least it seemed to be the most prevalent.
The last team needs to be entirely in a zone, if the robot is straddling between zones, it affects the assists.
PVCpirate
01-03-2014, 01:05
This might be unpopular, but I don't think the bar behind the goal should be changed. When I first saw people posting about it, I pulled up the official drawings and found the part. If I was on a team, there's a decent chance I would have wanted to see exactly how the goal would look at competition, and at least try to adjust my shots accordingly. The rules also state that the ball must go through the goal and stay there to be scored. It's the same bar for everyone, and it was never a secret.
The fix was estimated even before week zero. I heard that given the number of fields it was estimated at over $60k. Where I totally agree something needs to be done, I also understand FIRST waiting to see how big of an issue it really was. However after week zero, and one day of qualifications, I think they have their answer.
There are around 20 fields. I find it hard to believe FIRST couldnt find a solution under 3k/field.
indubitably
01-03-2014, 01:16
I personally think this game will evolve well in the coming weeks. It is frustrating when there are issues early on that seem obvious to predict but they will most likely correct it enough to make it competitive in the coming weeks.
Unlike most people apparently, I have seen a decent amount of close games and they get very intense. Yes, endgames have some inherent excitement, but seeing frantic strategies develop to score quick points is something that seemed rare in close games in the past.
There was a pretty crazy ending at Central Illinois where the match was tied and both alliances inbounded their balls around the 7 sec mark. Red launched the truss shot first, got the 10 pts, and then the red ball collided with the blue ball on the other side of the truss, preventing blue from tying it up again.
PVCpirate
01-03-2014, 01:26
I personally think this game will evolve well in the coming weeks. It is frustrating when there are issues early on that seem obvious to predict but they will most likely correct it enough to make it competitive in the coming weeks.
Unlike most people apparently, I have seen a decent amount of close games and they get very intense. Yes, endgames have some inherent excitement, but seeing frantic strategies develop to score quick points is something that seemed rare in close games in the past.
There was a pretty crazy ending at Central Illinois where the match was tied and both alliances inbounded their balls around the 7 sec mark. Red launched the truss shot first, got the 10 pts, and then the red ball collided with the blue ball on the other side of the truss, preventing blue from tying it up again.
I saw some close matches, Palmetto was usually pretty competitive, there was a nice buzzer-beater shot and a couple times where an alliance needed one last shot but couldn't score it. I think elims tomorrow will be fun:D
tkell274
01-03-2014, 01:27
I agree with everyone else here that the issues of the balls bouncing out and the refs not catching all the assists and fouls is a big problem. With that said you need to have someone paying attention to the whole match so in case you lose for a reason you shouldn't have you can go and discuss it with the head ref.
Another pet peeve of mine for this year is seeing alliances playing matches with only two robots. This is totally unacceptable in my opinion. In past years you could get away with this because all you needed was one strong robot to win it. But now with the addition of assist points the third team is very vital which is why I believe that unless your robot is totally disabled and not even able to move, you HAVE to get your robot out to the field to help play defense and help in the assist process. Obviously this will not be such an issue come later weeks but to not go out for a qualification match at all just irritates me.
Michael Corsetto
01-03-2014, 01:31
One question: Should referee scoring stations be positioned here, like in this image? http://i.imgur.com/Ufs5xZFl.jpg It honestly gets in the way of the Human Player.
This game is hard to play well. Given that powerhouses aren't setting the high scores, it's anyone's game IMO.
We'll see what inland looks like tomorrow. If you want a good webcast, check out citruscircuits.org/live Full HD, full field video! Hope you all like it!
-Mike
One question: Should referee scoring stations be positioned here, like in this image? http://i.imgur.com/Ufs5xZFl.jpg It honestly gets in the way of the Human Player.
This game is hard to play well. Given that powerhouses aren't setting the high scores, it's anyone's game IMO.
We'll see what inland looks like tomorrow. If you want a good webcast, check out citruscircuits.org/live Full HD, full field video! Hope you all like it!
-Mike
The refs have their work cut out for them this year! They said the scoring panel touchscreen icons have to be pushed several times to get it to respond, which is causing delays in the pedastal lighting up. Also they have to watch robot interactions on one side of the field and then quickly turn around to catch the start of the cycle on the other end. They say this is the hardest game they have had to ref so far. Some have been reffing for 6 years now. Hopefully everyone shows patience with them.
Michael Corsetto
01-03-2014, 02:33
The refs have their work cut out for them this year! They said the scoring panel touchscreen icons have to be pushed several times to get it to respond, which is causing delays in the pedastal lighting up. Also they have to watch robot interactions on one side of the field and then quickly turn around to catch the start of the cycle on the other end. They say this is the hardest game they have had to ref so far. Some have been reffing for 6 years now. Hopefully everyone shows patience with them.
Great points Doug!
I wish we could just grab the ball, and refs would call a foul if it was too early. We have some great refs at IE, I really hope that translates to great matches!
-Mike
atucker4072
01-03-2014, 02:48
What I really don't get is teams clearing off missed auto balls. Is it really that hard to push a ball into the low goal? You don't even have to collect it, it can just be pushed!
Teams need to play in zones. There are so many times when I see two robots on the same alliance go after the ball. What should be happening (at least what I feel like) is that there should be one robot in each zone. Then when you don't have a ball you are playing zone defense.
By the way are we really going to ignore the fact that 148 and 624 got a the ball hot goal auto their first time up? I watched it on a webcast and it was the most intense action all day because of how close they were to missing/making it.
And how about those mecanum drives? Has any team really found it that much better? The ones that are going well are the drives with omni wheels. They are able to just spin out of there. Also I'm pretty sure most traction drives could push mecanum drives.
One last not. The less time that you have, the better. It means you are picking up the ball quick and racking up those assits. I saw several times were a team took a while to collect the ball, even more time ti get the ball stable on their robot just to miss a high goal.
Steven Donow
01-03-2014, 05:27
The refs have their work cut out for them this year! They said the scoring panel touchscreen icons have to be pushed several times to get it to respond, which is causing delays in the pedastal lighting up. Also they have to watch robot interactions on one side of the field and then quickly turn around to catch the start of the cycle on the other end. They say this is the hardest game they have had to ref so far. Some have been reffing for 6 years now. Hopefully everyone shows patience with them.
Can confirm that panel response times aren't that great. In regards to the picture, I believe there is no actual protocol for where exactly the panel is supposed to.be placed...I had to move mine around multiple times during field reset just to avoid robots coming on/off from hitting it...
And since this may be a bit of a misconception, Refs do not determine assists. Only Zone Possessions.
JohnSchneider
01-03-2014, 07:37
This game is hard to play well. Given that powerhouses aren't setting the high scores, it's anyone's game IMO.
148 and 624 put up 200
I'll first say that I empathize with the hard working volunteers and respect the work done by the FIRST organization to design all of the aspects of this game.
That said, I am pretty concerned about the pedestals not lighting, the assists not being awarded, and the excessive human player penalties. This game has a lot of potential, so I really hope those three major issues are addressed somehow.
Any alliance that gets eliminated this afternoon due to incorrect scoring after having clearly won on the field is going to be pretty crestfallen. It's a bit like scoring a touchdown, kicking the extra point, and kicking off to the other team, then receiving only four points put on the scoreboard. The scoring is certainly more complex than football, but when teams don't receive the correct points for their actions, the level of unfairness is the same in Aerial Assist as it is in football.
The fix was estimated even before week zero. I heard that given the number of fields it was estimated at over $60k.
If the fix was estimated at $60K, then it was the wrong solution.
Slapping some plywood up there would fix things, but probably not provide the look FIRST is going for. A hundred feet of nylon rope wrapped around the rear two bars and secured with zip ties would solve the problem and not look too bad. Even 1/8" clear polycarbonate isn't that expensive.
But just shrugging your shoulders, giving up and doing nothing is unacceptable. This is an organization that is supposed to provide inspiration for kids to become engineers. Don't tell me that there isn't a simple, cheap way to solve this problem, because if our team were faced with a problem like this on our robot, we'd find one.
Some stats from the Twitter data for Friday's Qual matches:
99 average winning score
290 max winning score
7 min winning score
44 average losing score
181 max losing score
55 average winning margin
244 max winning margin
23 average winning foul
200 max winning foul
0 min winning foul
6 average losing foul
100 max losing foul
0 min losing foul
27 average winning auto
75 max winning auto
18 average losing auto
65 max losing auto
49 average winning TeleOp
190 max winning TeleOp
20 average losing TeleOp
102 max losing TeleOp
17 # matches whose outcome would have changed with no foul points
Some stats from the Twitter data for Friday's Qual matches:
...
17 # matches whose outcome would have changed with no foul points[/CODE]
Average scores with or without fouls?
Average scores with or without fouls?
All the stats labeled "scores" in the previous post are the final match scores, as in "Red Alliance won the match with a final score of 119 to 87"
Here are some additional stats:
122 average winning score without foul
417 max winning score without foul
50 average losing score without foul
281 max losing score without foul
MrForbes
01-03-2014, 10:22
Ether, how many matches do those statistics cover?
Ether, how many matches do those statistics cover?
370 Qual matches, for:
ILIL
MICEN
MISOU
ONTO2
SCMB
TXSA
WAAMV
Friday Twitter data
Daniel_LaFleur
01-03-2014, 10:37
This might be unpopular, but I don't think the bar behind the goal should be changed. When I first saw people posting about it, I pulled up the official drawings and found the part. If I was on a team, there's a decent chance I would have wanted to see exactly how the goal would look at competition, and at least try to adjust my shots accordingly. The rules also state that the ball must go through the goal and stay there to be scored. It's the same bar for everyone, and it was never a secret.
Agreed.
I noticed this when we were practicing on the field here in Georgia (Thanks Walton). I suspect that FIRST knew about this and decided to leave it.
Agreed.
I noticed this when we were practicing on the field here in Georgia (Thanks Walton). I suspect that FIRST knew about this and decided to leave it.
..and also decided to provide teams with instructions to build a field element that was substantively different than the real field?
I don't buy it. If the bar knocking balls out of the goal was meant to be part of the 'fun', that characteristic of gameplay should be present in the low-cost field parts.
Daniel_LaFleur
01-03-2014, 10:50
..and also decided to provide teams with instructions to build a field element that was substantively different than the real field?
I don't buy it. If the bar knocking balls out of the goal was meant to be part of the 'fun', that characteristic of gameplay should be present in the low-cost field parts.
Low cost fields always have 'differences'. This is a known byproduct of using different materials/designs and should be looked at before the competition.
Not sayin' it's right ... but it was in all the field drawings
Quick links to Week1 Match Results and Team Standings:
CASB Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/CASB/matchresults.html)
CASB Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/CASB/rankings.html)
ILIL Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/ILIL/matchresults.html)
ILIL Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/ILIL/rankings.html)
MICEN Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/MICEN/matchresults.html)
MICEN Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/MICEN/rankings.html)
MISOU Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/MISOU/matchresults.html)
MISOU Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/MISOU/rankings.html)
NHNAS Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/NHNAS/matchresults.html)
NHNAS Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/NHNAS/rankings.html)
ONTO2 Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/ONTO2/matchresults.html)
ONTO2 Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/ONTO2/rankings.html)
SCMB Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/SCMB/matchresults.html)
SCMB Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/SCMB/rankings.html)
TXSA Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/TXSA/matchresults.html)
TXSA Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/TXSA/rankings.html)
WAAMV Match Results (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/WAAMV/matchresults.html)
WAAMV Team Standings (http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/events/WAAMV/rankings.html)
The foghorns are back. I've been watching fairly casually and intermittently, but I've observed at least four field faults and/or match replays. Two yesterday were announced as scoring errors, and the one I just saw was announced as an error in transition from auton to teleop (gave an alliance a new ball before the auto balls were gone). Never did find out what the deal was on the fourth one as I had been watching with no audio.
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 13:11
Things I've noticed watching matches this morning, besides the massive human player penalties:
1. Ball pickup must be awesome, every time.
2. Every time your ball hits the ground, your opponent can screw you.
3. Accuracy is king--if you can't shoot, don't try.
4. Truss points win games, but only if it doesn't result in an uncontrolled ball.
5. Robots that can take a direct load are much, much faster than robots that can't (due to #2).
6. This game is much more interesting to watch than I expected it to be.
7. Team communication is not where it should be for most games.
8. Defense is crucial and absolutely killer, but if you need two robots to stop one, you're gonna have a bad time....
..and also decided to provide teams with instructions to build a field element that was substantively different than the real field?
I don't buy it. If the bar knocking balls out of the goal was meant to be part of the 'fun', that characteristic of gameplay should be present in the low-cost field parts.
When was the last time a team field drawing matched the real field? I don't even want to think about trying to build a pyramid last year that came anywhere near what was at competition. Teams should understand this by now, and rookies should be mentored by teams that already know. This like when teams complained about discs bouncing out last year after they shot them into the goal at 100 MPH with 15000 RPM on the disc. FIRST changed their design for that, but I don't think they ever should have.
The field drawings have shown this potential since day one, if a team didn't address it in their game analysis they will face the consequences.
We might have problems with our high goal shot from a certain distance, but we have a range to shoot from if we find an issue. I think it is a great engineering challenge.
wireties
01-03-2014, 14:07
..and also decided to provide teams with instructions to build a field element that was substantively different than the real field?
I don't buy it. If the bar knocking balls out of the goal was meant to be part of the 'fun', that characteristic of gameplay should be present in the low-cost field parts.
I understand the frustration (and agree it sucks) but a round metal bar that long and that high off the ground plus required support would run up costs for teams on the low-cost version, correct?
Grim Tuesday
01-03-2014, 14:37
I flipped on some webcasts today and honestly, for someone who has been out of the loop for the entire season (since week 2), the game is very difficult to watch. I was expecting that the two balls would help focus gameplay, but it seems that robots almost forget what to do when they don't have the ball, milling around and making the field a mess. Just like 2009, the game is focused not on the goal but on other robots.
I think it just isn't very fun to watch. None of the tasks are instantly interesting to the public (climbing was cool no matter what) or immediately obvious what robots are doing: putting basketballs in hoops simply made sense but robots picking up and dropping balls just looks disorganized. With the lack of an endgame, there is no task to wrap up the match so it just kind of fizzles out.
This is an odd change of direction because in the last few years, the games were only getting better and better with regard to that, and the GDC was making a conscious effort. I wonder if they thought this game would be interesting to watch and it isn't, or if they didn't have that as one of their primary goals anymore?
Edit: I've been watching a little more and am warming up to the game a little bit. Good alliances, like the 525/1986 one in Illinois that manage to actually execute a strategy make the game much more interesting. I based my original post on qualifications at GTR, so maybe I spoke too soon.
PVCpirate
01-03-2014, 15:00
I'm watching the Palmetto Eliminations right now, and I have to say this is fun! As a sports fan, I'm seeing everything I love: matches coming down to the last shot, hard hitting defense, robots hitting shots with said defense in their face. Haven't seen a tech foul in the 3 matches I saw. Sure the teamwork could be better, but I think that will come soon.
Some stats based on Twitter feed (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127354)
JohnSchneider
01-03-2014, 17:46
A ref committed a field fault in finals at Alamo just now and then when contested said it didn't matter....
Balls going out of play are the biggest problem with consistently.
Paul Copioli
01-03-2014, 18:03
This game ranks right up there with 2003. May even be "better".
PVCpirate
01-03-2014, 18:03
What happened at the end of Alamo? I just caught the end where they announced that 118's alliance won.
Canon reeves
01-03-2014, 18:05
What happened at the end of Alamo? I just caught the end where they announced that 118's alliance won.
Probably one of the best matches I've ever watched, it was a tie 85 to 85, red alliance had already won the first final, texplosion played amazing defense, robowranglers were scoring great, so were robonauts, but in the end after further review robonauts alliance won by ten points! Can someone post a video of that match?
MooreteP
01-03-2014, 18:06
I flipped on some webcasts today and honestly, for someone who has been out of the loop for the entire season (since week 2), the game is very difficult to watch. I was expecting that the two balls would help focus gameplay, but it seems that robots almost forget what to do when they don't have the ball, milling around and making the field a mess. Just like 2009, the game is focused not on the goal but on other robots.
I think it just isn't very fun to watch. None of the tasks are instantly interesting to the public (climbing was cool no matter what) or immediately obvious what robots are doing: putting basketballs in hoops simply made sense but robots picking up and dropping balls just looks disorganized. With the lack of an endgame, there is no task to wrap up the match so it just kind of fizzles out.
This is an odd change of direction because in the last few years, the games were only getting better and better with regard to that, and the GDC was making a conscious effort. I wonder if they thought this game would be interesting to watch and it isn't, or if they didn't have that as one of their primary goals anymore?
Edit: I've been watching a little more and am warming up to the game a little bit. Good alliances, like the 525/1986 one in Illinois that manage to actually execute a strategy make the game much more interesting. I based my original post on qualifications at GTR, so maybe I spoke too soon.
Yep, I am glad that I waited to post until after I had watched the elimination matches today.
Eliminations provided for a consistent alliance to execute a good game plan. But it was interesting to watch how they had to improvise when defense arose. Co-opertition indeed.
Alamo Final 2 just finished, whoa what a match! The human player caught an errant truss shot and inbound it as he fell out of his boundary area.
It ended in a tie, but I think a truss score that I thought was missed may have been added upon review. (uh-oh, booth reviews)
GDC done good creating a game that is complex with reasonable point values (Except for some of those fouls).
Referees were better today. (must have been some calibration) They are still being asked to do too much though.
This game should get better and better through the next eight weeks.
What happened at the end of Alamo? I just caught the end where they announced that 118's alliance won.Apparently they decided after review of the cycles that the real-time score of 85 to 85 was wrong. I believe it would have been a tie otherwise.
Would like to see a video of that match, not because I think they were wrong, but just to see what happened...
This game ranks right up there with 2003. May even be "better".Are you talking about an excess of defense? I think most of that is teams not knowing how to pass the ball, or lacking any kind of strategy to counter defensive robots. Yeah, there's more defense then recent years, but is that really a bad thing?
Either way, you can't deny it makes for exciting games!
Jared Russell
01-03-2014, 18:15
Yeah, there's more defense then recent years, but is that really a bad thing?
Yes
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 18:16
Yes
I like it.
Tommy F.
01-03-2014, 18:18
I like it.
My appendages do not.
Chris_Ely
01-03-2014, 18:26
My appendages do not.
Neither do my eyes as a spectator.
Most of the time matches look like the goal is to run into each other while throwing balls around.
Mr. Pockets
01-03-2014, 18:27
Anyone have any clue what happened in Alliance 2 vs Alliance 6 semis at Centerline? It originally said that Alliance 2 had won, then there were two more matches played and Alliance 6 won each one
The webcast wasn't up for the matches. Can anyone confirm what happened?
JohnSchneider
01-03-2014, 18:29
To those asking about alamo, finals 1 showed a tie but after further review the refs said alliance 1 won. The head ref committed a field fault and when contested said it didn't matter. Finals 2 showed a tie real time but the refs came back after and said alliance 1 won. A huge penalty wasn't called on 118's human player.
The finals had to be replayed a few times due to field connection and functionality. A misfire caused a robot to almost take out the MC
I have no understanding of how real time scoring cannot be correct in this game. The biggest problem is a consistency on putting auto balls that miss back in play and the fact that entire assists are being wiped out when a ball leaves the field.
I haven't played this game yet but from attending a regional I'm almost not looking forward to it...
Paul Copioli
01-03-2014, 18:31
Are you talking about an excess of defense? I think most of that is teams not knowing how to pass the ball, or lacking any kind of strategy to counter defensive robots. Yeah, there's more defense then recent years, but is that really a bad thing?
Either way, you can't deny it makes for exciting games!
I am talking about even if your team runs "the perfect cycle", each robot is relegated to defense for 2/3 of the match.
Even the announcers are like, "team blah blah blah is not moving, something's wrong ... oh wait, they are just waiting for the ball" ... so dumb.
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 18:36
My appendages do not.
I hearken from days of yore, before bumpers were required.... It's seemed to me for years that people make their appendages too fragile and to extend outside their perimeter much longer than necessary.
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 18:37
I am talking about even if your team runs "the perfect cycle", each robot is relegated to defense for 2/3 of the match.
Even the announcers are like, "team blah blah blah is not moving, something's wrong ... oh wait, they are just waiting for the ball" ... so dumb.
It seems to me that the perfect alliance would score in autonomous, get into position, and then never move.
Bryce Paputa
01-03-2014, 18:41
Something odd that I noticed is that oftentimes when there is very little time left after a shot, a team will get another ball, run under the truss with it, and attempt to make it in the high goal, why not go over the truss instead? It would be closer and it should be easier to do. It also gives possibilities for another high goal shot and possibly a catch. Any idea why this is?
4772 just made a block in autonomous (without moving, EDIT: other than extending its blocker), possibly the first robot to do so. Definitely cost the other alliance a lot of time...
Canon reeves
01-03-2014, 18:44
4772 just made a block in autonomous (without moving), possibly the first robot to do so. Definitely cost the other alliance a lot of time...
How?
How?When I said 'without moving', I mean that they didn't drive. They just extended a blocker.
Ginger Power
01-03-2014, 18:49
It seems to me that the perfect alliance would score in autonomous, get into position, and then never move.
I know what you are talking about but I just don't think it's going to happen. Unless 3 teams collaborated during the build season the odds of successfully completing a cycle like this are low. However, a variation of this cycle is doable and very effective.
Kevin Sheridan
01-03-2014, 18:54
Yes
Defense is a good thing!
atucker4072
01-03-2014, 18:57
It seems to me that the perfect alliance would score in autonomous, get into position, and then never move.
Why wouldn't a team that's waiting for a ball to cycle not just play defense in their zone? It would make the other alliance use up some time.
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 19:03
Why wouldn't a team that's waiting for a ball to cycle not just play defense in their zone? It would make the other alliance use up some time.
Because they'd be so busy scoring they wouldn't have time to get back into position!
...but yes, the less-than-perfect alliance will have to deal with the vagaries of life in robot-land.
The fix was estimated even before week zero. I heard that given the number of fields it was estimated at over $60k. Where I totally agree something needs to be done, I also understand FIRST waiting to see how big of an issue it really was. However after week zero, and one day of qualifications, I think they have their answer.
Regardless of if this really is an "issue" or not, the fact that FIRST can't figure out a way to fix that goal for under $60k is really scary. Our "cheap and stupid" ball ramp that rolls the ball out the side cost less than $20.
I am talking about even if your team runs "the perfect cycle", each robot is relegated to defense for 2/3 of the match.
Even the announcers are like, "team blah blah blah is not moving, something's wrong ... oh wait, they are just waiting for the ball" ... so dumb.
I agree. Like in 03, once you're ahead in points, defense is the best strategy. My favorite part was when the announcer said a robot was broken, then the robot spun around to show they worked.
Other memorable moments included 148 spinning because their drivers were bored, 118 sitting and waiting 10 seconds for a ref to notice that they were waiting for a cycle, and when 190 got to restart their match (that they were dead in) because the ref accidentally lit up the pedestal before the auto balls were cleared.
Probably one of the best matches I've ever watched, it was a tie 85 to 85, red alliance had already won the first final, texplosion played amazing defense, robowranglers were scoring great, so were robonauts, but in the end after further review robonauts alliance won by ten points! Can someone post a video of that match?
Best you ever watched? I saw half a match of botched gameplay. Yeah, there was good defense, but man that was hard to watch. There were zero points scored in 45+ seconds.
Regardless of if this really is an "issue" or not, the fact that FIRST can't figure out a way to fix that goal for under $60k is really scary. Our "cheap and stupid" ball ramp that rolls the ball out the side cost less than $20.
I have seen zero credible sources suggest that a) FIRST would like to "fix" the problem, but cannot afford to, or b) that the cost to do so is $60,000. This rumor seems to have gained legs because one dude heard a guy who knows a guy that...
Maybe it's true, but who knows?
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 19:12
There were zero points scored in 45+ seconds.
Yes, but not for a lack of trying, by some very good robots.
I won't respond further on this topic, because I've made my opinion known--at least until after next week--but thus far I very much liked how this played out.
This game ranks right up there with 2003. May even be "better".
A number of times this morning I said: "This is the worst game since 2003".
By this afternoon, I was saying this is the worst FRC game I've played.
...at least they can't put Championship at the Astrodome anymore.
tkell274
01-03-2014, 19:31
I for one love the defense this year. It makes the game a lot more exciting and it adds pressures to the better teams that in past years just had to maneuver around to a safe zone to score. Teams will get better and scoring will increase which will make all the defense and scoring that much better to watch.
Jonathan Norris
01-03-2014, 19:41
The Defense is crazy out there, it's certainly making for an interesting and controversial game. With the amount of contact, keeping robots (and appendages) working is going to be a big factor in alliance success.
The biggest thing that surprised me is how dangerous this game can be for field staff/volunteers. I've seen balls scored and take out DJ booths and railings, balls are constantly bouncing/being fired at field staff and referees, and a couple that have almost taken out the scoring table. With the steps taken last year to make firing frisbees safer, these 2 pound balls are ending up everywhere outside the field. I'm not saying that the balls are more dangerous, just surprised that there isn't netting behind the goals and sides of the field. It would be interesting to hear from those who have actually been by field level.
The Defense is crazy out there, it's certainly making for an interesting and controversial game. With the amount of contact, keeping robots (and appendages) working is going to be a big factor in alliance success.
The biggest thing that surprised me is how dangerous this game can be for field staff/volunteers. I've seen balls scored and take out DJ booths and railings, balls are constantly bouncing/being fired at field staff and referees, and a couple that have almost taken out the scoring table. With the steps taken last year to make firing frisbees safer, these 2 pound balls are ending up everywhere outside the field. I'm not saying that the balls are more dangerous, just surprised that there isn't netting behind the goals and sides of the field. It would be interesting to hear from those who have actually been by field level.
Seems marginally worse than 2008, since the game involves by its nature throwing a ball out of the field.
Jonathan Norris
01-03-2014, 20:05
Seems marginally worse than 2008, since the game involves by its nature throwing a ball out of the field.
2008 had 'cages' to try and keep the balls in the field.
Justin Shelley
01-03-2014, 20:26
Instead of bashing FIRST and the game why not accept it for what it is and make the best out of it?
Defense should evolve into a heavy part of FRC if it's supposed to resemble competitive sports at all. (Which I believe it should) If you didn't build your robot strong enough to handle the defense then that is on you.
I have seen zero credible sources suggest that a) FIRST would like to "fix" the problem, but cannot afford to, or b) that the cost to do so is $60,000. This rumor seems to have gained legs because one dude heard a guy who knows a guy that...
Maybe it's true, but who knows?
This guy heard it from a mentor of 18 years who heard it from an alumni who manufactured the fields. Also FIRST has grown immensely. I forget how much money runs through FIRST but it's a large amount. Working as a consultant at a large corporation myself, I know that all efforts receive a very substantial buffer. I'm guessing the large number came up as a rough estimation of how much it would cost to execute on the fix.
I completely agree that a fix should certainly cost much less than that, and that FIRST probably has chosen not to "fix" the problem as they clearly documented the specs for the field (minus some paint on the corners of the goals). I did not mean to attribute an exact amount to the estimate, I'm sure the number came out of a casual conversation.
I did not mean to get people hung up on the dollar value, I just wanted teams to know that FIRST was aware of it, that it seems that the effect on the game was underestimated, and that FIRST's official opinion on the issue has not been reported.
Sorry for starting a beast of a rumor...
I think many were not prepared for the huge role defense would be playing this year. Having a strong drive base this year is very important, because you simply cannot score if you are being pushed all over the place.
mman1506
01-03-2014, 21:36
The Defense is crazy out there, it's certainly making for an interesting and controversial game. With the amount of contact, keeping robots (and appendages) working is going to be a big factor in alliance success.
;)
sodizzle
01-03-2014, 21:57
Driver for 1023 here (1st seeded at Centerline). Im sharing a few of my observations about this years game after competitng.
-Defense. Defense can shange a single power robot from running a 160 point match by itself to barely putting up 50.
-Penalties. While I was not here for 2010 like many people are referring to, I am aware that the majority of eliminations at centerline were decided by foul points.
-Technicals. After committing a technical, you're pretty much done. 50 points is insanely hard to come back from especially with defense.
-Referees. The referees missed fouls and missed called plenty of fouls. I believe it is because of how much responsibility they are given. Scoring and penalties and watching multiple (maybe all 6) robots at once. Its insane.
-Playing "dirty". Heavy defense and overwhelmed refs are not a good combination for a team that is trying to play the game with assists. Or shooting for that matter. Fouls could slip through unnoticed and damage would occur. Like it did.
-What I think should change immediately. Scorekeepers. They need to be there. They need to free up refs so they can focus specifically on fouls and making the right call. Or a technical foul should be decreased. Especially since the majority of technicals were forced by the opponent and ended up changing match results.
This is all based on my opinion and I am in no way singing out the referees. I just think they are overworked and overwhelmed.
Brandon_L
01-03-2014, 22:02
Expect balls to be over inflated, because they all are.
Andrew Lawrence
01-03-2014, 22:06
Expect balls to be over inflated, because they all are.
I heard from Wil Payne that the balls were inflated to a good size.
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 22:13
Expect balls to be over inflated, because they all are.
We triple-tested our ball intake and shooter with over-inflated balls because we knew they would be. Everything inflatable in FIRST ends up over-inflated, and you have to plan for it.
Brandon_L
01-03-2014, 22:23
We triple-tested our ball intake and shooter with over-inflated balls because we knew they would be. Everything inflatable in FIRST ends up over-inflated, and you have to plan for it.
A sizing standard other then "Eh, that looks alright!" should have been in place anyway, because the balls at Hatboro are rolling around more like hexahedrons then a round ball. What happened to sizing cubes?
It should be planned for, but the specs in the manual are terrible.
Pedestals - Should be a dedicated pedestal lighting guy or something. Heck, there already is! Why can't the guy standing behind the goal catching balls also control the lighting of the pedestal? Refs are way overwhelmed. Countless times dead ball cards have been raised, and it gets ignored for 45 seconds of the match until the entire alliance is banging on the glass with their fists to catch a refs attention so they can legally put another ball in play.
Scorekeeping vs Reffing - Theres a HUGE difference between the two this year. Like I said, Refs are overwhelmed. Refs should Ref. We need scorekeepers. (What about that dandy guy catching the balls behind the alliance station?)
Field Staff - Generally untrained. Wastes time in a match when a ball flies out of bounds and they have to figure out who its supposed to go back to. Why can't we just return it near the point it left the field?
This game places way to much on the people running the event. Props to the head ref at Hatboro for pausing matches midway through and getting it right rather then screwing an alliance because of a volunteer mistake/ped not lighting.
pfreivald
01-03-2014, 22:28
A sizing standard other then "Eh, that looks alright!" should have been in place anyway, because the balls at Hatboro are rolling around more like hexahedrons then a round ball.
They're much more cubical than round, to be sure!
PayneTrain
01-03-2014, 22:32
I heard from Wil Payne that the balls were inflated to a good size.
I said that relatively, it's a very minor issue. It's not something we encountered because we dont have a design dependent on it. However, we had a strategy depending on at least one other robot functioning in the match. Apparently I overestimated...
I can't remember or care what rank we wound up in Alamo, but I saw a lot going on in Alamo Week 1 from behind the glass. There were a lot of... interesting things happening, and this is coming from someone who was also behind the glass at a Week 1 event in NJ in 2010.
It's not worth a lot of time for me to reiterate thoughts from either the people at events or the peanut gallery watching online, but I'll add in Alamo-specific observations to some that may not be specific to the venue.
Game observations:
The adage "you're only as strong as your weakest partner": multiply the truth of that by a thousand this year. I came into the evnet trying to execute a solid strategy with teams, only to get burned by robots that did not function, drivers that didn't understand the game, and human players that DEFINITELY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE GAME. I had to pull my human player off of the "islands" because I couldn't trust other human players to know how to look for the ball. We lost two matches because of this. If you have to pull out the rulebook and walk through with people, do it.
I don't know if this is the way things operate in the Lone Star State or will be indicative of the rest of competition, but there is no visible top 25% at events. Only 5 robots could earnestly play the game alone by themselves and win, while mid-top robots were thrown into a bind where they have to carry harder than usual.
If you want a visual representation of what kind of defense we're seeing in Aerial Assist, look here (http://a.pomf.se/dkgscy.jpg). That is a welded piece of 2x1, .125 in thick tubing, behind bumpers, totally broken. It's astounding. The "heavy defense" or what it should actually be called "pinning without fouls" will be prevalent as long as the game official setup is the way it is.
On the topic of Game Management Systems, Friday at Alamo had a few inbounders have grief with Tech Fouls. What isn't being considered are how some referees, at least on Friday, were not moving tablets out of the inbounder zone. It's hard to get a good pass off that is legal and controllable with that in the way, unless I tell my human player to throw the ball into the tablet and wait for a glare from a referee.
EDIT: In addition, the time wasted waiting for thigs to light up can be... enraging... in a high stress situation. In a match with 118, we had to wait 3 seconds with them at the goal for the assit counts to light up properly, then another 5 to light the pedestal. Things like that are killing the flow of matches and taking control of the game out of the hands of teams and into an inefficient managment computer (not FMS, but GMS).
This game is playing mostly as expected: qualification play is decidedly painful to witness, but eliminations can be the best they have to offer. The only caveat is that for a game that relies on live scoring more than any other event I can think of, getting the live score to reflect reality is as much of a given as 4 working robots in a given qualification match.
This game has potential, but they need to make a few administrative changes and wait hope that we're seeign Week 1 jitters and not season-long issues.
Sparky3D
01-03-2014, 22:39
If you want a visual representation of what kind of defense we're seeing in Aerial Assist, look here: http://a.pomf.se/zvhmwk.jpg. That is a welded piece of 2x1, .125 in thick tubing, behind bumpers, totally broken. It's astounding.
That looks more like a referee scoring station in a human player zone to me. :p
TheMadCADer
01-03-2014, 22:56
Teams are being dumb trying to show off how they score into the high goal by themselves. They should score over the truss and have a partner score it in the low goal for more than double the points (10 truss, 10 assist, 1 goal), and no need to try 7 times to make it into the high goal. Coaches especially are being stubborn on this on some... certain teams. Read the rules and know the scoring, especially before you try to tell other teams you haven't scouted what to do.
Yet again, non-roller intakes are terrible. Why any team tries to make them anymore baffles me. Stop trying to make pinchers happen, they're not going to happen!
Kevin Leonard
01-03-2014, 23:01
...
Yet again, non-roller intakes are terrible. Why any team tries to make them anymore baffles me. Stop trying to make pinchers happen, they're not going to happen!
Some roller intakes are terrible. Generally roller intake>non roller intake, but some teams I'm sure have made the pinch work (I'm interested to see how 4334 and 842 do).
orangemoore
01-03-2014, 23:13
...
Yet again, non-roller intakes are terrible. Why any team tries to make them anymore baffles me. Stop trying to make pinchers happen, they're not going to happen!
I have to disagree with this. I have been watching many steams of robots that have intakes that do not use rollers. They work just fine. What I do recognize is that fact that it does take more time for them generally to pickup a ball than a good roller intake. They can be better than some roller intakes as well.
It disappoints me that you would say something like that when it really isn't true. I think that there are a lot of teams that would be able prove you wrong.
What kind of intake does team 148 have?
*Note*
MY team isusing a Non-Roller intake this year.
joelg236
01-03-2014, 23:13
Some roller intakes are terrible. Generally roller intake>non roller intake, but some teams I'm sure have made the pinch work (I'm interested to see how 4334 and 842 do).
I am too. From our practice, it looks like our pinchers are a lot more effective than most rollers. Of course, that could be the effect of a "perfect scenario" without pressure on the drivers and with 5 robots in the way of vision.
Seems like the majority of the problem is rollers not bringing the ball in properly. And defense.
So much defense.
Tom Line
01-03-2014, 23:14
Driver for 1023 here (1st seeded at Centerline). Im sharing a few of my observations about this years game after competitng.
-Defense. Defense can shange a single power robot from running a 160 point match by itself to barely putting up 50.
-Penalties. While I was not here for 2010 like many people are referring to, I am aware that the majority of eliminations at centerline were decided by foul points.
-Technicals. After committing a technical, you're pretty much done. 50 points is insanely hard to come back from especially with defense.
-Referees. The referees missed fouls and missed called plenty of fouls. I believe it is because of how much responsibility they are given. Scoring and penalties and watching multiple (maybe all 6) robots at once. Its insane.
-Playing "dirty". Heavy defense and overwhelmed refs are not a good combination for a team that is trying to play the game with assists. Or shooting for that matter. Fouls could slip through unnoticed and damage would occur. Like it did.
-What I think should change immediately. Scorekeepers. They need to be there. They need to free up refs so they can focus specifically on fouls and making the right call. Or a technical foul should be decreased. Especially since the majority of technicals were forced by the opponent and ended up changing match results.
This is all based on my opinion and I am in no way singing out the referees. I just think they are overworked and overwhelmed.
Sodizzle, you kept that very polite. I intend to expound on this.
Centerline was perhaps the single most frustrating FIRST event I've ever attended. The qualification matches went well. The FTA's were wonderful working through problems. The refs were working hard and while the game was difficult to play, it was fun.
At the elimination driver's meeting the drivers were told that intrusions inside the bumper area were going to be called.
What wasn't understood was that it meant that ANY intrusion at ANY time, even one initiated by the defending bot, was going to be a foul. For example: we were shooting. Not moving. Intake down. A defensive bot came up from behind at full speed and slammed into us. WE were assessed the 50 point foul.
In the next match, we went to pick up our ball that was stuck in the corner between the opposing goal and the driver station wall. Again, a defending bot saw a good opportunity and slammed into us from behind to stop us from picking up the ball. That pushed a portion of our pickup into the goal. Technical foul again, on us.
Shooting the ball to the human player, but get hit in the process and have him miss the catch? Technical foul.
Going to pick up a ball at the edge of the field, but get hit so your pickup extends outside the arena? Called a foul.
I use these only as examples out of quite literally dozens that occurred during the elimination rounds. I appreciate the hard work the referees and other volunteers put in. However, I think it's important these issues be brought to light in the hopes that FIRST provide some guidance for their volunteers to try to ease some of the issues we saw at the event.
There were SO many penalties that for quite a while they weren't announcing who was getting penalized for what. No one had any clue - spectators or competitors. The 'question' box for the ref was full (there was a line at several points). At one point, upon being questioned, they were unable to tell us what the fouls were for!
I almost feel like we aren't playing the game FIRST intended us to be playing - offensive bots terrified to lower their intakes for fear of penalties while defensive bots battered away scoring more points in a couple seconds in penalties than most alliances scored on offense.
I am unsure if there was a single elimination match that wasn't decided by penalties. Hopefully the insights gained at Centerline can be used to improve the games going forward.
TheMadCADer
01-03-2014, 23:17
Some roller intakes are terrible. Generally roller intake>non roller intake, but some teams I'm sure have made the pinch work (I'm interested to see how 4334 and 842 do).
Teams who have broken roller intakes need to iterate more and smarter. Existing designs from the 3 day robots provide an excellent starting point for prototypes that is quite good and adaptable. If yours is bad, there is something seriously wrong (I do agree though that some are terrible). Messing up on your intake is the worst mistake you can make in this game.
Pinching claws simply are not safe in this game. They rely too much on the ball and robot being still, which never happens. They are also easier to break from what I've seen (being at bumper level puts them in harm's way). I would advise any pinchers to seriously consider a design change.
It disappoints me that you would say something like that when it really isn't true. I think that there are a lot of teams that would be able prove you wrong.
What kind of intake does team 148 have?
It is true. Those teams could have decent intake using a pincher, or a great intake with rollers. The ceiling is always higher on a roller intake.
Rollers.
s_forbes
01-03-2014, 23:20
I am too. From our practice, it looks like our pinchers are a lot more effective than most rollers.
I was little bit skeptical at first, but we are seeing the same. With control systems in place, our grabbers are currently working just as fast as well-designed roller intakes, and have advantages in some situations. Not to mention that death grip on the ball...
Pinching claws simply are not safe in this game. They rely too much on the ball and robot being still, which never happens. They are also easier to break from what I've seen (being at bumper level puts them in harm's way). I would advise any pinchers to seriously consider a design change.
We hope to disprove every one of these points.
Brandon_L
01-03-2014, 23:30
What kind of intake does team 148 have?
Roller
Jarren Harkema
01-03-2014, 23:32
Rookie here, so my observations might not be as keen as some. Our team went down to the Southfield tournament in Michigan as spectators. A few major things stuck out to me.
If you can't shoot the ball accurately in auto, don't even bother trying. It is painful to watch 3 robots miss in succession, and have to watch them for the first 30 seconds of teleop just trying to grab the balls and get them to a goal so they can start cycles. If you don't shoot at all, don't even start with a ball.
If you miss a high shot, don't waste your time trying again, shove it in the low goal and move on. I saw many teams attempt 3-4 times before humbling themselves and pushing the ball into the low goal. I was surprised at how inaccurate the throwing mechanisms were.
If you have to park to shoot, you will get pushed. As soon as a robot begins lining up, an opposing robot is right in its way, shoving, pushing, doing anything to mess up your shot. Teams that can shoot while moving have the best luck at avoiding defense. In addition to this, having to lower an intake arm, or the like, in order to shoot, slows you down.
Human Players, if a robot has the ability to catch from you, please toss the ball into the robot rather than onto the field.
Finally, I was surprised at the number of teams who didn't have a secure hold on the ball. Simply spinning or getting rammed from the side was enough to dislodge the ball. This was very apparent during lining up for shots.
Pickup systems, whether it be roller bars or el toro, aren't created equal. They have to be done right to be effective.
That's my observations, I hope I didn't come across as too condescending. I'm sure I will eat some of my own words as I'm coaching our drive team next weekend.
Rynocorn
01-03-2014, 23:33
Roller
Love it. Also I think that the major advantage 842 has over a roller intake is that they can set the ball down for assists and carry the ball around switch greater security (that's how it seems to me). Though they cannot roll it out, it should be easy for the pincers to fit underneath a roller intake making a pass a little easier and secure.
TheMadCADer
01-03-2014, 23:43
Love it. Also I think that the major advantage 842 has over a roller intake is that they can set the ball down for assists and carry the ball around switch greater security (that's how it seems to me). Though they cannot roll it out, it should be easy for the pincers to fit underneath a roller intake making a pass a little easier and secure.
There is no functionality difference in this area. Both systems can set the ball on the ground quite reliably, quickly, and easily.
You do run into an issue when a pincher hands off to another pincher. The recipient needs to wait for the passer to back away, or else the claws can get tangled (which I saw in one match at Alamo, not sure the number, though). It's either that, or leaving the ball open on the ground.
A few things.
#1: At Centerline, many teams came to us saying our field balls were over inflated. After spending lunch measuring every balls three times, they came out to ~25" diameter. There seems to be a discrepancy between the field balls and teams balls, but they are the right size, atleast at centerline.
#2: There needs to be a ramp of some sort on the overhang above the drivers. I can't tell you how many times the ball got stuck up there, and without having a pole of some sort to get it down, Field Reset has to run in there and dislodge it with their hands, completely disrupting the drivers.
#3: What 1023 and 1718 said was completely true. I saw so many penalties that made no sense I was amazed. Tech Fouls either need to be lower points, or the system needs an overhaul to help protect the offensive robots. This year seems to be going in the complete opposite way that past years have been. Instead of protecting scorers for an excited match, defensive robots are aloud to go ham with very few repercussions. This has nothing to do with the proficiency of refs but everything to do with them having way too much on their plate to do.
cadandcookies
02-03-2014, 00:08
Main observation:
The game is significantly different than anyone's predictions I heard before this week.
As almost everyone else mentioned, this is a ridiculously penalty heavy game, and I think that's hurting more than a little bit.
I sincerely hope we see a Tuesday rule update that addresses the concerns brought up in this thread.
Anupam Goli
02-03-2014, 00:19
Man, I could go to town on what happened at Palmetto
This has to be the worst scouting I've ever seen. EVER. You can't trust the FIRST rankings AT ALL this year. Teams like 4451 got absolutely awful schedules, but were the best assisting bot out on the field, and one of the most consistent low and high goal scorers. They weren't picked at all. I'll be honest, our robot was having a lot of issues, I don't think we (1648) deserved to be picked at all, but team 3571, coached by a certain world championship winning drive coach, and one of the best trussers and best intakes in the field, was also left out of eliminations. We saw teams in elims that had no business being there, there were teams that didn't understand game rules in elims here. Defense may win a lot of matches, but when teams as good as 4451, 3571, and 4452 get overlooked because the FIRST rankings show they were on weak alliances all day, there is a problem. I seriously hope 3571 gets polled in FRC Top 25, that's how good I felt their intake and shots were throughout the day.
I have had enough of week 1 ref issues now. Last year, we lost in quarterfinals because of a ref not calling a pyramid contact, but calling a human player stepping behind the line. I swallowed that one up as having scouting mistakes and having a weaker robot and lucky schedule. This time, I was absolutely livid after watching many matches end in high scores because of unnecessary tech foul calls. When my human player is in no immediate danger of hitting a robot, and barely extends over that yellow tape for a fraction of a second to in bound the ball, I don't think G40 should apply to that. We racked up 150 foul points in a match by ourselves because this ref was too focused on watching millimeter portrustions of hands over the yellow tape*. FIRST, PLEASE FIX THIS! THESE TECH FOULS ARE RIDICULOUS AND I ASSURE YOU AREN'T PREVENTING ANY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS.
I'm glad we don't compete again until week 5, I think it's going to take me a couple of weeks to calm down and refocus on how to improve.
*1024 and 5130, we apologize for incurring so many foul points and making a winnable match into a loss.
Here's my opinion:
Penalties:
G40's penalty should be reduced if the alliance at fault gained no advantage by running afoul of it.
G12 may need to be reworked to become like the pinning rule, to where you can posses the opponents ball for five seconds if the ball was acquired without the use of an active mechanism on the robot, but you must get X distance away from their ball before you can attempt to posses it again. That way if the opposing human player drops their ball in your robot you don't get the "death penalty" for it. EDIT: Also, the robot may not distance itself from the ball by launching it via a mechanism on the robot.
Defense:
Defense is always part of the game, but I doubt this is quite what the GDC envisioned when they made a game all about the concept of assists. Pushing matches tend to be the least damaging type of effective defense played, and what they tend to break (transmissions, motors, wheels) are more readily replaceable than all the frame bends and tweaks that usually result from these high speed ramming maneuvers I've seen. Usually once the frame is bent, the robot is never quite right again.
tl;dr push and bump, don't ram.
Though, would be interesting to put shock watches on some of these robots, and see how hard some of these hits are.
Abhishek R
02-03-2014, 00:45
I said that relatively, it's a very minor issue. It's not something we encountered because we dont have a design dependent on it. However, we had a strategy depending on at least one other robot functioning in the match. Apparently I overestimated...
I can't remember or care what rank we wound up in Alamo, but I saw a lot going on in Alamo Week 1 from behind the glass. There were a lot of... interesting things happening, and this is coming from someone who was also behind the glass at a Week 1 event in NJ in 2010.
It's not worth a lot of time for me to reiterate thoughts from either the people at events or the peanut gallery watching online, but I'll add in Alamo-specific observations to some that may not be specific to the venue.
Game observations:
The adage "you're only as strong as your weakest partner": multiply the truth of that by a thousand this year. I came into the evnet trying to execute a solid strategy with teams, only to get burned by robots that did not function, drivers that didn't understand the game, and human players that DEFINITELY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE GAME. I had to pull my human player off of the "islands" because I couldn't trust other human players to know how to look for the ball. We lost two matches because of this. If you have to pull out the rulebook and walk through with people, do it.
I don't know if this is the way things operate in the Lone Star State or will be indicative of the rest of competition, but there is no visible top 25% at events. Only 5 robots could earnestly play the game alone by themselves and win, while mid-top robots were thrown into a bind where they have to carry harder than usual.
If you want a visual representation of what kind of defense we're seeing in Aerial Assist, look here (http://a.pomf.se/dkgscy.jpg). That is a welded piece of 2x1, .125 in thick tubing, behind bumpers, totally broken. It's astounding. The "heavy defense" or what it should actually be called "pinning without fouls" will be prevalent as long as the game official setup is the way it is.
On the topic of Game Management Systems, Friday at Alamo had a few inbounders have grief with Tech Fouls. What isn't being considered are how some referees, at least on Friday, were not moving tablets out of the inbounder zone. It's hard to get a good pass off that is legal and controllable with that in the way, unless I tell my human player to throw the ball into the tablet and wait for a glare from a referee.
EDIT: In addition, the time wasted waiting for thigs to light up can be... enraging... in a high stress situation. In a match with 118, we had to wait 3 seconds with them at the goal for the assit counts to light up properly, then another 5 to light the pedestal. Things like that are killing the flow of matches and taking control of the game out of the hands of teams and into an inefficient managment computer (not FMS, but GMS).
This game is playing mostly as expected: qualification play is decidedly painful to witness, but eliminations can be the best they have to offer. The only caveat is that for a game that relies on live scoring more than any other event I can think of, getting the live score to reflect reality is as much of a given as 4 working robots in a given qualification match.
This game has potential, but they need to make a few administrative changes and wait hope that we're seeign Week 1 jitters and not season-long issues.
I completely agree with everything here. The coordination required to play this game is insanely high, and so many teams seem to not have gone through the rules. In addition, the field problems and other issues (not having a working hot goal for quite some time) only compound the frustration. However, I do think things will get straightened out soon.
PayneTrain
02-03-2014, 00:48
I completely agree with everything here. The coordination required to play this game is insanely high, and so many teams seem to not have gone through the rules. In addition, the field problems and other issues (not having a working hot goal for quite some time) only compound the frustration. However, I do think things will get straightened out soon.
I know an issue I had to personally deal with were human players and drive teams not knowing the rules. Since we were running a skeleton crew I was running back and forth and didn't get to have super-long alliance meetings. Aside from finals, I never had time to watch a match you guys played in. Do you know how you handled human players who didn't know rules?
RyanShoff
02-03-2014, 01:15
Usually once the frame is bent, the robot is never quite right again.
push and bump, don't ram
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
Abhishek R
02-03-2014, 01:36
I know an issue I had to personally deal with were human players and drive teams not knowing the rules. Since we were running a skeleton crew I was running back and forth and didn't get to have super-long alliance meetings. Aside from finals, I never had time to watch a match you guys played in. Do you know how you handled human players who didn't know rules?
We took quite a bit of time to make sure our alliance's human players knew the rules, especially about the safety zone, and taught them how to load our robot and vice versa. We were fortunate to have pretty great alliance partners throughout the regional, however, when we did have a human player who had violated rules in the past according to scouting, we usually would try to get our human player to fill the role. The main thing though was reinforcing the safety zone rule over and over again before each match. We probably iterated it maybe 6 times before each match.
Laaba 80
02-03-2014, 01:51
When my human player is in no immediate danger of hitting a robot, and barely extends over that yellow tape for a fraction of a second to in bound the ball, I don't think G40 should apply to that. We racked up 150 foul points in a match by ourselves because this ref was too focused on watching millimeter portrustions of hands over the yellow tape
Have you ever heard the phrase "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." The rules are very clear; you can't reach past the yellow line. I don't understand how you can blame the refs for receiving the same penalty three times in one match.
Have you ever heard the phrase "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." The rules are very clear; you can't reach past the yellow line. I don't understand how you can blame the refs for receiving the same penalty three times in one match.
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?
JTEarley
02-03-2014, 02:01
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?
As a HP, I agree with this. I don't necessarily think that the rule should be changed, because it is written out very clearly, but I think that then this tech foul is called, the ref should make the HP aware of it. Although i was always aware and cautious, It was called on me once at the Alamo regional, and I had to ask my coach when it happened after the match was over
Laaba 80
02-03-2014, 02:05
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?
I could see from the webcasts when a human player received a penalty. If a human player can't see the ref waving the flag 3 feet from them they need to become more aware. That said, it is unacceptable if a ref calls a penalty without waving the flag, or signaling in some way.
jeremylee
02-03-2014, 02:17
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
Ouch, that sounds like a lot of work. Im hoping we didnt miss any damage beyond our air cylinders.
JeremyLansing
02-03-2014, 02:23
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
That's quite unfortunate, but not really all that surprising to me. Everyone in those finals was playing all out, its just a shame that it turned into such carnage on the field. I know that one of out pickup cylinders has a 30 degree bend in the rod, and our blue bumpers need to be rebuilt. Best of luck to you guys getting your frame fixed. It was a pleasure playing with you guys in elims and I look forward to hopefully getting to play together in Milwaukee.
What fun being the Week 1 guinea pigs was. Our pairings were absolutely dreadful this year at WAAMV. We were often paired with unreliable teams, of which had confused drivers and didn't communicate. Our event's game breaking problem? An FMS that failed at least 5 times over the course of the last two days, causing mass robot DC's, and not to mention that fact that the field broke down several times. In the end, we leveled out at 6-6 for Qualifiers, and loosing our Semifinal Games.
Drive Issues
Our ability to shoot was somewhat hindered by our team having ONE driver manning all the controls, which led to multi-tasking being a nil topic. We were easily able to be shoved around, (even though we're on traction wheels) and the fact that we couldn't set up our launcher WHILE driving led to wasted time being stationary. By next event we're going to install a 360 Gamepad onto our drive station, so I can load the launcher while our driver focuses on ball acquisition, and getting our butts to the goal.
Autonomous
We were pretty reliable on our Autonomous, missing about 4 or 5 out of 12 balls we loaded. We ended up being 4th on autonomous score, which led other teams to be interested in us once it came to alliance selection. Our code's rundown is Mast - 1 Sec - Drive 30% (2.7 Sec) - 3 Sec - Launch(.25 Sec) x3
Elimination
During Quarters, we were paired with 1294 (Top Gun) and 4579 (RoboEagles). 1294's bot was the best loading bot at our district, with a backboard that rebounds into the holding area, and let us get some quick assist points out. We were facing an alliance containing 2990, a robot that near-severely damaged our spinner. 2990 was their destined shooting bot, and as such, 1294 and 4579 pressed on them hard as soon as their assists counted. 1294 kept bashing them to the point that they got under them, causing 2990 to, technically, ENTER 1294's robot. That gave us 50 Foul Points. At that point, 3220 bashed 1294, toppling 2990 and giving US even MORE Foul Points.
As this is MY first year, I'm quite pleased with our performance. Because this is our team's 5th year, the last of our founding members have left us for better lands. As such, we have 8 members with 1+ years of experience. The rest of us (15+ Members) are Rookies and Freshmen. It's like back to square one. May luck bless us at Event Two.
To all of you guys, good luck!
S.P.A.M.er 17
02-03-2014, 02:31
I wanted to comment how I feel the bar may impact ref'ing. As a ref for a week two event, I feel like there are two ways I could handle keeping score for an alliance. *Note: refs do not have the ability to undo ending a cycle*
A.) Have a itchy scoring finger: This ensures the second a ball is through the goal, and *scored,* the next cycle can begin. But what if that bar hits the ball back into play. Now a new cycle is started, and the first ball was never scored. The ref now is to blame.
B.) Patience is key: Not wanting to mess up, you will always have to make sure the ball is completely scored before ending a cycle. This means the ball crosses the plane, wait a second. The ball hits the bar, wait a second. Ball bounces around on the bar for a bit, wait two seconds. Finally, the ball falls off the bar, END CYCLE. While its true that no field fault occurred, it came at the expense of play time for an alliance.
Either way, this bar will be playing psychological games with refs, something I am not looking forward to. Hopefully it will be more clear when on the field, but from the videos, it was never 100% when the ball would be accepted or not.
I could see from the webcasts when a human player received a penalty. If a human player can't see the ref waving the flag 3 feet from them they need to become more aware. That said, it is unacceptable if a ref calls a penalty without waving the flag, or signaling in some way.
Webcast =/= on the field. I can tell you that from first hand human player experience. When you're worried about getting balls to your robot as fast as possible, you don't notice when a ref is waving his flag. If the safety zone was more noticeable, we'd have a lot less G40s. A small strip of yellow tape isn't really cutting it.
They should just remove the tape and extend the safety zone all the way to the edge of the field.
Abhishek R
02-03-2014, 02:35
Either way, this bar will be playing psychological games with refs, something I am not looking forward to. Hopefully it will be more clear when on the field, but from the videos, it was never 100% when the ball would be accepted or not.
Yes, this creates a lose-lose situation for the referees. The field should have a change to a slightly inclined ramp rather than a bar to ensure the ball leaves the field after passing through the plane of the goal.
Hopefully it will be more clear when on the field, but from the videos, it was never 100% when the ball would be accepted or not.
Unfortunately, it isn't. Even as Field Reset being right behind the goal, I was never 100% sure if a ball was going to bounce out or not.
jeremylee
02-03-2014, 03:19
G12 may need to be reworked to become like the pinning rule, to where you can posses the opponents ball for five seconds if the ball was acquired without the use of an active mechanism on the robot, but you must get X distance away from their ball before you can attempt to posses it again. That way if the opposing human player drops their ball in your robot you don't get the "death penalty" for it. EDIT: Also, the robot may not distance itself from the ball by launching it via a mechanism on the robot.
Interesting suggestion if I understand you correctly. Might also help in the case of a ball randomly falling in your robot after an opposing teams truss shot causing you to loose the match in finals due to a "50 point" technical to start you packing. I'm sure this would never happen...
Anupam Goli
02-03-2014, 07:07
Webcast =/= on the field. I can tell you that from first hand human player experience. When you're worried about getting balls to your robot as fast as possible, you don't notice when a ref is waving his flag. If the safety zone was more noticeable, we'd have a lot less G40s. A small strip of yellow tape isn't really cutting it.
They should just remove the tape and extend the safety zone all the way to the edge of the field.
This.
I understand why G40 exists, but I don't think calling it every single time there is some portrusion is in the spirit of the rule. The initial team update added the rule because there were robots extending past the field perimeter when intaking the ball, so to keep human players safe, we need to have some saftey zone. When there is no robot extending past the field perimeter, and our human player wants to have some sort of accuracy when loading our robot, we shouldn't be penalized if we extend an inch into the zone. Especially if our player is in no immediate danger. Maybe we can define a "robot interaction zone" just like we did in 2005, but without pressure plates.
MooreteP
02-03-2014, 07:34
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw
mechanical_robot
02-03-2014, 08:04
On the scoreboard, there is a number adjacent to the team number. What does it represent? Seems too high to be total assists.
Edit: It appears to be the current ranking.
The green dots represent the number of assists. You are talking about the rank number or the team number.
Wayne TenBrink
02-03-2014, 08:17
This.
I understand why G40 exists, but I don't think calling it every single time there is some portrusion is in the spirit of the rule. The initial team update added the rule because there were robots extending past the field perimeter when intaking the ball, so to keep human players safe, we need to have some saftey zone. When there is no robot extending past the field perimeter, and our human player wants to have some sort of accuracy when loading our robot, we shouldn't be penalized if we extend an inch into the zone. Especially if our player is in no immediate danger. Maybe we can define a "robot interaction zone" just like we did in 2005, but without pressure plates.
Proposed wording for updated rules:
<Proposed G21> ROBOTS may not extend outside the HUMAN PLAYER BARRIER. (Note: the HP barrier is the 20" wide zone above the field perimeter pipes)
<Proposed G40> TEAMS may not extend any body part into the FIELD during the MATCH.
G41 (no HP/robot contact, no HP/Ball/Robot contact) remains as is.
This would make the HP barrier a "transition zone" where either robots or HP's could reach, but there could be no contact between them. You still couldn't lay a ball directly into a robot.
Sparky3D
02-03-2014, 08:49
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
Man, that sucks. Let us know if you guys need any help.
If you want a visual representation of what kind of defense we're seeing in Aerial Assist, look here (http://a.pomf.se/dkgscy.jpg). That is a welded piece of 2x1, .125 in thick tubing, behind bumpers, totally broken. It's astounding.
From the wiki on 6061 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6061_aluminium_alloy) aluminum:
"6061 is highly weldable, for example using tungsten inert gas welding (TIG) or metal inert gas welding (MIG). Typically, after welding, the properties near the weld are those of 6061-O, a loss of strength of around 80%. The material can be re-heat-treated to restore -T4 or -T6 temper for the whole piece. After welding, the material can naturally age and restore some of its strength as well. Nevertheless, the Alcoa Structural Handbook recommends the design strength of the material adjacent to the weld to be taken as 11,000 psi without proper heat treatment after the weld."
That compares to 35ksi yield strength of properly heat treated 6061-T6.
Teams that use welded aluminum construction need to realize that your welded joints are now incredibly weak. And that's if the welding has been done with perfect technique (certified welder with years of experience). High school grade workmanship will be way worse.
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw
That was Awesome!
Great technique by the human player. We'll be using this as a training video.
GTR West Q49. The blue alliance just executed a beautiful strategy with 3 weak robots and succeeded in 2 31pt cycles.
GTR West Q49. The blue alliance just executed a beautiful strategy with 3 weak robots and succeeded in 2 31pt cycles.
Link to video?
Daniel_LaFleur
02-03-2014, 10:12
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw
I'll be showing this video to my team ... and ALL of our alliance partners.
Thanks for the link
sdcantrell56
02-03-2014, 11:23
From the wiki on 6061 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6061_aluminium_alloy) aluminum:
"6061 is highly weldable, for example using tungsten inert gas welding (TIG) or metal inert gas welding (MIG). Typically, after welding, the properties near the weld are those of 6061-O, a loss of strength of around 80%. The material can be re-heat-treated to restore -T4 or -T6 temper for the whole piece. After welding, the material can naturally age and restore some of its strength as well. Nevertheless, the Alcoa Structural Handbook recommends the design strength of the material adjacent to the weld to be taken as 11,000 psi without proper heat treatment after the weld."
That compares to 35ksi yield strength of properly heat treated 6061-T6.
Teams that use welded aluminum construction need to realize that your welded joints are now incredibly weak. And that's if the welding has been done with perfect technique (certified welder with years of experience). High school grade workmanship will be way worse.
In this particular example they also ground most of the weld away. It is not surprising that this joint failed.
Navid Shafa
02-03-2014, 11:35
Just watched a rather amazing match at GTR.
Match 59: 1310 facing off against 610 (&Company)
1310 beats 610 by a score of 161/160 to clinch the number 1 seed. :yikes:
orangemoore
02-03-2014, 11:41
Just watched a rather amazing match at GTR.
Match 59: 1310 facing off against 610 (&Company)
1310 beats 610 by a score of 161/160 to clinch the number 1 seed. :yikes:
It will be interesting to see who gets picked. :cool:
NickTosta
02-03-2014, 11:43
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw
I'm more amazed by the poor defense being played than anything else. The blue alliance was certainly efficient, and certainly had two extremely capable robots, but it should have been trivial for a red robot(s) to shove one or both of the blue robots out of alignment.
ThomasClark
02-03-2014, 12:10
http://i.imgur.com/4m7TG3c.png
sodizzle
02-03-2014, 12:20
http://i.imgur.com/4m7TG3c.png
This seems absolutely crazy to me that almost 20% of all scores were made up of penalties. I believe that this is not the way the game was meant to be played.
12.4% of winning alliances would not have won without penalty points? That's insanely high. If I am reading this correct and that is only the qualification matches being taken into account, I would be interested in seeing that same statistic for the eliminations.
ThomasClark
02-03-2014, 13:01
This seems absolutely crazy to me that almost 20% of all scores were made up of penalties. I believe that this is not the way the game was meant to be played.
Agreed. I haven't watched any streams, but it sounds like penalties are huge in a lot of places.
12.4% of winning alliances would not have won without penalty points? That's insanely high. If I am reading this correct and that is only the qualification matches being taken into account, I would be interested in seeing that same statistic for the eliminations.
Not all eliminations matches have taken place yet, but it's currently around 9.8% of matches that were won by penalties.
For comparison, it was 3.9% of (all) matches last year.
I'm more amazed by the poor defense being played than anything else. The blue alliance was certainly efficient, and certainly had two extremely capable robots, but it should have been trivial for a red robot(s) to shove one or both of the blue robots out of alignment.
You're right, defense is most of the time pretty easy for stopping the catch, but we were paired with a large bot with a great shooter and 1772 had a strong drive train; it was pretty difficult to move around. Nevertheless, still the highest score in the world right now without penalties I believe.
NickTosta
02-03-2014, 13:25
You're right, defense is most of the time pretty easy for stopping the catch, but we were paired with a large bot with a great shooter and 1772 had a strong drive train; it was pretty difficult to move around. Nevertheless, still the highest score in the world right now without penalties I believe.
Yeah, I'm reasonably sure it's the high-high score no questions asked.
At any rate, I point it out not to take anything away from you guys' win (based on that video it's difficult to imagine a world in which you didn't win, defense or not), but mostly just because it's another important conclusion to be drawn.
There's a big reason why this game is so physical, and that match proves it.
Ian Curtis
02-03-2014, 13:36
Agreed. I haven't watched any streams, but it sounds like penalties are huge in a lot of places.
Not all eliminations matches have taken place yet, but it's currently around 9.8% of matches that were won by penalties.
For comparison, it was 3.9% of (all) matches last year.
10% isn't ridiculous compared to some older games though. This was back when they penalties and subtracted from your score, instead of added to your opponents score. (http://ewcp.org/blog/2011/12/08/average-and-what-it-means-to-your-team/)
Yeah, I'm reasonably sure it's the high-high score no questions asked.
At any rate, I point it out not to take anything away from you guys' win (based on that video it's difficult to imagine a world in which you didn't win, defense or not), but mostly just because it's another important conclusion to be drawn.
There's a big reason why this game is so physical, and that match proves it.
You're completely right! This match is incredibly physical. Our executive captain pointed it out to me that it's an open field, and a you can do a lot on an open field to damage other robots; ramming at full speed, pickup arms and shooters will be hit from the side, and huge balls falling from the sky are all parts of this game. That may be another reason they increased the weight limit of spare parts. At Palmetto, I saw some serious aggressive driving, and I fear that this type of driving may become integrated into the game.
Justin Shelley
02-03-2014, 13:38
What continues to baffle me is when human players throw the ball onto the field without even attempting to get the ball into one of their robots. The next 15 or more seconds are spent trying to recover the ball which should have never been lost in the first place.
Things for teams to learn from Week 1
1) If you can't do scoring in auto 90% of time or better then don't shoot!!
2) Teach your human players how to put a ball into a robot fast and reliably without crossing into the field and occurring a penalty.
3) Be humble- This is a role playing game just like sports. Somebody needs to play 1st base and somebody needs to be in the outfield, the outfield is just as important. If you can't do something, just realize that and make out of what you have!!
4) Know the rules!!!!
Jared Russell
02-03-2014, 13:50
At the MAR events it looks like refs are pausing matches in the middle of teleop to discuss and assess penalties and assists...?
Qbot2640
02-03-2014, 14:06
A match at palmetto they just scored 290. Several cycles with catches. 1772 was catching and scoring and another team I forget the number was getting the inbound and throwing over the truss.
Someone may have already linked this...haven't read through all 16 pages. Here's the video:
http://youtu.be/iUi8ZEie7uw
Quick cycles are the key. The third team on this alliance was dead...imagine what would have been possible with an auto contribution and some defensive play from 346. They were a capable bot - played into semi finals if memory serves.
Carnage. Who's going to want to do a 3rd event before states?
Abhishek R
02-03-2014, 14:11
Someone may have already linked this...haven't read through all 16 pages. Here's the video:
http://youtu.be/iUi8ZEie7uw
Quick cycles are the key. The third team on this alliance was dead...imagine what would have been possible with an auto contribution and some defensive play from 346. They were a capable bot - played into semi finals if memory serves.
Those were definitely quick cycles.
However, there wasn't any actual defense being played on the inbounding robot or the catcher; I doubt you would ever be able to easily line up like that.
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
Wow, I knew this game was gonna be physical but I didn't know it was gonna be THAT physical. If you need help, let me know.
sdcantrell56
02-03-2014, 15:05
Someone may have already linked this...haven't read through all 16 pages. Here's the video:
http://youtu.be/iUi8ZEie7uw
Quick cycles are the key. The third team on this alliance was dead...imagine what would have been possible with an auto contribution and some defensive play from 346. They were a capable bot - played into semi finals if memory serves.
Is 3824 using suction?
Is 3824 using suction?
Yes we are! It is a great way to solidify the seal on the ball quickly, plus it adds power to our shot.
Tom Line
02-03-2014, 15:21
10% isn't ridiculous compared to some older games though. This was back when they penalties and subtracted from your score, instead of added to your opponents score. (http://ewcp.org/blog/2011/12/08/average-and-what-it-means-to-your-team/)
Ian, I'd LOVE to see this data run on the Centerline eliminations. I can't say for 100% certainty, but I'm not sure if the winning alliance beat their opponents on straight score even once. Can someone point me in the direction of the centerline elim data with penalties showing?
sdcantrell56
02-03-2014, 15:28
Yes we are! It is a great way to solidify the seal on the ball quickly, plus it adds power to our shot.
Are there any pictures of your robot anywhere?
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.