Week 1 Observations

[KosmicKhaos]

Hi, decided I'm going to make a thread with observations from week one events and will be adding to this throughout the week, any observations you make, comment them and I'l add them to the list. Also criticism is greatly appreciated! These are my personal observations and opinions on what I am seeing

Average match score prediction 30-40 Rank one average scores 70-90 at least for week one, I will be updating predicted scores also

Be prepared to update your firmware. Bring a flash drive with the most updated firmware for your PDP, PCM, Roborio and Talon SRX. thank you ehochstein for the info!


Throwing noodles are a very viable way of scoring points, possibly a game changer (at least in early matches)
The audio for the previous 30 seconds left is now on 20 seconds
The field is going to get very very very messy very quick at least in early matches probably even later because people will still try to throw noodles. Whether they land on your side our the opposite side its going to get messy.
With noodle throwing being a very possible strategy, if you don't have a way to clear noodles it's going to be very hard for you to move around and you'll shred noodles to pieces
Co-op points- rare to see 4 yellow totes on the step further more at least one. Possibly because often noodles block the path to the middle. This is where clearing noodles helps.
Co-op points are very valuable I cant stress this enough. With such low scoring this is whag seperates teams in the standings. Top ranked teams will be those who get co-op points and do it consistently
Many teams seem to prefer the landfill
Landfill isn't going to be pretty pretty for you to acquire totes from, especially later in the match
Capping stacks especially 6 stacks is rare. My prediction, if you can at least make one 6 stack with a can you can make a big difference in your alliance's score
Recycling containers are going to be knocked over. I don't care how hard you try at not knocking them over most if not all of them will be knocked over. If you plan on using them, you should be able to pick them up tipped over.
Some robots, especially external forklifts are a bit tipsy carrying stacks, be aware of falling/tipped robots.
It's going to be crowded on your side of the field, try to give others some space especially those carrying stacks
Not much scoring in autonomous, even simple robot sets. If you can make a tote stack all by your self and have your alliance partners stay in the autozone and do nothing could possibly be a game changer. Even just a container set is helpful
There is no such thing as a Science to throwing noodles there are to many variables (bent noodles, stiff noodles, etc.) to have a way to throw noodles %100 to the other side noodles are NOT accurate
For scouting, look for an alliance partner that can complement what your robot can do. what I mean by this is is look for teams who you can work together with, if you can stack really well don't choose an alliance buddy who can also stack really well, maximize what your alliance can do
Despite what everyone says about the lack of involvement of refs in this years game, refs are calling fouls and they do hurt your score. With such a low scoring game -6 really makes a difference. specifically SO SO SO many G-6 fouls (touching chute door and tote) be aware of this
The Real Time Scoring is NOT reliable at all. They're are delays and it does not score noodles. Coaches need to learn to score in their heads.


Poll on throwing noodles
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135219

I will be updating as matches continue!

[CTbiker105]

The field is going to get very messy very quick.


Here here.

When I went to a week 0 event, I was surprised at how quickly I couldn't really tell what was happening on the field once the match started.

Unless you have a robot on your alliance that can effectively clean up missed noodles, a human player with dead-on accuracy when throwing, or you desperately need points if it's a close match (only applicable in finals), I don't think throwing noodles is going to be a very popular strategy once teams realize how much clutter it results in on the field.

[Bluman56]

Here here.

When I went to a week 0 event, I was surprised at how quickly I couldn't really tell what was happening on the field once the match started.

Unless you have a robot on your alliance that can effectively clean up missed noodles, a human player with dead-on accuracy when throwing, or you desperately need points if it's a close match, I don't think throwing noodles is going to be a very popular strategy once teams realize how much clutter it results in on the field.

Until teams realize that, I would like to petition for this game to be renamed Litter Lunge. :p

[Lil' Lavery]

Here here.

When I went to a week 0 event, I was surprised at how quickly I couldn't really tell what was happening on the field once the match started.

Unless you have a robot on your alliance that can effectively clean up missed noodles, a human player with dead-on accuracy when throwing, or you desperately need points if it's a close match, I don't think throwing noodles is going to be a very popular strategy once teams realize how much clutter it results in on the field.

Why would it being a "close match" impact you at all? Wins/Losses don't matter, only how many points you score. If the clutter on the field from noodles reduces your score more than you gain in points from scoring the noodles, don't throw. If you gain more points from throwing the noodles than you lose to the clutter on the field, throw noodles.

[IronicDeadBird]

I underestimated utility this year which is weird normally I over emphasize it.
Just saw a tethered robot and the actual "footprint" created by the tether was a lot bigger then I had accounted for.
Size is killing some robots be it with center of gravity or just trying to get around, shout out to GDC for smart resource placement.

[CTbiker105]

Why would it being a "close match" impact you at all? Wins/Losses don't matter, only how many points you score.

Crap. I keep forgetting this. You're right, close matches are no longer a thing besides finals.

[Michael Corsetto]

Despite what everyone says about the lack of involvement of refs in this years game, refs are calling A LOT of fouls and they do hurt your score. With such a low scoring game -6 really makes a difference.


Curious, what penalties are being called?

Let me just give a general "thank you!" for sharing this insight with the community!

[IronicDeadBird]

Curious, what penalties are being called?

Let me just give a general "thank you!" for sharing this insight with the community!

The one penalty I saw was a robot getting snagged on the scoring wall thing that determines your bin level. With so many mechanisms that apply force sticking out of the robot you need to remember that you are limited to what you can actually apply force to.

[ehochstein]

From a Robot Inspector at Lake Superior... Be prepared to update your firmware. Bring a flashdrive with the most updated firmware for your PDP, PCM, Roborio and Talon SRX.

[KosmicKhaos]

From a Robot Inspector at Lake Superior... Be prepared to update your firmware. Bring a flashdrive with the most updated firmware for your PDP, PCM, Roborio and Talon SRX.

Thanks for the info! Very helpful!

[Tytus Gerrish]

Recycle rush is the most garbage game ever

[Boltman]

Recycle rush is the most garbage game ever

Swamp Thing likes garbage

[thatprogrammer]

Recycle rush is the most garbage game ever

It seemed okay to me today. I do think it's worse than any game for 2011-2014, but it seems better than 2009 or 10. Still, it did seemed very... awkward to watch.

[IronicDeadBird]

Recycle rush is the most garbage game ever

Can't tell if this is a pun or if you are being serious....

[Boltman]

Can't tell if this is a pun or if you are being serious....

Its a pun

[Chris C 3624]

Can anyone explain the process used for measuring transport configuration?

[Boltman]

Can anyone explain the process used for measuring transport configuration?

Imagine a box does your robot fit in it ?

Transport: 28 in. wide, 42 in. long, and 78 in. tall. 120lbs max internal weight

They will likely have a box with those dimensions to test.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Can anyone explain the process used for measuring transport configuration?

From LRI training, it should just be a taped outline on the floor and a tape measure in the hand of the inspector.

[IronicDeadBird]

You know I had a chance to make a joke and I missed it but here goes anyway.

For inspection generally you see maybe one or two mimes at competition. These mimes are in charge of making invisible walls around your robot and if there are any cracks between where the invisible walls should meet then your robot doesn't pass. After security has chased the people randomly dressed up mimes away they lay down a tape square and do it for real.

[BBray_T1296]

From LRI training, it should just be a taped outline on the floor and a tape measure in the hand of the inspector.

+1

How it was done today in Dallas


Imagine a box does your robot fit in it ?

Transport: 28 in. wide, 42 in. long, and 78 in. tall. 120lbs max internal weight

They will likely have a box with those dimensions to test.

No box. They just eyeballed the vertical planes of the box, not my preferred method of checking this rule. If you happen to be off by 1/4" or 1/2" you would likely get away with it especially if it was higher up on the robot.

[ozrien]

Be prepared to update your firmware. Bring a flash drive with the most updated firmware for your PDP, PCM, Roborio and Talon SRX.

I'm a little surprised how many teams did not update to the min legal firmware versions, which have been in the rules for some time (PCM and Talon since kickoff and PDP in an early team update).

[AllenGregoryIV]

I'm a little surprised how many teams did not update to the min legal firmware versions, which have been in the rules for some time (PCM and Talon since kickoff and PDP in an early team update).

I'm not surprised at all. Countless teams need help even to image the RoboRIO. If it doesn't fix a noticeable problem, it doesn't become a priority for teams. Even my team has shown up to competition with an outdated driver station version before.

[Anupam Goli]

I'm not surprised at all. Countless teams need help even to image the RoboRIO. If it doesn't fix a noticeable problem, it doesn't become a priority for teams. Even my team has shown up to competition with an outdated driver station version before.

Also this is the first year in which teams teams need to update PDP's Talon's and PCM's as well. That's a lot of things to keep up to date.

[Koko Ed]

Curious, what penalties are being called?

Let me just give a general "thank you!" for sharing this insight with the community!

Human player kept stepping off the carpet too get pool noodles. Once again poor training of human players are going to hurt teams trying to get cheap points when just simply drilling into their minds to watch what they are doing would save them alot of trouble.

[Left To Beaver]

If the path to center of the step is even slightly impeded for either alliance, just call off any coopertition actions.

[IronicDeadBird]

What about prioritizing totes to clear a path to the step in that scenario. Or snow plows?

[CalTran]

Curious, what penalties are being called?

Let me just give a general "thank you!" for sharing this insight with the community!

I've heard a few called for contact with both the chute door and a tote, and therefore propping up the chute door. A nice little 12pt whammy.

[Citrus Dad]

I'm not sure what the level of interest will be in watching all of the matches. After watching a team a couple of matches it all becomes quite predictable. The only question will be if certain teams improve substantially over the competition. This will become less relevant as the season progresses and teams reach their level of proficiency.

[IronicDeadBird]

The mess on the field when one team makes a mistake is so crazy and so detrimental to the team. Another underestimation by a good 300% on my end. Mobility is more important then I thought it would be. These 6 stacks are so slow to make and so bad if they topple. The more I see the more clear the team comp gets and the more stupid I feel but whatever...

[Travis Hoffman]

Recycle rush is the most garbage game ever

Where's a portable incinerator when you need one? ;)

#oldschoolreference

[Orion.DeYoe]

From a Robot Inspector at Lake Superior... Be prepared to update your firmware. Bring a flashdrive with the most updated firmware for your PDP, PCM, Roborio and Talon SRX.

Where do we get said firmware and where are instructions for installing it?

[MrForbes]

Where do we get said firmware and where are instructions for installing it?

I would start here....

(which I got to from the usfirst.org FRC page, Technical Resources, Programming, on the menu on the left)

https://wpilib.screenstepslive.com/s/4485

On the left side of the page, "Current Software Revisions" is the link you want.

[Travis Hoffman]

Where do we get said firmware and where are instructions for installing it?

I threw this links page together a while back to help local NEOFRA teams find useful information. The Current Software Revisions page is linked here.

www.neofra.com/resources/links

[idahorobot]

+1

How it was done today in Dallas




No box. They just eyeballed the vertical planes of the box, not my preferred method of checking this rule. If you happen to be off by 1/4" or 1/2" you would likely get away with it especially if it was higher up on the robot.

Really no Plexiglas box like in the past? Is this how it is at all competitions?

[thatprogrammer]

Really no Plexiglas box like in the past? Is this how it is at all competitions?

It was like that at South Florida too.

[vdoe]

Dead on accuracy with throwing noddles isn't something very hard to get; I've seen several human players who are nailing their noodle shots into the opposite wall. In one practice match a human player tossed 10 noodles and beat the opposing alliance. He alone scored 33 points with no robot working on his alliance, while also making it harder for the opposing alliance by cluttering the space around the human player station on the opposite side

[snoman]

1 noodles make little difference other than clogging up the field.
2 co op pts are huge almost every alliance try to do it. Lots succeed.
3 no 3 tote stacks in auto at the 2 events I was at. Not many pts scored in auto overall.
4 low scores overall. games in the single digits
5 teams communication with everyone playing prior to game is very important

[Doug Frisk]

3 no 3 tote stacks in auto at the 2 events I was at. Not many pts scored in auto overall.


You haven't been at the Northern Lights Regional. 2512 has made an auton tote stack in 5 of 6 matches so far.

[snoman]

I am in duluth missed that one. Working other event. The blue alliance shows 2 done in auto by 2512. Still very good !! Are you using encoders to drive straight?

[Doug Frisk]

I am in duluth missed that one. Working other event. The blue alliance shows 2 done in auto by 2512. Still very good !! Are you using encoders to drive straight?

That's because the blue alliance only has the first 30ish matches from Northern Lights.

As for driving straight, I tend to try to focus 10 to 12 seconds down the road. If you're asking how the robot does it, I have no clue, I'm just running the FMS and occasionally running ranking reports to Pit Admin.

[ice.berg]

You haven't been at the Northern Lights Regional. 2512 has made an auton tote stack in 5 of 6 matches so far.

I have no idea what you are talking about.....:p
But we might also bring 2 containers into the zone as well....

[snoman]

Is there a link to a video?

[ice.berg]

Is there a link to a video?
Click the facebook link below
|
|
V

[snoman]

Very cool! !!

[Mike Copioli]

I'm not surprised at all. Countless teams need help even to image the RoboRIO. If it doesn't fix a noticeable problem, it doesn't become a priority for teams. Even my team has shown up to competition with an outdated driver station version before.


Allen,

Having a legal robot should be every teams priority. Updating PCM, PDP, and Talon firmware is easier than tying your shoes.

[Lunitic2197]

So, just some observations I have made during the first day of competition at Howell....

- Co-Op Scores is the easiest way for points, any alliance that doesn't do this in quals drops pretty fast in rankings. However, both teams must be aware that this is going to happen and plan it out, similar to 2012
- Grabbing bins from the centers is often useless and just clogs the fields more. More often then not, they just fall over, and few teams are able to pick these up.
- Noodle Agreement 2.0: Both teams are waiting till either the co-op set/stack is complete, or there are 40 seconds left in the match, as to not make a mess on their own side, or in the way of their opponents as they work for the co-op.
- If you don't make it clear to your teammates to stay out of an area, you are very likely to lose your 5 stack with a bin.
- Teams that stack 4 high with container/litter are able to do much faster and with a lesser chance to fall then when doing 5/6 (107 is able to do up to 2 of these in a match, getting 60 points easily by themselves in later matches rather than in their first ones where they spent the entire match on one 5 tote stack, getting only 36 points.
- Totes going out the chute with nothing there will bounce almost anywhere and are unpredictable, just putting a drive train a few inches further than the length of a tote away from the chute usually keeps them falling right side up and often in an easy to access orientation.

[rich2202]

Curious, what penalties are being called?


Common fouls have been

G5 More than one person in the Human Player Zone
G6 HP in contact with both tote and chute door
G6-1 Prop open chute door - If the tote is stuck in the chute, do NOT release the chute door until the tote is cleared by the robot or gently shaking the chute.
G23 robot - knocks stack over, and it falls out of the field
G24 robot, while Coop stacking, knocks stack over onto other side of the field
G30 leave alliance station - do not step off the carpet
G31/G32 Coach touches anything
G33 throwing litter during last 20 seconds

[Koko Ed]

Not going to get much from week one. Teams were leaving in the middle of the day out of the blue (from what I'm told in Texas when a school closes kids on a field trip are required to go home ASAP unless they have an exception or have a hotel to stay at) so we had alot of surrogates for teams and we even had to have surrogates for surrogates. It was a mess.
It was a pleasure to watch beautifully designed robots like 987,118 and 148 at work. I took a video of one of 148's matches.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153183652459444&pnref=story

[Bongle]

At least on the webcast, the lack of actual head-to-head competition between alliances really hurts the excitement level. The final 20 seconds of the match loses a lot of suspense when you're only worrying about a marginal increase in each team's score rather than swinging the match to a win or loss.

I love the highly visible black-on-white numbers.

[Ty Tremblay]

Smooth is faster than fast. Especially this year.

[g_sawchuk]

Use a tote horizontally parallel to the human player station to keep totes from falling on their sides when they come from the "chute door". Yes, chute door.

[Shrub]

-When resetting the field, throw all the blue noodles to the blue side and all the red noodles to the red side. Also, be kind to them. It's extemely easy to make them unusable: driving on them with Mechanum is the easiest way.
-At most, the best teams made two tall stacks with a bin on top, and once they finely tuned their strategy, maybe a stack of three as well.
-extremely common: throwing noodles in last 20 seconds, two people in HP zone.
-coopertition is so important. Since averages dictate rank, it's an easy way to rank higher. This is probably known.
-teams usually wait for coopertition to start flinging noodles. Don't fling them willy-nilly, they really dictate the first few matches.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Allen,

Having a legal robot should be every teams priority. Updating PCM, PDP, and Talon firmware is easier than tying your shoes.

To be fair, I have a senior I have to yell at to tie his shoes on an hourly basis. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever seen him with tied shoes. Might need to do some "mentoring" there... or give him velcro.

[xXhunter47Xx]

I've noticed a couple things
-From what I've seen, teams have resorted to loading at the Human Player station rather than mining the Landfill
-Noodle throwing doesn't work out very well
-Step cans weren't as important as I thought (although I haven't watch any elim matches yet)
-Coopertition is pretty important

[dodar]

If you gather totes at the landfill, litter is the bane of your existence.

[Tweedy399]

I have definitely noticed today that litter makes a very large difference when going for co-op. Almost all alliances I have worked with have agreed to not throw litter until the co-op stack is scored. This is very helpful for both sides.

[lcoreyl]

1) the win-loss format adds (at least some) excitement to a low scorer if a team pulls a come from behind win. This year's low scorers are brutal...

2) teams need to know beforehand if they are sensitive to coop tote placement. If you know you can't reach far and can tell the other side, they can set and then poke it forward a little.

3) many teams have nice stable lifts but can't move stacks. They need to convince teammates to fetch totes to them on the platform.

[Johnbot]

What I've noticed from watching the Hatboro-Horsham district livestream (and the rest of the Dallas Regional after HH ended for the day):
- It is really easy to really mess up everything for yourself by dropping a full stack. I expected this, but it seems worse than I thought -> teams who normally score ~100 points barely reaching 30, etc.
- There aren't as many ambitious designs as I had expected - most every team went with the expected stackers, leading me to really applaud 148 for actually going through with the "tethered bot" idea.
- Do not let go of the door with a Tote stuck in it, you will get a yellow card.
- If you knock a tote onto the step, you may be penalized.
- If you knock over a co-op stack, you will almost definitely be penalized.
- Some teams mastered throwing Litter. Some have made great uses for it in Containers. Others did not.
- Auton is far more strategic than in previous years - the relatively low point value and relatively high difficulty makes doing other things in auton far more viable, often even desirable.
- Just being able to do something is hard. I had expected far more "pushers" -> robots who didn't try stacking, but instead just plowed for a bunch of two pointers, maybe making a stack of two.

-Teams should really try helping out their future alliance partners more with getting an auton that can at least drive/push something working. I imagine/hope many teams are doing that, but I still am seeing a very sizable teams at HH not even try to move.

[lovelj]

Coop points are important but can skew rankings. Coop doesn't count in finals so stacking and autonomous becomes critical. In Palmetto, 3824 could reliably do two 42 pt stacks from the loading station. Teamed with 4454 who could do a 42 stack from the loading station and a 3rd that could do a small stack from the field. Finals were intense with four huge stacks on a tight field. Third pick (feel terrible not recalling their number) was critical, getting a bin from the step and creating a 4th stack in finals for a 150 to 133 win.

Also, tank drives struggled in Palmetto. Holonomic omnidirectionality with swerves or meccanums is critical. It's a very tight field!

[Mike Copioli]

Some recommendations after week 1 SFR (south Florida Regional). Below are a list of observed issues. These are in order of most common to least common

1. Update your DS software, PDP and PCM firmware to the required versions.

1. Check the seating depth of your PDP fuses, I cannot stress this enough. A good rule of thumb for this; If you can remove the fuse by hand, without the use of pliers, then it is NOT properly seated.

2. Robot Wiring - Teams should pull test every connection on the robot, specifically the Weidmuller connectors (push-in-type connector on PCM/VRM/PDP). Try to pull the wire out, you do not need to be gentle. If the wire can be removed without pressing the white button you should re-strip and re-seat as necessary. Also check the main battery, breaker and PDP terminals. Make sure these connections are not loose. You should not be able to move these connections without the use of tools.

3. Driver Station Computer - Disable all power management features of your DS computer. Specifically sleep and hibernate features. This can affect connectivity to the field as hibernate and sleep disable network connection and sometimes do not re-enable properly upon wake.

4. Disable all firewall and antivirus software. This can also affect field connectivity. A few teams had this issue.

5. Battery Quality - Not all SLA batteries are created equally. Some brands of batteries contain more pure lead, more consistent chemistry and lower internal resistance than others. From my experience, the MK and Genesis batteries seem to perform the best. They have a much lower internal resistance than some of the other brands out there. Having said that, all lead acid batteries degrade over time and use, so it is a good practice to test your batteries regularly.

6. PERFORM A COMPLETE ROBOT SYSTEMS CHECK BEFORE EACH MATCH!!!
If you are not doing this you are inviting failure. Catch issues before they cost your team and your alliance partners a match.

These are my observation made by both myself and Ken Gardner while CSAing at SFR.

[MrRoboSteve]

1. Update your DS software, PDP and PCM firmware to the required versions.


Most teams at NL needed the software updates. The DS update is particularly important as the older version won't connect to the field. We bypassed several teams at Northern Lights during practice for this issue.

You can update the DS software and do items 3, 4, and 5 on Mike's list with the robot in the bag.

[Short Stuff]

Was ere a problem at the South Florida regional that caused it to go so late last night or just so many teams that it took so long to get through qualifications? I am trying to help my team plan ahead for when we go to the Utah regional in a couple weeks.

[Pretzel]

Was ere a problem at the South Florida regional that caused it to go so late last night or just so many teams that it took so long to get through qualifications? I am trying to help my team plan ahead for when we go to the Utah regional in a couple weeks.
South Florida was one of the earliest ending regionals. I remember watching the finals at around 3:00-3:45 mountain time, which I suppose would still be a bit late at 5:00-5:45 EST.

Did you perhaps mean Dallas, which finished at around 9:00-10:00 mountain time? If so, it is because they had to end qualifications matches on Friday at ~3:00 due to weather concerns. This meant they had to finish qualification matches on Saturday afternoon before they could do alliance selections and eliminations.

[Short Stuff]

South Florida was one of the earliest ending regionals. I remember watching the finals at around 3:00-3:45 mountain time, which I suppose would still be a bit late at 5:00-5:45 EST.

Did you perhaps mean Dallas, which finished at around 9:00-10:00 mountain time? If so, it is because they had to end qualifications matches on Friday at ~3:00 due to weather concerns. This meant they had to finish qualification matches on Saturday afternoon before they could do alliance selections and eliminations.

When I was watching the live stream of South Florida, I saw the finals end at about 7 pm MST

[Jade Z]

Where is everyone finding match results/rankings/etc? The Blue Alliance only has some of the information I'm looking for, and FRC Spyder stopped updating after the third match for everyone at South Florida this weekend.

[Qbot2640]

Recycle rush is the most garbage game ever

Have to agree, pun or no pun...I hate this game!

[brrian27]

Where is everyone finding match results/rankings/etc? The Blue Alliance only has some of the information I'm looking for, and FRC Spyder stopped updating after the third match for everyone at South Florida this weekend.

For South Florida at least,http://app.robovisionod.com/ (http://app.robovisionod.com/)has scores and rankings

[AlexD744]

There is no room for error in eliminations. In quals, a bad match can be overcome because it's only 1/12 - 1/9 of your average. But in quarters and semis, where your average is based on 2-3 matches, you have to be on point for every match. Finals actually is more error tolerant because of the W-L-T system.

[SoccerTaco]

There is no room for error in eliminations. In quals, a bad match can be overcome because it's only 1/12 - 1/9 of your average. But in quarters and semis, where your average is based on 2-3 matches, you have to be on point for every match. Finals actually is more error tolerant because of the W-L-T system.

Quoted for TRUTH!

I much prefer the 2 out of 3 W-L format for playoffs.

[dodar]

Honestly, in the playoff format, the finals this year are easier than the quarters and semis.

[Jay O'Donnell]

Honestly, in the playoff format, the finals this year are easier than the quarters and semis.

Agreed. One bad match in quarters/semis (whether it is your own fault or a dead robot) kills your average and chances of advancing, but one bad match finals and you still have a chance to win the other two matches.

[rick.oliver]

Recycle rush is the most garbage game ever

I could not disagree more. In my twelve seasons, this is the best game design I've seen.

[highlander]

I could not disagree more. In my twelve seasons, this is the best game design I've seen.

That's a joke, right?

[Doug Frisk]

I could not disagree more. In my twelve seasons, this is the best game design I've seen.

I can't agree with that. In past games, a rookie or not as skilled team had opportunities to contribute where in this game there isn't that opportunity.

Even something as simple as a "noodle plow" requires a good driver and some decent manipulation capability.

As for the totes and recycling containers, their weight and the height they must be lifted means that you need some serious engineering and manufacturing skill to build a machine that can put a full stack together.

[rick.oliver]

That's a joke, right?

No, not a joke. I am quite serious. Look at the solutions we saw in Dallas this past weekend ... and without Alfred, too. Really looking forward to see how the season plays out. World Championships are going to be epic, I believe.

Yes, it requires a fair amount of engineering knowledge and experience to be competitive. At the same time, many excellent resources have been established to provide less resourced teams with the strategy, design and manufacturing capability to contribute.

It has been derided (my inference) as a glorified skills contest. I agree, it is a glorified skills contest and I like it very much.

[D.Allred]

Smooth is faster than fast. Especially this year.
Absolutely. I used "slow is faster" with my drive team. You have to finish a task to score. Do it right the first time instead of trying to rush.

Here are my observations and suggestions.
- Co-op can be a huge factor in your rankings, but you have to work together to achieve it. No litter and no landfill work near the middle of the field until that task is complete.
- I saw too many teams driving with totes in the air in an unstable configuration. Leave them on the ground and push them on the platform.
- Don't turn fast. Angular momentum is your enemy unless you have tote stablizers.
- The field is crowded. Have an alliance plan on where you will work.
- There is a way to make totes land flat on the floor. It's a bit hard to describe, but essentially you use the chute door to drag the back 3 inches of the tote as it exits the chute. Takes practice, but I highly recommend it.

David

[highlander]

No, not a joke. I am quite serious. Look at the solutions we saw in Dallas this past weekend ... and without Alfred, too. Really looking forward to see how the season plays out. World Championships are going to be epic, I believe.

I have to disagree. The gameplay itself is quite poor. The same tasks are performed again and again. Excitement only comes when mistakes are made, unlike a truly well designed game where excitement is derived from excellent plays. Watching 148 (just an example) stack again and again is, to be sure, very impressive, but it lacks the truly dynamic and exciting action that other games have had in the past. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that there is no robot to robot interaction (offense-defense wise).

Viewing impressive solutions to this challenge, I think, isn't indicative of game design quality. Every game has interesting solutions and nuances, this one is no better. The game, as mentioned formerly, is boring. When explaining to others not involved in the program, it is difficult to describe and often lacks the interesting aspect that other games have had in the past.

In fact, it was a stretch to even make this a 'game', or manipulate it to fit the current competition format, which I guess FIRST had to do due to institutional difficulties.

[Squillo]

I can't agree with that. In past games, a rookie or not as skilled team had opportunities to contribute where in this game there isn't that opportunity.

Even something as simple as a "noodle plow" requires a good driver and some decent manipulation capability.

As for the totes and recycling containers, their weight and the height they must be lifted means that you need some serious engineering and manufacturing skill to build a machine that can put a full stack together.

I think this is mixing apples and oranges. You go from "nothing a rookie can contribute" to talking about the difficulty of making "full stacks" - implying that if a team can't make a full (I assume that by this you mean a 6-high) stack, they can't do anything. Consider our robot - we can make stacks up to 4 (though 3 is our sweet spot), cap a stack of up to 4, help with coopertition, move our bot, a tote and a can in auto (or do less if desired). We don't even have a MechE mentor, and we just started learning CAD this year. We have no sponsors who provide parts, machining, or shop space. Even if "putting together a full stack" were more than we could do (and I'm not conceding that, but it may very well have been true had we tried to do that), I do tjink we'll "contribute" to our alliances. We actually found it easier to build what we think will be a solid competitor (no, not a superstar), without having to worry AS MUCH about being beat to a pulp by the other robots, strict perimeter rules during competition, etc.

I like this game. I wouldn't say it's my favorite, or least favorite, but I just don't see why everyone hates it so much. Admittedly it would be more fun to watch if more robots actually did stuff, but I'm thinking that will improve over the next 6 weeks.

[Ben Wolsieffer]

There is a way to make totes land flat on the floor. It's a bit hard to describe, but essentially you use the chute door to drag the back 3 inches of the tote as it exits the chute. Takes practice, but I highly recommend it.

At Granite State we were told by the refs that we were not allowed to do this and that the chute door can't be closed at all until the tote has exited.

[Drakxii]

I hate this game. Hopefully next year game will be better.

[mrnoble]

I've seen a lot of games since 2004. This one is a very interesting technical challenge for my team, and I like the solutions they came up with a lot, though they don't really approach 148, 624, et al. I look forward to our chance to be on the field in Utah week three. Still, I don't think this game is going to be as much fun to watch as 2013 or 2014, even as the weeks go by and teams dial in their strategies. I speculate that the nature of the game was driven by:

a reaction against last year's heavy defense
a reaction against the sense in the community that FRC meant "sport" only (which I know I've contributed to)
a desire to give the new RoboRio and peripherals a low speed test run


I'm still optimistic, but I also am one of those that liked Lunacy, so...

[Boltman]

Great game whats needed are better designed robots.... not easy to be effective and to be badly designed.... this game points out those flaws for all to see. Also driver abilities have a huge impact.

What works:

HP loaders up to 6 tall with RC
Versatile robots that can do it all
Wall stacker coop

What doesn't all else

[PVCpirate]

Some observations:

Auto stacks are massive, if a team can make one consistently they will be a game changer the entire competition. At both of this weekend's New England district events, the 1 seed and winning alliance captain had auto stacks.

Having one robot make tall stacks and another cap the stacks with RCs is a great strategy if neither robot can do both quickly. 1519 and 95 at Granite State employed this for a dominant win, with 1519 making stacks of 4 from the landfill and 95 capping them.

Throwing noodles CAN be a viable strategy if the human players can get them across consistently, especially in elims where you won't mess up coopertition. I saw and heard about advancement in elims being decided by noodles a few times.

[Caleb Sykes]

I like this game. I wouldn't say it's my favorite, or least favorite, but I just don't see why everyone hates it so much.

I think it's personal preference. Everyone has a favorite sport, and it can be disappointing to be forced to design for a game that you don't particularly like.

For example, I can't watch golf or downhill skiing for more than 5 minutes without getting bored. This doesn't mean that these are poor competitions, just that I don't find them interesting. People like me will generally not get as much enjoyment out of games like Recycle Rush as we would AA or UA because there is not any head-to-head competition.

I also don't enjoy sports like bowling where there is a score ceiling. Watching sports like these makes viewers have less appreciation for success, since for example, strikes in bowling come to be commonplace. People then start watching for the mistakes. Again, this does not mean that bowling is a poor game, just that it doesn't suit my taste. Both Recycle Rush and Logomotion have had "soft" score ceilings. That is, there are hardly any matches that actually will hit the ceiling, but at high levels, more effort will be required to get the same score increase (top pegs full in 2011, RCs all used in 2015). I'm not particularly excited for championships when teams with amazing robots that don't play perfectly will lose to teams with poorer robots that had slightly better execution.

This game has those two strikes against it for me, which probably makes it my least favorite game I have participated in. However, my team still built a great robot, and I will still have fun at every competition I will attend. I wouldn't be in FRC if I wanted to play Rebound Rumble every year. We need to have random games like this for those who actually enjoy games like bowling or golf.

[Zach101]

I hate this game. Hopefully next year game will be better.

I see the downsides of this game compared to years past but I am not disappointed and in ways I love the strategy this year when trying to pick robots for elimination rounds. I think people are disappointed the most about this game because they are so used to it being a shooting game and now that there isn't a shooting aspect people are like, 'What now?', because this game is so different. I know this isn't the only reason why they are disappointed(most people at least). This game is great. Of course I wish one rule was this way and things like that but no game is perfect and sometimes we need to adjust to these new rules/game.

[Sperkowsky]

I don't like this game because it's less exciting for spectators. Getting sponsors and parents to come is a lot easier when it's a fast paced shooting game

[Ichlieberoboter]

Curious, what penalties are being called?

Let me just give a general "thank you!" for sharing this insight with the community!

I saw quite a few penalties called when teams tried to do coopertition and accidentally knocked the yellow totes to the other side of the field while stacking them.

[jwhite]

-Teams should really try helping out their future alliance partners more with getting an auton that can at least drive/push something working. I imagine/hope many teams are doing that, but I still am seeing a very sizable teams at HH not even try to move.

This is a lot harder than it looks, and the incentives all push against experimenting. We had a two tote auto that worked on the practice field, but nearly destroyed 2052 when a turn bound up. The field is tiny, and it's easy to disrupt a can or the ever-so-precious path to the coopertition step.

Unless all 3 teams are certain to do it, the risks strongly outweigh the rewards. (Risk losing 40 points for a long shot at 4 points?!!? No thanks). And so as a result, few teams try, and few teams can do it, and so on...

I really think they ought to give 1 or 2 points for single robots or totes, and then a bonus for sets. That would change the incentive structure, I think.

Cheers,

Jeremy

[Drakxii]

I see the downsides of this game compared to years past but I am not disappointed and in ways I love the strategy this year when trying to pick robots for elimination rounds. I think people are disappointed the most about this game because they are so used to it being a shooting game and now that there isn't a shooting aspect people are like, 'What now?', because this game is so different. I know this isn't the only reason why they are disappointed(most people at least). This game is great. Of course I wish one rule was this way and things like that but no game is perfect and sometimes we need to adjust to these new rules/game.

My problem with the game has nothing to do with it being a manipulation game. Logo Motion was a manipulation game and I mostly like that game.

I have a lot of problems with this game. I just can't find a good way to say them without rambling. But my main problems in line with rules that don't support weak teams and allow superstar teams to do everything on the field without any need for teamwork on the alliance. (Staying out of each other's way isn't very good "teamwork" imo)

[jajabinx124]

This is a lot harder than it looks, and the incentives all push against experimenting. We had a two tote auto that worked on the practice field, but nearly destroyed 2052 when a turn bound up. The field is tiny, and it's easy to disrupt a can or the ever-so-precious path to the coopertition step.

Unless all 3 teams are certain to do it, the risks strongly outweigh the rewards. (Risk losing 40 points for a long shot at 4 points?!!? No thanks). And so as a result, few teams try, and few teams can do it, and so on...

I really think they ought to give 1 or 2 points for single robots or totes, and then a bonus for sets. That would change the incentive structure, I think.

Cheers,

Jeremy

I agree.

Our elims alliance in Lake superior all moved forward in auto and didn't mess with totes or RC's in auto in fear of tipping a RC over. Those RC's are worth too much and we were limited to only be able to pick up the RC's when they are standing up vertically. We didn't take the risk we just stuck to driving forward in auto.

[angelah]

We competed at Southfield.

Things we thought would be a big deal but weren't:
Picking up upside down totes (few people cleared the landfill that far)
Driving over noodles
Getting containers off the step in auto
Tipping robots (a few did, but not as many as we expected)
Totes falling on people or robots


Things that we didn't foresee:
Noodles on steps cluttering up spots to stack (we lost a stack of points built by an alliance partner because of a noodle partially under it)
Noodle throwing points making such a difference (I don't like this, but that's another conversation)
The low scores


Things that were as expected:
Totes landed on their ends (unless you used the drag-at-the-end method)
The field is crowded (we built a smaller robot than most)
Maneuverability would be critical, speed would not be
Picking up containers laying on their sides would be necessary


Other general notes:
We toppled a stack of yellows onto the other side in our second match. Granted, it was because of field communication issues, but still, we didn't get a penalty for it.
There were two ways to go in an alliance... 2014-style where everyone took a role, or a more individual-style where you divided up the field and each did your thing. We played both ways depending on the match, but ended up building an alliance to work as a team in playoffs, which went well.


Overall, I like this game. I very much dislike the new system for playoffs.

[Bruce Newendorp]

After spending the weekend at the Northern Lights Regional at the northern end of I35 (compared to all the buzz about the one near the southern end of I35) my observations are:
Pros:
1. A manipulation game vs. a shooting/throwing game is a very nice change. Quick scoring is still highly valued but this game requires smooth driving and finesse.
2. I was concerned the playoffs would be fairly predictable and end up with the alliances getting the same score for every playoff match. This was not the case and the playoffs were exciting through the finals. Our alliance (3130, 525, & 4215) had scores ranging from 99 to 163 over the 7 playoff matches. With the scoring coming in large chunks one wrong move can completely change a match outcome.
3. Alliances of robots with varying ability is a huge benefit. We are a feeder station robot and can make 2 stacks with containers. 3130 was very good at getting containers off the step and can make 2 stacks with containers from the landfill. 4215 made stacks from the other feeder station. Picking alliance partners with the best skill fit is critical to success this year.

Cons:
1. The alliance vs. alliance competition is missing and takes away some of the excitement. In previous games strategic decisions on both alliances matter. Not so much this year.
2. Since high scores is all that matters, coopertition was and will not be a priority for all teams. Simply put some teams can score as many or more points on their own as they can doing the coopertition stack. We had to turn down doing coopertition with our opposing alliance because it was not advantageous to us. That’s not how we like to play but given the qualification scoring rules we have no choice but to maximize our score every match. We are sorry to any teams we had to have that discussion with.
3. Autonomous is very strange this year. Unless a team can get the three tote set, there is not much value in doing any autonomous scoring. An orderly field is easier for teams to plan a strategy around and generally the autonomous routines I saw made a mess of the field leaving it in a disadvantageous state for teleop. With more work we think we can get the three tote stack in autonomous but I doubt we will work on it any more. The risk does not outweigh the reward so we are likely to continue to use autonomous to get a container in position for teleop.

Other:
1. At Northern Lights the two teams that could make two 4-6 tall stacks with containers had qualification scores in the mid 90’s. There’s a significant gap to the next 6 qualifying scores which were in the upper 60’s to upper 70’s. Getting 2 tall stacks in 135 seconds will put teams at the top of the ranking. The litter and cooperation points average out over all the matches.
2. While coopertition points are a good way to get qualification points they have no value in the playoffs. Alliance selection picks need to consider this.

[Richard Wallace]

At Granite State we were told by the refs that we were not allowed to do this and that the chute door can't be closed at all until the tote has exited.
Did anyone talk with the Head Ref about that? It seems inconsistent with Q260 and Q164. Nothing in G6 prohibits this method, although it could become a field damage (G16g) issue if done incorrectly with too much force.

[alicen]

Curious, what penalties are being called?

Let me just give a general "thank you!" for sharing this insight with the community!

GSCR just ended this afternoon and the most common fouls we called were throwing noodles in the last 20 seconds, two human players in the HP zone and a couple of crossing the start line during autonomous.

We didnt have a single G6 of touching tote and chute door, and only one red card in the entire event. :)

[Squillo]

Two other things I like about this game:
- It's not hard to avoid fouls, and the point values for most fouls seem reasonable, and
- The playoff format ensures more matches in the semi-finals; each team is guaranteed 3, rather than two plus a possible third. More matches is more of a reward for making it to playoffs.

(It would be better if they got three in the quarter-finals too.)

[alephzer0]

One thing I noticed (at least in MAR):
G6-1 is a killer. I saw at least 3 yellow cards and one red card from it.
For reference,G6-1 is the rule that says you can't prop open the chute door. That was a problem, I'm assuming, because HP's left totes in the chute with the door open and unattended.
Or something like that.

[dodar]

Two other things I like about this game:
- The playoff format ensures more matches for the teams in the quarter- and semi-finals (each QF team gets to play 3 matches, rather than only two with a POSSIBLE 3rd - in the old format, while there were "underdog victories", the likelihood was that for alliances 7 and 8, at least, they would only get two elim matches; each SF team gets 3 more, so a total of 6 playoff matches). More matches is more of a reward for making it to playoffs.

This isnt right. You still only get 2 matches in the Quarters.

[Boltman]

This isnt right. You still only get 2 matches in the Quarters.


Yes this:

Quarterfinals in Regional (2 matches)

4-5
3-6
2-7
1-8

4-6
3-5
2-8
1-7

[Squillo]

Oh, well, that's a drag. But I see why it's necessary, to save time.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

It's really difficult to watch both alliances work at the same time. It's almost like there are two separate "games" coexisting at the same time.

The other thing that I thought was kind of funny was that this is the only year to my knowledge where a #1 seed can end up playing as the blue alliance.

[Thad House]

One thing I noticed (at least in MAR):
G6-1 is a killer. I saw at least 3 yellow cards and one red card from it.
For reference,G6-1 is the rule that says you can't prop open the chute door. That was a problem, I'm assuming, because HP's left totes in the chute with the door open and unattended.
Or something like that.

They handed like to G6-1 red cards out at Oregon City.

Some were caused by one of the chute doors being sticky, and not falling correctly. Field issue, but they couldnt fix it, and still gave out the cards.

I think it being a card is a bit too harsh. Thinking about the safety things, I think I came up with a way to keep it safe, make it not have a competitive advantage, and give less cards.

Add a safety zone 5 inches into the chute.
Red card if the HP extends past that line inside the chute
Keep regular G6
Remove the cards from G6-1 - keep the foul

That keeps the HP safe by not allowing them to put their hands inside the chute, which honestly I never saw and shouldnt happen anyway. And it take out the harsh card for if a tote gets stuck. You could also add a condition to G6 to make it so an HP in the zone cannot touch a tote if the chute door is propped open. But with the foul on G6-1 I dont really think thats needed, because that basically makes it so the chute door has to close in order to put another tote in without getting a foul.

[PayneTrain]

Absolutely. I used "slow is faster" with my drive team. You have to finish a task to score. Do it right the first time instead of trying to rush.

Here are my observations and suggestions.
- Co-op can be a huge factor in your rankings, but you have to work together to achieve it. No litter and no landfill work near the middle of the field until that task is complete.
- I saw too many teams driving with totes in the air in an unstable configuration. Leave them on the ground and push them on the platform.
- Don't turn fast. Angular momentum is your enemy unless you have tote stablizers.
- The field is crowded. Have an alliance plan on where you will work.
- There is a way to make totes land flat on the floor. It's a bit hard to describe, but essentially you use the chute door to drag the back 3 inches of the tote as it exits the chute. Takes practice, but I highly recommend it.

David

Just because the referees at Palmetto didn't know the rules, doesn't mean dragging isn't a G6 violation.

[PayneTrain]

Did anyone talk with the Head Ref about that? It seems inconsistent with Q260 and Q164. Nothing in G6 prohibits this method, although it could become a field damage (G16g) issue if done incorrectly with too much force.

They made a clarification that in the blue box by linking to the field tour video and dragging is not in the video.

The whole thing surrounding G6 was seemingly intentionally vague for no real reason, but when our drive coach went in to the question box at Palmetto we were told we couldn't do it, even though D.Allred and 4451 were doing it during the same event.

It's the same referee crew that didn't know you could unload yellow totes from the field before the match and tried to convince me that the robot touching the cans in the staging area in auto was barely legal, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Thad House]

Just because the referees at Palmetto didn't know the rules, doesn't mean dragging isn't a G6 violation.

Dragging is not a G6 violation. Q&A said its not, and if your hand is controlling it, the tote is not propping it open. The HP is controlling and holding it open. If dragging would be a foul, then everytime you opened the door it would be a foul, because its dragging on the tote then too.

[PayneTrain]

Dragging is not a G6 violation. Q&A said its not, and if your hand is controlling it, the tote is not propping it open. The HP is controlling and holding it open. If dragging would be a foul, then everytime you opened the door it would be a foul, because its dragging on the tote then too.

Look at my other post. We came to the regional with the impression we could "pop" the totes by stopping them at the end of its travel trough the chute. Myself and other team members, along with other team members, were split on how we thought referees would rule on this with regards to the Q&A, so we asked at the event and got what we got.

[wireties]

Did you perhaps mean Dallas, which finished at around 9:00-10:00 mountain time? If so, it is because they had to end qualifications matches on Friday at ~3:00 due to weather concerns. This meant they had to finish qualification matches on Saturday afternoon before they could do alliance selections and eliminations.

And the weather delay continued through Saturday morning. Matches did not start till 11:00 Saturday morning after ending at 3:45-ish on Friday. On top of that many local school districts sent buses to pull their students home mid-day Friday and would not transport students on Saturday. It was a mess and FIRST did the best they could.

[Kevin Leonard]

It was interesting sitting at home and watching different alliance compositions compete.
Dallas was the battle of the superpowers, with 148-987 and 118-624. These two alliances mostly competed as individuals, with each robot doing their own thing. However, sometimes in eliminations, 987 would grab a stack from Robin while Batman was out to get a quick score toward the end. 3rd picks only really came in to play when they needed to come in clutch and keep up average scores.
These two alliances also showed that a less crowded field can be better, often putting up high scores despite having only 1 or 2 robots on the field.

At Hatboro-Horsham, you also had the top two robots working alone, but their third picks were tremendously important, with the third robots of the finalist alliances working to grab containers from the step during teleop. The winning alliance had major help from 5407, who had an interesting mechanism for grabbing containers.

At Waterbury, the number one seed and eventual champion alliance worked as separate systems for the most part, but the other finalist alliance was much more interesting. The alliance of 237-558-4557 worked as an amazing team. The alliance hinged on having all the recycling containers due to 237's auto. 237 and 4557 would make short stacks of 2-3, and 558 would work to add noodles to cans and cap the stacks. Most of their successful matches would end with 4-6 stacks of 1-3 that were capped with RC's. They took the winners to 3 with this fascinating strategy.

The first seed and finalists at Indianapolis had similar teamwork, with 5188 and 1024 working to make stacks, and then 1024 would cap all of them.

Most successful robots and high seeds took primarily from the feeder station, but a few of the competitive machines, like 987, 118, and 230 all took to the landfill, and a few alliances making short stacks also took from the landfill.

Stacks of 5 and 6 seemed interchangeable at most events, but the shorter the stacks being made, the more important litter became to success.

Matches in eliminations at most events were sometimes decided by which alliance more effectively threw litter.

Lastly, most people's crazy score predictions were way off, and a very competitive machine is one that can make one full stack per match.
High scores at most regionals were around 100.

[KosmicKhaos]

Unfortunately after 24 hours i can no longer edit this post to add more observations. However i will continue to add observations of other people and such on the reddit version of this thread.

http://http://www.reddit.com/r/FRC/comments/2xb5u7/week_1_observations/

[dradel]

It was interesting sitting at home and watching different alliance compositions compete.

Dallas was the battle of the superpowers, with 148-987 and 118-624. These two alliances mostly competed as individuals, with each robot doing their own thing. However, sometimes in eliminations, 987 would grab a stack from Robin while Batman was out to get a quick score toward the end. 3rd picks only really came in to play when they needed to come in clutch and keep up average scores.

These two alliances also showed that a less crowded field can be better, often putting up high scores despite having only 1 or 2 robots on the field.



At Hatboro-Horsham, you also had the top two robots working alone, but their third picks were tremendously important, with the third robots of the finalist alliances working to grab containers from the step during teleop. The winning alliance had major help from 5407, who had an interesting mechanism for grabbing containers.



At Waterbury, the number one seed and eventual champion alliance worked as separate systems for the most part, but the other finalist alliance was much more interesting. The alliance of 237-558-4557 worked as an amazing team. The alliance hinged on having all the recycling containers due to 237's auto. 237 and 4557 would make short stacks of 2-3, and 558 would work to add noodles to cans and cap the stacks. Most of their successful matches would end with 4-6 stacks of 1-3 that were capped with RC's. They took the winners to 3 with this fascinating strategy.



The first seed and finalists at Indianapolis had similar teamwork, with 5188 and 1024 working to make stacks, and then 1024 would cap all of them.



Most successful robots and high seeds took primarily from the feeder station, but a few of the competitive machines, like 987, 118, and 230 all took to the landfill, and a few alliances making short stacks also took from the landfill.



Stacks of 5 and 6 seemed interchangeable at most events, but the shorter the stacks being made, the more important litter became to success.



Matches in eliminations at most events were sometimes decided by which alliance more effectively threw litter.



Lastly, most people's crazy score predictions were way off, and a very competitive machine is one that can make one full stack per match.

High scores at most regionals were around 100.


Was amazing being part of the Waterbury district final! Seeing 237, 558, and 4557 develop and implement their strategy made this mentor proud.

[Doug Frisk]

I think this is mixing apples and oranges. You go from "nothing a rookie can contribute" to talking about the difficulty of making "full stacks" - implying that if a team can't make a full (I assume that by this you mean a 6-high) stack, they can't do anything. Consider our robot - we can make stacks up to 4 (though 3 is our sweet spot), cap a stack of up to 4, help with coopertition, move our bot, a tote and a can in auto (or do less if desired). We don't even have a MechE mentor, and we just started learning CAD this year. We have no sponsors who provide parts, machining, or shop space. Even if "putting together a full stack" were more than we could do (and I'm not conceding that, but it may very well have been true had we tried to do that), I do tjink we'll "contribute" to our alliances. We actually found it easier to build what we think will be a solid competitor (no, not a superstar), without having to worry AS MUCH about being beat to a pulp by the other robots, strict perimeter rules during competition, etc.

I like this game. I wouldn't say it's my favorite, or least favorite, but I just don't see why everyone hates it so much. Admittedly it would be more fun to watch if more robots actually did stuff, but I'm thinking that will improve over the next 6 weeks.

I didn't say I hated the game I said it's hard, perhaps impossible, for teams who don't have excellent engineering and manufacturing (and programming) skills to be able to build a high scoring robot.

The major scoring this year comes from lifting recycling containers onto the top of stacks. Yes, totes are worth 2 points each, but if you can build a stack 6 totes high and then put a container on top, that container is worth 24 points and there's no path to advancement in this game that doesn't involve lifting those containers up very high.

There's no question that's an engineering and manufacturing challenge that relatively few teams can achieve.

[rich2202]

Look at my other post. We came to the regional with the impression we could "pop" the totes by stopping them at the end of its travel trough the chute. Myself and other team members, along with other team members, were split on how we thought referees would rule on this with regards to the Q&A, so we asked at the event and got what we got.

Print the Q&A where First allows dragging
Go to the Question Box, and ask the Head Ref for a clarification
Show the Q&A and confirm that dragging will not be called as a foul

At Lake Superior, dragging was not a foul. What is a foul is: When the HP lets go of the chute door, if the door does not fully close - then that is the foul.

So, push the chute door closed, and don't let go until it is fully closed.

[tindleroot]

The other thing that I thought was kind of funny was that this is the only year to my knowledge where a #1 seed can end up playing as the blue alliance.

I though the highest seeded team was always red alliance this year.:confused:

[JeffersonMartin]

I though the highest seeded team was always red alliance this year.:confused:
Alliances reseed after each playoff round. So the 1 overall seed could end up as the fourth seed in semis.

[MechEng83]

Agreed. One bad match in quarters/semis (whether it is your own fault or a dead robot) kills your average and chances of advancing, but one bad match finals and you still have a chance to win the other two matches.

The advancement structure has created a big problem with red card penalties in eliminations.

Case in point: My team's alliance was given a red card for G14 after our 1st semifinal match because we had back-to-back matches and our alliance partner tethered their robot as many teams have done in the past with back-to-back matches, during the field timeout. We were about to do the same to get log files when the head ref came out to give our alliance the red card.

Now, I'm not disputing the penalty, it's clearly in the rules (though easily overlooked by teams used to previous years). But I feel the consequence of the penalty far outweighs the action. In the past, a red card gave you zero points, and the counter was reset, so you could recover from that. With the advancement structure being average score, you're basically hosed from a single red card, with almost no ability to recover.

So my warning to everyone is: don't tether the robot on the field. Ever.

My plea to FIRST is to change this rule. I understand the safety implications in Frank's written notes about this in the team update, but this is another example of the infamous "beatings will continue until morale improves"

[carpedav000]

We just came back from a week one Indiana district event, I noticed that the landfill can be a bit too crowded to make larger stacks of totes. The quarterfinals at the event were rather exciting, as the 8th seated alliance (The CyberCards, 1720, and 1741) took first and held it until the last quarterfinal match.

[plnyyanks]

Now, I'm not disputing the penalty, it's clearly in the rules (though easily overlooked by teams used to previous years). But I feel the consequence of the penalty far outweighs the action. In the past, a red card gave you zero points, and the counter was reset, so you could recover from that. With the advancement structure being average score, you're basically hosed from a single red card, with almost no ability to recover.


Are you implying that you could tether the robot on the field in previous years? Because that isn't true. From archived game manuals (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/archived-game-documentation-and-event-results)


ROBOTS will not be re-enabled after the conclusion of the MATCH, nor will Teams be permitted to tether to the ROBOT



5.5.5.2 T15
ROBOTS will not be re-enabled after the conclusion of the MATCH, nor will Teams be permitted to tether to the ROBOT



Robots will not be re-enabled after the conclusion of the Match, nor will teams be permitted to tether to the Robot

[PayneTrain]

Are you implying that you could tether the robot on the field in previous years? Because that isn't true. From archived game manuals (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/archived-game-documentation-and-event-results)

To my knowledge this was never enforced during eliminations where there are field timeouts, and there was no applied red card for it either.

[plnyyanks]

To my knowledge this was never enforced during eliminations where there are field timeouts, and there was no applied red card for it either.

That's a good point - the red card is new this year. I guess that's why it's starting to be enforced.

[Thad House]

In past years, we have been specifically asked to tether on the fields if we had back to back matches. We were asked to do it this year as well. Thats weird that you guys got carded for it.

[IronicDeadBird]

Whats the reasoning behind no tethering on the field? The red cards in FRC follow the general pattern of being safety related (don't let your robot wield totes in an aggressive manner towards refs), GP related (be civil) or just actions that would break the game (don't throw auto totes that you took off the field into the auto zone during auto)
Tethering doesn't fall into any of those categories at least not that I know of.

[MechEng83]

Whats the reasoning behind no tethering on the field? The red cards in FRC follow the general pattern of being safety related (don't let your robot wield totes in an aggressive manner towards refs), GP related (be civil) or just actions that would break the game (don't throw auto totes that you took off the field into the auto zone during auto)
Tethering doesn't fall into any of those categories at least not that I know of.

Here you go


This note is from Frank Merrick, Director of FRC

Hi Teams. In this update, you will see we’ve added a blue box to G14 to explain what we mean by ‘tethering’. I’ll tell you how this came about. Someone asked a question (Q216)
about using an external control box to drive a motor after a match. It wasn’t stated in the question, but we’re assuming the intent was to reset a mechanism and possibly get the
robot into Transport Configuration. This approach raised safety concerns for us. At the end of a match, teams and volunteers are rushing around trying to clear the field and get
it set up for the next match. They may not necessarily be paying attention to robot mechanisms activating near them. If we allowed custom control boxes, without a number of
additional rules that would add significant complexity, teams could be creating controls that slam motors on at full speed. They could potentially lose control of the situation, in
a crowded, busy environment. Broadening the traditional FRC definition of ‘tethering’ seemed the best way for us to solve this issue. It’s true that teams can still, for example,
leave hex shafts on mechanisms accessible to be mechanically driven externally, using hand tools or battery operated drills, so mechanisms could still be activated on the field.
However, using hand tools or battery operated drills to drive mechanisms struck us as more controllable situations. Most battery operated drills are variable speed, and – unless
locked on – if a team member’s finger slips or the tool is dropped, the mechanism in many cases would stop moving. We’re trying to balance the need to make sure teams can
do what they need to do to play the game with helping to ensure everyone stays safe.

[IronicDeadBird]

Here you go


That was a fast response...
Can you get me a box of thin mints? The cookie dealer I know is out.
Either way an observation I failed to have until now is just how bad fallen stacks are. I didn't bother pitching the idea of a tote flipper because of the limited amount of them on the field, and its biggest use would be when a stack fell over. The totes as resources are interesting because when right you get points, but when things go wrong and they fall over you have the potential to lose using them all together.
That is something very hard to do in physical sports or activities without adding levels of complexity. The GDC did a great job of making the field another player in this game. I normally felt like the fields in past games punished teams who didn't invest heavily into drive bases this was a nice change from that.
Although I still do not like straight mecanum...

[PVCpirate]

I didn't say I hated the game I said it's hard, perhaps impossible, for teams who don't have excellent engineering and manufacturing (and programming) skills to be able to build a high scoring robot.


I'm sorry, when has this ever not been true? In 2013, could a team without excellent engineering, manufacturing and programming skills have built a robot with a 7 disk auto and a 30 point climb? Could a team without those skills have had a 3 ball auto for Aerial Assist? High scoring robots are built by teams that excel in all of these areas, regardless of the game.

[AllenGregoryIV]

The red cards make some sense during a normal match and while attempting to get into transport configuration. Franks explanation is reasonable. During a field timeout, it will only delay matches for teams to have to recharge pneumatics off the field, when it could easily be done on the field as it has been done in every year I can remember.

Another rule that will be changed at most off-seasons if not sooner by FIRST, I'm sure.

In general I don't understand why the FRC rule book needs to be so strict. Everyone is out here to play, have fun, and yes to win. The VEX rule book gives the head referee a lot of room to give teams warning before and after they commit offenses before drastic action is taken. Why isn't this the same in FRC. When it comes down to it, warning a team and explaining the rules is just the civil thing to do. Rule enforcement should change through the event and year, everyone is learning in early weeks, why not be kind and cut teams some slack. Later in the event, if you have warned them and they are still not following then there should be repercussion for their actions. First strike rules seem far to harsh for an organization that prides it self on being gracious. We talk about cooperation and wanting to compete against teams when they are at their best. I don't know any competitive team that goes into an event wanting to win by having another robot tipped over or not working, let alone red carded for minor non-match actions. This is one of the reason I have never been an FRC referee.

[EricH]

I know that at Inland Empire, we were calling fouls during practice matches. And if we called a foul at that time, we generally went over to the team and said "hey, we called a foul on you, here's what it is". By quals, most teams had figured out what sort of actions would cause a foul/card. (Though one of the first fouls called in quals was a yellow card--that was also the last team to touch their controls during auto!)

[Doug Frisk]

I'm sorry, when has this ever not been true? In 2013, could a team without excellent engineering, manufacturing and programming skills have built a robot with a 7 disk auto and a 30 point climb? Could a team without those skills have had a 3 ball auto for Aerial Assist? High scoring robots are built by teams that excel in all of these areas, regardless of the game.

But, a marginal team with a kit-bot could manage to do autonomous mobility and a 10 point climb. This year, a basic kit-bot can be part of a robot set, but only if the other two members of the alliance don't blow it off as unneeded points.

Beyond that, if they try to push single totes onto the scoring platform, they're likely to get yelled at by their partners for "cluttering" the field and getting in the way. There's certainly a place for a less advanced team with a good driver to pick up litter, but that would require engineering and manufacturing an effective noodle grabber which would mean that they aren't a less advanced team.

Last year, it was about all 3 robots on an alliance working together, this year leaving the third alliance robot off the field in eliminations has been an effective strategy.

[Jared Russell]

Things I learned from webcasts:

1) This year there are more HD webcasts and fewer "potato" quality webcasts than in years past. That is a good thing. In particular, the Michigan, PNW, and Dallas webcasts were phenomenal. Although I don't know why Dallas had to disable embed, meaning you can't watch alongside other events on The Blue Alliance.

2) I found the black-on-white numbering scheme to be very difficult to read from afar, particularly when numbers can be mounted at any height. Some teams had them low, some high, some on large panels, others taped onto superstructure. The high numbers were the worst to read, because of all the visual clutter in the background at that height. And black on white does not pop whatsoever against the gray aluminum structure that 80% of FRC teams use. I guess this is one downside of extremely liberal robot rules...with bumpers, you always know where you need to look. #bringbackthespinnylight

3) The litter mechanic is my least favorite part of this game, and maybe my least favorite FRC game mechanic ever. Human players have long been a part of FRC, and I have no problem letting them directly contribute to the score. But the noodles become land mines for both alliances, blocking access to totes and recycling cans, invalidating swaths of the scoring ramp, and getting lodged in drive trains. There is nothing inspiring in watching an effective robot get a "noodle flat tire" or be unable to load because of a piece of litter (and it is basically impossible to design a robot that is totally impervious). I also find it simultaneously depressing and ironic that "throwing your trash into your neighbor's lawn" is in many ways just as effective or more effective than recycling :) It's certainly easier...

4) This game did not pass the "wife" test (my litmus test for the crowd-pleasing-ness of a game is to show it to my wife). The scoring was easy for her to understand, but she did not find it interesting to watch in the least. (As background she really liked 2006, 2011, 2012, 2013; tolerated 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2014; and despised 2009).

5) I do not know how the refs are supposed to judge the state of 3 robots, 3 yellow bins, and 3+ recycling cans simultaneously and instantly at the end of autonomous mode. There were times on the webcast where I swear I saw an auto stack in contact with a robot (the scorer or a partner) at the end of autonomous, but the points were awarded anyways.

6) One more thing about webcasts...many events cut from the field feed to the "Thank You Sponsors" roll the SECOND that the match ended, meaning that the viewer could only guess whether that last second cap was successful, or whether that precarious stack finally tumbled...

I saw quite a few penalties called when teams tried to do coopertition and accidentally knocked the yellow totes to the other side of the field while stacking them.

Imagine how great it would have been if the yellow totes were the only game object that a robot was allow to transfer to the other side of the field without penalty. Not only would this eliminate the (questionable) penalty for trying and failing to co-op, but it would have given rise to a new class of "tote catapult" robots during elims! Stacking high? Better be ready to protect them...

[EricH]

Not only would this eliminate the (questionable) penalty for trying and failing to co-op, but it would have given rise to a new class of "tote catapult" robots during elims! Stacking high? Better be ready to protect them...

Why? If a hit is scored by such a method, the points are guaranteed. OTOH, if that alliance gets crazy and knocks them over themselves, no points are awarded...

[Jared Russell]

Why? If a hit is scored by such a method, the points are guaranteed. OTOH, if that alliance gets crazy and knocks them over themselves, no points are awarded...

Yes, I was (jokingly) proposing that yellow tote wrecking balls would be allowed to descore.

[Koko Ed]

Yes, I was (jokingly) proposing that yellow tote wrecking balls would be allowed to descore.

IRI can dream.

[Jared Russell]

IRI can dream.

IRI should remove the noodles, replace them with one Aerial Assist ball per alliance that can be used for descoring, and let teams enter either their 2014 or 2015 robots as they see fit. That would make this game a lot more interesting to watch, and hey, it's recycling? ;)

[Gregor]

Yes, I was (jokingly) proposing that yellow tote wrecking balls would be allowed to descore.

That would give them some use to their otherwise useless role in teleop of elims...

[dodar]

IRI should remove the noodles, replace them with one Aerial Assist ball per alliance that can be used for descoring, and let teams enter either their 2014 or 2015 robots as they see fit. That would make this game a lot more interesting to watch, and hey, it's recycling?

They need to reverse the noodle policy. Now, its noodles till final 20; it should be, no noodles till final 20.

[Abrakadabra]

Things I learned from webcasts:

...

3) The litter mechanic is my least favorite part of this game, and maybe my least favorite FRC game mechanic ever. Human players have long been a part of FRC, and I have no problem letting them directly contribute to the score. But the noodles become land mines for both alliances, blocking access to totes and recycling cans, invalidating swaths of the scoring ramp, and getting lodged in drive trains. There is nothing inspiring in watching an effective robot get a "noodle flat tire" or be unable to load because of a piece of litter (and it is basically impossible to design a robot that is totally impervious). I also find it simultaneously depressing and ironic that "throwing your trash into your neighbor's lawn" is in many ways just as effective or more effective than recycling :) It's certainly easier...

...

Yes - my feelings exactly! In a game that is meant to showcase precise robot engineering and manipulation skills, the noodles just seem like a cheap distraction.

[PayneTrain]

They need to reverse the noodle policy. Now, its noodles till final 20; it should be, no noodles till final 20.

As much as I would love this, it makes the rarely used but still existing "processing litter" mechanic hard to execute. I'd prefer if they go ahead and "recycle" all of the noodles tomorrow morning, though.

With regards to the numbering on robots, I can't tell you how surprised I wasn't how the numbering turned out. Bonus points to robots at Palmetto with vertical and split numbering, as well as teams just throwing on the number plate they get in the pits and rolling out to the field with them (this actually happened).

With regards to the game being hard to understand, I really don't know how the GDC expected it to be easy to understand. I know hindsight is 20/20 but to improve the understandability of the game, I would have done this:

1) Get rid of Litter
2) Divide all remaining point values by 2 (not really necessary, but it helps later)
3) Instead of gratuitously stamping the FIRST logo on every game piece even though the banners, scoring overlay, and logos on the field walls apparently aren't enough, and replace every logo with the point value stamped on to the object. Every tote has a big white "1" printed on each side and each can has each FIRST logo replaced by a big white "x3" stamped around the cylinders.
3-a) Change auto point values so we don't see the most useless auto period since 2010. Tote set is worth 6, robot set is worth 4, and stack set is 12, but the containers are x3 to your auto score for both consistency but also to encourage better auto play.
4) Replace the gold totes on the field at the start of the match with gray totes, or a different color. Keep gold totes off the field. Allow the new totes in the staging zone to be scored on the bumps. Stamp the +1 on those
5) Replace the vision targets no one uses with the "grabsomefeet" co-op logo on the cans. On each side of the step have a display that shows the current point value of the co-op stack. In eliminations, have the display show the seeds playing in the matches.
6) Maybe have displays on top of each backstop showing how many points currently sit on each backstop.
7) (Totally optional and a little crazy) Somehow get the bumps to illuminate where a scored stack is placed

If I had no clue what this game was when I saw it, I would wonder why teams are throwing scoring objects to the other alliance, why teams are delivering yellow totes to a center object in qualification matches for a lot of points but don't ever touch them in eliminations (when points matter more, right!), why a stack of 6 totes tall is not worth any more than 6 totes laying alone on the bumps, and understand exactly how much cans help.

I'm pretty sure as much as 11 years ago FIRST had scoring object values printed on the objects (Frenzy, right?). This way I could look at the field and figure out exactly what was happening. You count "1, 1, 1, 1, x3... that's 12 points!" You see the co-op display and know how much that is worth.

Post-match overlay could be really good if some thought was put into it. One idea I have at 2:30 AM is this:

1) Take a screenshot of the field before the field gets the green lights.
2) Have the first overlay take up the lower third, like the small one we see in the playoffs, while you see the field screenshot.
3) After that screen, move to a screen that shows the final score of the match as well as a sample of the standings. Have 16 slots to show at once. You get the top 10 + the 6 robots in the last match on the screen showing their rank and change arrow, QA and change arrow, Co-Op score, and Next Match. The teams not in the match are not highlighted while the ones from the match are highlighted in their alliance colors. If one of the teams from the last match are in the top 10, you show the 11th place team, 2 means you show up to 12th, and so on.

One concerning thing I have gotten out of this game so far has nothing to do with FRC the program. FRC is a product. A game like this is hard to sell as a product to potential sponsors, volunteers, media partners, schools, etc.

[carpedav000]

IRI should remove the noodles, replace them with one Aerial Assist ball per alliance that can be used for descoring, and let teams enter either their 2014 or 2015 robots as they see fit. That would make this game a lot more interesting to watch, and hey, it's recycling? ;)

That would make this game much more exciting to watch. And why not, they already recycled part of arial assist (the podium turning into the noodle holder).

[Jared]

Autonomous mode was very important. Very few teams were able to score very many points in auto, so our 20 point auto gave us a huge advantage.

Grabbing containers from the step in auto is very important. Lots of capped short stacks are a great way to get points without the worry of super high stacks. It also lets you score many noodle points and makes it more difficult for the other alliance to deal with containers.

The field has some weird behavior with talking to the driver station. From time to time, some driver stations just don't connect to the FMS. Restarting the driver station and disabling/re enabling the network adapter fixed these problems.

It is extremely difficult to transport a 78" tall robot. You cannot tilt it, or you will violate the transport configuration. To fit through a doorway, you need a cart that almost drags on the ground, which won't go over bumps in the ground. You can't tilt the robot to get it through the doorway. Also, when carrying it, you must hold the robot upright.

Coopertition impacts the rankings quite a bit, but isn't always the best strategy. 40 points is a lot of points, but it's hard to be sure it'll work out. Consistency is really important, so a capped six stack for 36 points (or 42 with noodle) seems like a better option, and takes a similar amount of time.

Autonomous mode needs a five second delay to let the referees score things.
The referees have .2 seconds to judge 30+ things
Location of robot x6
Location of tote x6
Location of container x10
Contact between robot/tote x6
Stacked status of totes x2
and fouls for container grabbers.

[Oromus]

We noticed at the Georgia Southern Classic Regional that there were three common penalties:


Human players were often throwing litter after the 20 second mark.
Multiple people were often in human player area at the same time.
Teams were accidentally knocking yellow totes off the step and into the opposing alliance's side.

[Andrew Schreiber]

I'm sorry, when has this ever not been true? In 2013, could a team without excellent engineering, manufacturing and programming skills have built a robot with a 7 disk auto and a 30 point climb? Could a team without those skills have had a 3 ball auto for Aerial Assist? High scoring robots are built by teams that excel in all of these areas, regardless of the game.

Those are not core functionality to play the game competitively. Stacking reliably is. Case in point, in 2013 I won 2 regionals with a 10 point hang and no floor loader. A robot well within the capabilities of ANYONE with a hack saw and a power drill. In 2014 I won 3 districts with a robot without a 3 ball auto, slightly more complicated robot but with VP still within the range of abilities for dedicated students to build with basic resources, but what's worse, a team that was a decent intake (which anyone with a power drill and hack saw should have been able to build) would have been INCREDIBLY valuable. This year? Drastically harder to achieve basic game objectives. Let's break down what options a low resource team has that aren't stacks on stacks on stacks.

1. RC specialist - Great idea until you realize it's a 9lb object that you need to accurately move to 70"+ in the air while only having 6" of it to grip on to. Oh, and you risk knocking over a stack. Not really viable.

2. Litter specialist - Robots aren't allowed to throw litter so the best you can do is clear it, viable but not anywhere near a solid pick imho.

3. Coop Stacker - Ignoring that if you can do this you can stack bins of at least 4... it almost requires a floor loader (which is kinda hard) and is worthless in eliminations. Though could possibly seed high and pick a stacking team. Likely wouldn't win.

4. RC grabber - Ok, this one works. Sorta. At early events they might have a chance but they are completely reliant on being picked since they effectively can't score any points on their own. Plus by CMP (or DCMP) they will be effectively overshadowed by greater speed and precision of the top tier teams who realize it's too important a role to be left to unreliable partners.

So, I'm not seeing any viable options for lower resource teams to be competitive. I feel the MCC this year is a little sparse on the Minimum part.

[JesseK]

4) This game did not pass the "wife" test (my litmus test for the crowd-pleasing-ness of a game is to show it to my wife). The scoring was easy for her to understand, but she did not find it interesting to watch in the least. (As background she really liked 2006, 2011, 2012, 2013; tolerated 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2014; and despised 2009).

...

Not only would this eliminate the (questionable) penalty for trying and failing to co-op, but it would have given rise to a new class of "tote catapult" robots during elims! Stacking high? Better be ready to protect them...

I got my wife to pause House of Cards on Saturday night to watch Dallas F2. She felt the same way. The challenge is definitely one of the better ones to design for - but entertaining to watch, it is not. She puts it above 2010 though.

If only there were a legal way to knock over an opponent's stack...

[Breadbocks]

Just my 2 cents after participating in Georgia Southern Classic regional.

1. Noodles are god. One team carried themselves to second seed purely off the back of one really, really, really good noodle thrower. In one of the elims he went 10 for 10. Their robot wasn't on the level it should've been to succeed that much but because noodle scoring is so ridiculous they got very, very far.

2. Coopertition is necessary if you want a prayer at getting high seeding, you need to get the coopertition stacks. They inflate your average an absurd amount. Early on, my team didn't get it and it murdered our average. We had a game near the start where we got the coopertition stack and a couple totes in the center and that was it and that still bumped up our average a significant margin.

3. Containers fall, everyone dies. Nuff said.

4. Autonomous is critical. Bare minimum, you absolutely need to move to the auton zone. Because of one match in elims where an alliance member missed the auton zone by 3 inches, which meant we had slightly lower auton points than the opposing alliance, we lost the tie breaker that would've put us up to 4th place and let us move on to semis.

[who716]

I'm sure some team are aware of this but Ik others are not yellow totes do not count for anything outside of auto in the eliminations don't stzck them on coop don't stack them on platform they do not count,......... But by but but you CAN USE THEM IN AUTO a team came to me and asked why they were using the yellow totes in elimnations as they though they were completely useless

[Daniel_LaFleur]

I'm sure some team are aware of this but Ik others are not yellow totes do not count for anything outside of auto in the eliminations don't stzck them on coop don't stack them on platform they do not count,......... But by but but you CAN USE THEM IN AUTO a team came to me and asked why they were using the yellow totes in elimnations as they though they were completely useless
For the elims:

If your auto programs allow to get all 3 into the auto zone (or stacked in the auto zone) then they are extremely useful. If your auto cannot do these, then remove them from the field.

Simple enough.

[Anupam Goli]

Scouting and forming alliances in this game takes a lot of thought. You have to figure out who is good at what role for your alliance. Also, scouting wins regionals, as usual.

In the playoffs, it isn't about one single robot's versatility or capability (well, most of the time). It's about how well your alliance can work with each other. Our alliance won our regional because each robot had its own role and specialized in one part of the field and game. We combined those abilities, and no other alliance at the event could come close to our scores. Our lowest score as an alliance was higher than the highest score any alliance put up in the playoffs.

[rich2202]

During a field timeout, it will only delay matches for teams to have to recharge pneumatics off the field, when it could easily be done on the field as it has been done in every year I can remember.

I don't think G14 is being applied to Field Time Outs. The Refs realize it just delays things. That said, if a robot moves something in a potentially dangerous way, without people being warned, that would be a problem.

There was a situation in the Eliminations where one alliance had to switch sides of the field. The robots had to be put into transport configuration to switch sides.

In general I don't understand why the FRC rule book needs to be so strict. Everyone is out here to play, have fun, and yes to win. The VEX rule book gives the head referee a lot of room to give teams warning before and after they commit offenses before drastic action is taken. Why isn't this the same in FRC.

You forget the discretion element. In general, Head Refs are very reluctant to give Red Cards (Regular Refs tell the Head Ref, but the call is up to the Head Ref). Writing a strict rule gives Head Refs a lot of cover when they actually have to use the rule. By then, either it is an egregious rule violation, or the team has been warned.

[Joe Ross]

1. Check the seating depth of your PDP fuses, I cannot stress this enough. A good rule of thumb for this; If you can remove the fuse by hand, without the use of pliers, then it is NOT properly seated.

We also saw this at Inland Empire. After two robots died in the playoffs because of this, we checked every playoff team and found around 25% were loose.

[MechEng83]

I don't think G14 is being applied to Field Time Outs.

It was at ININD.

The larger problem I see is that a red card is *almost* an automatic elim DQ, rather than just a match DQ like previous years because of the average match score advancement criteria.

[angelah]

Yes - my feelings exactly! In a game that is meant to showcase precise robot engineering and manipulation skills, the noodles just seem like a cheap distraction.

This. :(

FIRST is an alternative to sports in my mind, a way for students who are interested in science, math, and engineering to have their own "place." They spent six weeks building robots, and then (at least at our event) all the fan's and media's attention went to a tall athletic guy who could throw things well. That's pretty much just any other high school activity now. (And 4/13 students on my team are athletes, so I'm not anti-sports in general.)

Sure, I suppose it is a realistic picture of the world the students will enter, but I thought FIRST was about changing the culture.

[IronicDeadBird]

The noodles were game pieces from the start I don't see why people didn't design around moving litter from day 1.

[PayneTrain]

The noodles were game pieces from the start I don't see why people didn't design around moving litter from day 1.

You can design around the Human Player station vs robot start arrangement in Lunacy, but that doesn't make it an awful game mechanic.

You can recognize the existence of the dogma in 2010 and train your human players to be acutely aware of it, but that doesn't make it a bad game mechanic.

You can strategize around the 10 protected areas of the field in Logomotion, but that doesn't make it a bad game mechanic.

You can recognize how the scoring weights in 2013 strongly favored throwing discs over Level 3 climbing in 95/100 cases, but you can still wish FIRST would have weighted the scores differently.

You can play a slower but less ambiguous assist cycle in Aerial Assist so referees accurately count your assists, but that doesn't make the scoring method of assists by the referees a bad idea.

Litter was seen as an issue robots would run into since Kickoff. Without looking at it, I think Karthik had mobility around litter as one of the top 4 requirements for playing the game. Litter was expected to be a total pain to work with.

Game design has to serve many masters, and this makes game design difficult. Is it a game teams enjoy designing for? Is it a game teams enjoy playing? Is it a game that spectators enjoy watching? Is it a game that "serves itself" well (not allowing for rulings resulting from a wide gap of interpretations, having an intelligent seeding system, having a safe and expedient field cycle time)? Is it a game that fulfills the mission of FIRST and FRC? While the game design committee may have different priorities (serving one master before the others) this is the order of importance I perceive as a former student and coach in the organization.

These are all of the masters an FRC game has to serve in order to be considered a success. One of the reasons Aim High and Ultimate Ascent make the top of the lists for game quality is because it manages to serve all of the masters with varying levels. The reason Lunacy scores so low? It was not fun to design for or play and wasn't easy to watch. Aerial Assist was fun to play and watch, but designing for it was pretty boring and the game did not serve itself very well. Recycle Rush may have been a fun game to design for and serves itself pretty well, but it sucks to play and watch.

[frasnow]

My life got too busy to continue mentoring, so I've been relegated to the position of robotics fan. The past few years I've really enjoyed cheering on my favorite teams via the webcasts. Based on week 1, I don't think I'll watch much this year. It's not an exciting game.

Every team's playoff strategy: Score the most points in the manner we can, and don't mess up. Maybe try to get the recycling containers in the middle if necessary.

If all the robots are functioning well, as everyone desires in a robotics competition, most of the playoff matches are a forgone conclusion. If it wasn't for mistakes (and robots getting disabled), the top alliance (seeding format pushes the best to the top) should win the majority of regionals and districts. Who wants to cheer for teams to make mistakes or breakdown? Defending against an opponent's strategy should be an important part of every FIRST competition.

Though, I must say I enjoy watching gymnastics and golf, which don't have defense, but usually have very close matches. Perhaps I'll like this game on Einstein.

https://gatsiesheikar.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/yawn2.jpg

[IronicDeadBird]

You can design around the Human Player station vs robot start arrangement in Lunacy, but that doesn't make it an awful game mechanic.

You can recognize the existence of the dogma in 2010 and train your human players to be acutely aware of it, but that doesn't make it a bad game mechanic.

You can strategize around the 10 protected areas of the field in Logomotion, but that doesn't make it a bad game mechanic.

You can recognize how the scoring weights in 2013 strongly favored throwing discs over Level 3 climbing in 95/100 cases, but you can still wish FIRST would have weighted the scores differently.

You can play a slower but less ambiguous assist cycle in Aerial Assist so referees accurately count your assists, but that doesn't make the scoring method of assists by the referees a bad idea.

Litter was seen as an issue robots would run into since Kickoff. Without looking at it, I think Karthik had mobility around litter as one of the top 4 requirements for playing the game. Litter was expected to be a total pain to work with.

Game design has to serve many masters, and this makes game design difficult. Is it a game teams enjoy designing for? Is it a game teams enjoy playing? Is it a game that spectators enjoy watching? Is it a game that "serves itself" well (not allowing for rulings resulting from a wide gap of interpretations, having an intelligent seeding system, having a safe and expedient field cycle time)? Is it a game that fulfills the mission of FIRST and FRC? While the game design committee may have different priorities (serving one master before the others) this is the order of importance I perceive as a former student and coach in the organization.

These are all of the masters an FRC game has to serve in order to be considered a success. One of the reasons Aim High and Ultimate Ascent make the top of the lists for game quality is because it manages to serve all of the masters with varying levels. The reason Lunacy scores so low? It was not fun to design for or play and wasn't easy to watch. Aerial Assist was fun to play and watch, but designing for it was pretty boring and the game did not serve itself very well. Recycle Rush may have been a fun game to design for and serves itself pretty well, but it sucks to play and watch.

Enjoy is subjective to the person in question. Some people enjoy candy crush, a bright vibrant game full of making things match. What happens when those things match? You are rewarded with fun animations and exciting sounds.
Other people enjoy Chess, a quiet game where focus and strategy is important, and aside from the act of reaching over and taking a piece off the board that belongs to your opponent there isn't much in the way of rewarding the player for doing well.
Recycle Rush would have been a great game to watch except unfortunately the kids who decided to play it are smart...
You could equate this game to watching someone swing at a pinata with a blindfold. Except higher level teams have transparent blind folds so they can see what they are doing. The rewarding aspect of this game was when you created a 6 stack that feelings of accomplishment. The fun was supposed to come from the suspense and tension in creating stacks. The issue is that teams just did it too well. 148 has an amazing robot but seeing robin in action didn't exactly have me holding my breath. I honestly wouldn't say this game is bad, at all. I would just say it isn't the right kind of game considering the audience.

Translating whats being said into shorter phrases.
Jenga sucks to watch and play when you are playing with people who are perfect at it because the fun comes from the falling Jenga stacks
Recycle rush sucks to watch and play when you are playing with higher level teams because the fun comes from falling tote stacks.

[rich2202]

It was at ININD.

At future regionals, bring along a printed copy of Q337

Q. The response to Q214/Q69 says only G9 items may be used on the field to configure the robot. No tethering is allowed. Is there an exception for 5.5.5 Match Replays (restarts)? If not, will teams be allowed time to take their robot back to the pit to put the robot back into starting configuration?
2015-02-09 by FRC2202

A. Yes, exceptional circumstances, e.g. MATCH Replays or Back-to-back Playoff MATCHES, will result in special accommodations for minor ROBOT maintenance like resetting a ROBOT'S configuration, minor repairs, trading out a battery, etc.

https://frc-qa.usfirst.org/Question/337/the-response-to-q214-q69-says-only-g9-items-may-be-used-on-the-field-to-configure-the-robot-no-tethering-is-allowed-is-there-an-exception-for-5-5-5-match-replays-restarts-if-not-will-teams-be-al

[MechEng83]

At future regionals, bring along a printed copy of Q337

Wow. I wish we had known that. Seems like a very non-obvious place to clarify something which potentially results in a red card.

[excel2474]

That red card in Indy didn't exactly put the "grace" in gracious professionalism.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Translating whats being said into shorter phrases.
Jenga sucks to watch and play when you are playing with people who are perfect at it because the fun comes from the falling Jenga stacks
Recycle rush sucks to watch and play when you are playing with higher level teams because the fun comes from falling tote stacks.

I don't know about anyone else but falling stacks weren't fun to watch this weekend they were painful. I know all the work that these teams put into getting their robots to work, when 118's stack fell in the playoffs at Dallas it wasn't enjoyable for me, it hurt. I am not really looking forward to a season of feeling bad when things go wrong. I love defense and I like cheering for the underdogs, however I'm not cheering for gravity and momentum this year.

[Boltman]

I don't know about anyone else but falling stacks weren't fun to watch this weekend they were painful. I know all the work that these teams put into getting their robots to work, when 118's stack fell in the playoffs at Dallas it wasn't enjoyable for me, it hurt. I am not really looking forward to a season of feeling bad when things go wrong. I love defense and I like cheering for the underdogs, however I'm not cheering for gravity and momentum this year.

Make a better stack. Not a gravity issue, a better stack issue or better driving issue.

[IronicDeadBird]

I don't know about anyone else but falling stacks weren't fun to watch this weekend they were painful. I know all the work that these teams put into getting their robots to work, when 118's stack fell in the playoffs at Dallas it wasn't enjoyable for me, it hurt. I am not really looking forward to a season of feeling bad when things go wrong. I love defense and I like cheering for the underdogs, however I'm not cheering for gravity and momentum this year.

Enjoyment is once again subject to the person. I shouldn't say falling stacks are what cause fun its when stacks are teetering precariously or they look like they are going to fall over. The suspense that comes from seeing something like a stack about to fall is fun, having it actually fall of course its not fun.
I personally don't really enjoy things going to plan as much as I enjoy being able to recover after a failure and perform well. Comebacks are fun to watch for me.

[mwmac]

Recommended name change: Schadenfreude Rush!

[Amanda Morrison]

Recycle rush sucks to watch and play when you are playing with higher level teams because the fun comes from falling tote stacks.

Enjoyment is indeed subjective, yet I personally disagree with your reasoning.

The FRC community is not used to seeing task-based games without active defense, or any other kind of incredibly significant defensive challenges against our alliances while accomplishing these tasks. (Noodles being thrown are not nearly as significant as, say, a team blocking your shots or pulling a goal away from you.) In the past we've had difficult game pieces, but had rules against de-scoring or had safety zones designed to assist offensive gameplay. The combination of repetitive tasks, without direct competition, match after match... you're only working to beat your best time. Yes, the tasks themselves are not easy. Yet each year we're given difficult tasks alongside the pressure of active defense, and with that precedent I believe this year many of us feel that something is lacking. In your example you list both chess and Jenga as examples, yet I feel a better example is the game Perfection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfection_%28board_game%29).

So for many in our community, racing against a clock is less thrilling than directly racing against, say, HOT Team 67. Why? Because one is absolutely terrifying to play against year after year and one is - well, a clock.

"Skills challenge" games are not new to FIRST, although it's been about 14 years since it was last tried. 2001 featured a similar game style with a race against the clock. Reviews from participants will vary, with some considering it one of the very best games and some, among the worst. If you have not watched that game, check out this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vsp2LjfJHsA) for what is considered one of the most exciting matches that year. Maybe it gets your heart pounding - maybe it doesn't.

So my TL;DR is: High achievement of teams on the field is not what makes it less "fun" to watch for many people, IMO - it is the lack of direct competition for this achievement (to which we've become accustomed in past FRC games).

Additionally, as a spectator I did not enjoy the simultaneous field action. I found it difficult to watch both sides of the field and truly keep track of what was happening unless I was watching the zones closest to the landfill. This type of game may be exciting for FLL, but for me it doesn't seem to scale well for our larger robots.

[IronicDeadBird]

Enjoyment is indeed subjective, yet I personally disagree with your reasoning.

The FRC community is not used to seeing task-based games without active defense, or any other kind of incredibly significant defensive challenges against our alliances while accomplishing these tasks. (Noodles being thrown are not nearly as significant as, say, a team blocking your shots or pulling a goal away from you.) In the past we've had difficult game pieces, but had rules against de-scoring or had safety zones designed to assist offensive gameplay. The combination of repetitive tasks, without direct competition, match after match... you're only working to beat your best time. Yes, the tasks themselves are not easy. Yet each year we're given difficult tasks alongside the pressure of active defense, and with that precedent I believe this year many of us feel that something is lacking. In your example you list both chess and Jenga as examples, yet I feel a better example is the game Perfection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfection_%28board_game%29).

So for many in our community, racing against a clock is less thrilling than directly racing against, say, HOT Team 67. Why? Because one is absolutely terrifying to play against year after year and one is - well, a clock.

"Skills challenge" games are not new to FIRST, although it's been about 14 years since it was last tried. 2001 featured a similar game style with a race against the clock. Reviews from participants will vary, with some considering it one of the very best games and some, among the worst. If you have not watched that game, check out this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vsp2LjfJHsA) for what is considered one of the most exciting matches that year. Maybe it gets your heart pounding - maybe it doesn't.

So my TL;DR is: High achievement of teams on the field is not what makes it less "fun" to watch for many people, IMO - it is the lack of direct competition for this achievement (to which we've become accustomed in past FRC games).

Additionally, as a spectator I did not enjoy the simultaneous field action. I found it difficult to watch both sides of the field and truly keep track of what was happening unless I was watching the zones closest to the landfill. This type of game may be exciting for FLL, but for me it doesn't seem to scale well for our larger robots.

Full disclosure that perfection reference got me right in the nostalgia gland. While I did list chess and Jenga as games I meant to use them to portray examples of games where the "fun" comes from very different means. Neither are very good comparisons to this years game at all. Man I got to go see if I still have perfection laying around somewhere...
Anyway
I did say that this game was good (in the sense of its level of design is very good its a smart game) it is just that it is the wrong audience. This kind of PvE game when you are racing the clock is best experienced when it is one person against a clock not 6 people against a clock. When you play perfection you are the one in the tense position, if you watch someone play perfection its less tense because you don't actually have to do anything.
I phrased it poorly, high level teams don't make this boring. The difficulty of the game doesn't scale up to the level of high level teams and provide them with the challenge that excites the viewer or team. Also that is only one of the reasons why this isn't exactly the most spectator friendly game. Field clutter, estimates on live score, no real focus.
Once again though there is still a lot from this game I would like to see the GDC keep in mind or re use for future games.

Also let me make it extremely clear that I mean no disrespect to any high level team

[Mastonevich]

I would like to think that the seeding will be (more) accurate this year because of the "time trial" style of competition. That is a nice side effect.

I did find myself not as engaged.

[notmattlythgoe]

I would like to think that the seeding will be (more) accurate this year because of the "time trial" style of competition. That is a nice side effect.

I did find myself not as engaged.

Another thing that will be nice is that the rankings should settle down more and more as the competition goes on. Meaning the top 8 teams should be pretty set towards the last round or 2 of matches.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Another thing that will be nice is that the rankings should settle down more and more as the competition goes on. Meaning the top 8 teams should be pretty set towards the last round or 2 of matches.

That's what my simulations of it have shown me. Obviously it depends on how many matches teams have and how many teams. But for districts it's accurate for most teams. There's still a bit of schedule element to it but it's nowhere near as bad as the WLT system where a rough schedule could destroy your chances of seeding high.

[notmattlythgoe]

That's what my simulations of it have shown me. Obviously it depends on how many matches teams have and how many teams. But for districts it's accurate for most teams. There's still a bit of schedule element to it but it's nowhere near as bad as the WLT system where a rough schedule could destroy your chances of seeding high.

That and the top 8 could change quite a bit in the last 2 rounds in the WLT system. Making knowing who is picking and when pretty difficult to determine. This should make it easier to determine where you are picking relatively easy with a couple of matches still left to play. Meaning more time to discuss picks.

[MrJohnston]

I have to admit that, at first, I was not thrilled with the game, but I gave it a chance....

* I still think that it is weak as a spectators' game. I've watched enough video of various regional and district events that I can honestly say it's kind of dull to watch. Now, having spent the last couple of months dealing with the challenges of my team's robot, I have to say I had an appreciation for some of the strongest robots around the nation and a lot of sympathy for teams that are still working to overcome the challenges we've been working through. I did find myself enjoying watching the matches - but only because I had been involved in the process. Had I come in knowing nothing, I would not have stuck around long. This is different from the direct competition "sports" we've had for several years.

* I think FIRST nailed this competition in terms of an engineering challenge. The level of thinking, problem-solving and work that we have had to put forth to meet the strategic demands of the game. This task, overall, has been **hard.** My team has been challenged and engaged the entire season and is excited to compete in week 2...

[Qbot2640]

I would like to think that the seeding will be (more) accurate this year because of the "time trial" style of competition. That is a nice side effect.

Another thing that will be nice is that the rankings should settle down more and more as the competition goes on. Meaning the top 8 teams should be pretty set towards the last round or 2 of matches.

I saw lots of exceptions to this at Palmetto....most notably team 2059 with an incredible robot and awesome team seeded 62 at the end of Qualification...really showed their stuff devouring the landfill and churning out 3-stack after 3-stack in Eliminations along with 1533 (also great bot - seeded 17th) and 1261. Very close to pulling off the upset win.

[notmattlythgoe]

I saw lots of exceptions to this at Palmetto....most notably team 2059 with an incredible robot and awesome team seeded 62 at the end of Qualification...really showed their stuff devouring the landfill and churning out 3-stack after 3-stack in Eliminations along with 1533 (also great bot - seeded 17th) and 1261. Very close to pulling off the upset win.

Agreed, starting slow or having a few bad rounds can really hurt you this year. It's pretty much impossible to recover from.

[Caleb Sykes]

Agreed, starting slow or having a few bad rounds can really hurt you this year. It's pretty much impossible to recover from.

How is that different from any other year? Having 3+ losses in previous years generally destroyed any chance of seeding in the top 8. This year, it is always at least possible to get up in the top 8 after poor matches.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

There are very few things for the 3rd alliance member to do in playoffs. I suggest all teams trying to make playoffs in the 2nd round add noodle and RC plowing devices. Moving the noodles away from the scoring/landfill zones and moving the RCs back towards the drivers' station will be very beneficial.

[notmattlythgoe]

How is that different from any other year? Having 3+ losses in previous years generally destroyed any chance of seeding in the top 8. This year, it is always at least possible to get up in the top 8 after poor matches.

Previously you could start slow, and as long as your opponent had a bad match it didn't hurt. You don't get that benefit this year.

[Pretzel]

As someone who hasn't yet physically been to a competition yet, take what I say with a grain of salt:

"Cons"
- I think this year's game is not as fun, simply because it's very repetitive. Nearly all the teams do the same thing in every match because they've determined the optimal strategy for their robot, so they stick to it. There's no real individuality between matches it seems besides how many pool noodles the human player is able to score.

- Because of the fact that teams are doing the same thing each time, pre-match strategy will become a bit less important than previous years. You only need to discuss what each person will do and where they will do it. You don't have the opportunity to discuss how to counter the opposing team's likely strategies.

- This feels to me like a game that was decided in the first weeks of the build season. There isn't a large opportunity for good strategy to overcome superior robot construction, just because this year is more of an engineering challenge than anything else. Elimination matches will be decided more by the physical limitations of each robot than the skill of their drivers in each particular match.

- Nearly contradictory to that last point, drivers practice will be vital this year more than most. This year's game has a high "skill floor", so to speak, in that you need to be able to efficiently complete all the actions your robot was designed to do without tipping over stacks or the robot along the way. Precise, smooth motions will be key. However the "skill ceiling" this year is relatively close to the floor compared to previous years. Once a drive team can efficiently create stacks and place them without tipping them over or experiencing unneeded delays, there's not a lot they can do to set them apart. This is a near-opposite of how it was last year, where nearly any robot could at least possess a ball for assists but the driver skill really set the great inbounding robots apart from the so-so or poor ones.

- If I didn't believe that the GDC already has next year's game prepared and in testing (and subsequently had this game in testing before the competitions last year), I would think that this game was a knee-jerk reaction to last year's complaints. Last year's game appears to have been one of the most violent in FRC history, being dubbed "Aerial Assault" by some, with no safezones and up to two robots free at any time (only one gamepiece) to play defense. This year even the act of knocking a gamepiece into the opposing alliance's side of the field is a foul, and direct interaction is limited to the scuffles that will likely occur at higher levels over the recycling cans on the step.

"Pros"
- One thing this game did very well was it encouraged strategic design choices. Teams had to consider multiple strategies for the collection and stacking of both totes and containers. Some teams created individual solution for each operation (including mine), while others integrated them into one system. Totes can come from the step, the landfill, and the chute door (yes, chute door). Containers come primarily from the step, and this is where I love seeing the diversity of designs. 3310 advertises their can grabber as taking 2 in the first quarter second of autonomous and other teams are grabbing all four bins simultaneously from the step.

- Teams are encouraged to play more efficiently and think about what their actions will do to the field. Robots that collect totes from the landfill need to be careful not to block their view of it with their own stacks, or otherwise install a vision solution. Robots that collect from the chute door need to make sure that they can ensure the totes land in the same orientation every time, as well as carefully train human players to avoid the numerous penalties that can be committed rather easily. The biggest part of all of this is litter and coopertition. By throwing pool noodles early you guarantee you will have time to throw them all without rushing, but you also start to make it more difficult for other teams to reach the step and place their yellow totes for the important coopertition points.

- As boring as the game may seem to some, it is one that is more applicable in industry (especially now) than any other. With the booming success of Amazon, eBay, and other online retailers the need for labor in the shipping industry is growing. Many companies use similar totes to pack their products before shipping, and this is a first step towards students entering the industry and designing robots that can autonomously stack and transport these totes through warehouses. Designs that work for the totes, especially of the forklift variety, could also be easily modified to carry pallets that are commonly used in the shipping industries if the need for automation becomes greater.

"Verdict"
This game is just different from the rest that we have seen recently. It's been likened to FLL with it's "message" about recycling, and it's a game that could be played completely autonomously if a team's programmers were ambitious enough. I don't think it's really fair to compare this game to Aerial Assist, Ultimate Ascent, or the like because it's not really even the same type of game. I look forward to competing as always, but this year appeared to be much more focused on the design component than the competition element.

[BBray_T1296]

There are very few things for the 3rd alliance member to do in playoffs. I suggest all teams trying to make playoffs in the 2nd round add noodle and RC plowing devices. Moving the noodles away from the scoring/landfill zones and moving the RCs back towards the drivers' station will be very beneficial.

Only so long as they can stay away from the robots putting up the big stacks. It was not unheard of that a robot was severely hindered by another robot simply being in proximity. Noodle plowers need to be effective, quick, and VERY controllable

[Kevin Leonard]

There are very few things for the 3rd alliance member to do in playoffs. I suggest all teams trying to make playoffs in the 2nd round add noodle and RC plowing devices. Moving the noodles away from the scoring/landfill zones and moving the RCs back towards the drivers' station will be very beneficial.

A third robot can make small tote stacks wherever isn't being used by the first two.
I think the easiest thing for third robots to do is get the RCs noodled.
I personally think 3rd robots built for litter plowing are going to get more in the way than anything else.

[SteveGPage]

I will echo what has been said previously, boring to watch (Friends watching the video feed told me that watching paint dry or grass grow is much more exciting!) - challenging to build and play. We thought we had nailed this - great analysis of the game, how to play, things we needed to do ... build an absolutely beautiful robot ... that doesn't work at all. Week 1 showed that we completely missed the mark in how to build for this year's game. We are fortunate that we have a shot at redemption - 4 weeks until the Chesapeake Regional, and then 2 more weeks until Championships. So 30 pounds of changes between now and Chesapeake, and 30 more for Champs. We have just entered our second build season! In this regard, I'm glad we did a Week 1 event, so we could see what we need to do for subsequent events.
I remember the days of being "One and done" and it would have been heart-breaking to think we ended the season on the disaster that was our Week 1 outing at Palmetto. This is much, much tougher to play than I thought.
Congratulations to the amazing teams we saw that nailed it and could perform at a high level this weekend!

A couple of side notes:
* Tossing Litter -- if you haven't started to have your human player practice, start immediately. It is a huge impact on the game.
* The field Geometry -- the space is much smaller that you think it is - Human Player Stations are practically on top of the Totes and RCs. Landfill is hard to drive around.
* Coop points are a must -- Just do that consistently, you'll score high
* Human Player -- Totes don't fall like you think they will. We built the practice field version, and the actual field one works completely different. Spend the time on the field during the practice matches dropping them out the chute door (yes, chute door).

Steve

[electroken]

There are very few things for the 3rd alliance member to do in playoffs.

I'm pretty sure that without our 3rd alliance partner (3464) and their 4 tote stacks, none of us (236, 230 and 3464) have our nice, new blue banners.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

I'm pretty sure that without our 3rd alliance partner (3464) and their 4 tote stacks, none of us (236, 230 and 3464) have our nice, new blue banners.

Something something averages versus outliers...

I don't doubt there will be awesome 2nd round picks that fall through for whatever reason. At the average event, the average alliance will probably have a 3rd robot which is less than capable of building 4 stacks.

Also, as the higher powered teams get better, your opponents will also get better which means the percent contribution of the third partner becomes smaller. At some point, an uncapped stack of 3/4 has a higher opportunity cost (less landfill totes/more entropy on field) than scored value.

[Caleb Sykes]

Previously you could start slow, and as long as your opponent had a bad match it didn't hurt. You don't get that benefit this year.

Last year, we didn't start slow at all. We played our first 2 matches very well. However, the match schedule put us up against two alliances who managed to do even better, which started us out with 2 losses. I don't see that as a benefit.

The only difference I see between this seeding system and previous ones is the variance relative to robot ability. This system is so much better at sorting robots, because one tipped over stack will only drop your team a few ranking spots at most, whereas in previous years, a similar event either would either have kept you in the same spot in the sort, or dropped you down ten, which just means more variance overall. Additionally, teams could legitimately blame the scheduler in previous years for their poor seed, but this year, most teams who do that are just looking for a scapegoat to take the blame for their own poor performance.

[excel2474]

Last year, we didn't start slow at all. We played our first 2 matches very well. However, the match schedule put us up against two alliances who managed to do even better, which started us out with 2 losses. I don't see that as a benefit.

The only difference I see between this seeding system and previous ones is the variance relative to robot ability. This system is so much better at sorting robots, because one tipped over stack will only drop your team a few ranking spots at most, whereas in previous years, a similar event either would either have kept you in the same spot in the sort, or dropped you down ten, which just means more variance overall. Additionally, teams could legitimately blame the scheduler in previous years for their poor seed, but this year, most teams who do that are just looking for a scapegoat to take the blame for their own poor performance.

Exactly. This year, teams control their own destiny. I guess some people don't like that.

[waialua359]

Agreed, starting slow or having a few bad rounds can really hurt you this year. It's pretty much impossible to recover from.
I disagree.
We were 30th after our 1st 3 matches and by the end of the day, ranked 3rd.
We held onto the #1 spot and lost it in the final match by 6 total points.

[excel2474]

I disagree.
We were 30th after our 1st 3 matches and by the end of the day, ranked 3rd.
We held onto the #1 spot and lost it in the final match by 6 total points.

Good example. That's probably because you weren't the only ones that had a couple bad rounds. It all works out.

[Breadbocks]

I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.

[Boltman]

I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.

And in Dallas ONE bot put up 95. So relying on Co-op is not a good strategy sure it helps and is arguably the easiest 40 points but it does rely on others and that is never a good thing , scouting could ferret out those that do typically and those that don't there is video on prior matches...if you were scouting.

You team "shafted itself" by not being prepared for unsuccessful co-op pts. Teams that scored higher may have had the same issues yet scored higher...why? You create your own points based on how well your alliance performs as a unit.


Take IE Regional (Listed by QA in Quals):

Now strictly Cooperation

80 <---------------#1 1572 Hammer Heads (2 matches with co-op)
120
200
80 <--------------- #4 973 Greybots (2 matches with co-op)
160
200

....

240 <-------------------------#13 Golden Gears (6 matches with co-op....Best Co-Op% and 17th pick in draft)

So Co-op #'s are not indicative of Finals placement.


Hammer Heads NEVER did one single co-op attempt nor did Grey Bots and both were in Playoffs and NOW Hammer Heads in World Championships as non co-op bot.

[PayneTrain]

I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.

1) Wait, you're telling me that you think each team should be averaging 80 on their QA in the coming weeks? Currently available data for mean QA for week 1 didn't even break HALF of that. I would be shocked if mean QA ever hit 80 before CMP.

2) While this is a true thing that does suck, 148, 3824, and other high ranking teams ranked high with <50% co-op stack conversion rate. I know our rank dropped precipitously because by the time we fixed our robot we hit a stretch of matches without co-op capability on the opposite side of the step. It's an issue we're looking to solve in two ways for our next event.

[AdamHeard]

Take IE Regional (Listed by QA in Quals):

Coopertition

80 <---------------#1 1572 Hammer Heads
120
200
80 <--------------- #4 973 Orange Crush
160
200


Not really a fan of our new name.

[Boltman]

Not really a fan of our new name.

Ha fixed

[AdamHeard]

Ha fixed

Ehhhhhhhhhhh. Try again.

Code Orange is 3476.

[Mark Sheridan]

80 <--------------- #4 973 Code Orange (2 matches with co-op)

When did we trade names with the greybots?

[Boltman]

Ehhhhhhhhhhh. Try again.

Code Orange is 3476.

Got it thx anyhow both still got far without needing co-op

[dave1027]

But, a marginal team with a kit-bot could manage to do autonomous mobility and a 10 point climb. This year, a basic kit-bot can be part of a robot set, but only if the other two members of the alliance don't blow it off as unneeded points.

Beyond that, if they try to push single totes onto the scoring platform, they're likely to get yelled at by their partners for "cluttering" the field and getting in the way. There's certainly a place for a less advanced team with a good driver to pick up litter, but that would require engineering and manufacturing an effective noodle grabber which would mean that they aren't a less advanced team.

Last year, it was about all 3 robots on an alliance working together, this year leaving the third alliance robot off the field in eliminations has been an effective strategy.

This year is a great year for teams with less engineering and manufacturing power. With a kit bit chassis, power drill, some basic hand tools, and a trip to home depot, a competative robot could be built capable of a four stack, plus topping with an RC. I know because this is what we did for a prototype. We took our prototype a few steps further, but we could have competed with the prototype. No special expertise required. I'm not saying that it would be a power house/rock star, but it would be competitive, it would have contributed.

[Nuttyman54]

When did we trade names with the greybots?

Why are these so-called "Greybots" orange? Some questions can never be answered...

[Breadbocks]

1) Wait, you're telling me that you think each team should be averaging 80 on their QA in the coming weeks? Currently available data for mean QA for week 1 didn't even break HALF of that. I would be shocked if mean QA ever hit 80 before CMP.

2) While this is a true thing that does suck, 148, 3824, and other high ranking teams ranked high with <50% co-op stack conversion rate. I know our rank dropped precipitously because by the time we fixed our robot we hit a stretch of matches without co-op capability on the opposite side of the step. It's an issue we're looking to solve in two ways for our next event.

1. I'm projecting that the average will be around 80, for good teams at least, in coming qualifiers, unless there's major changes to the way scoring works. Just how large the potential points from noodles are as well as coop didn't really seem to hit until a day or two in, but now that word's out teams will know to train throwing noodles and plan around them and coop.

2. Part of why I expect matchmaking to matter a lot more is because of 1. With coop becoming a thing everyone knows to do, or at least attempt, there's more pressure on everyone else to be able to do it as well. If everybody does coop, it doesn't matter. If nobody does coop, it doesn't matter. If everybody except a few teams do coop, it's brutal on the few teams because they can't and it impacts teams that get matched against them because then they get dragged down by a significant margin, unless in the time it takes your team to grab the yellows and dump them in the middle is equal to the time it takes you to get 40 points from stacks.

[notmattlythgoe]

I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.

I actually have the exact opposite opinion you do on matchmaking. Since the randomness of your opponents ability to stop you from scoring is taken out of the equation you are only worried about the randomness of your partners.

Previously you could get paired with 2 good robots and end up against an alliance of 3 great robots. That's a loss usually. This year if the opponent is great it doesn't matter, you can still put up the points and the fact that they did more doesn't effect you.

[EricH]

Why are these so-called "Greybots" orange? Some questions can never be answered...

I've never been able to figure that out, though they were wearing BLACK yesterday (I was looking for orange...).


For Tom B.: I think Glenn missed an opportunity to plug their third partner, who kept very busy running smaller stacks into position. VERY busy. One medium-tall stacker (359, #2 seed and #1 pick), one RC specialist that could handle short tote stacks (1572, #1 AC), and one short-stacker (Livewire--forget their number), one set of dominating matches.

[Sperkowsky]

As much as I would love this, it makes the rarely used but still existing "processing litter" mechanic hard to execute. I'd prefer if they go ahead and "recycle" all of the noodles tomorrow morning, though.

With regards to the numbering on robots, I can't tell you how surprised I wasn't how the numbering turned out. Bonus points to robots at Palmetto with vertical and split numbering, as well as teams just throwing on the number plate they get in the pits and rolling out to the field with them (this actually happened).

With regards to the game being hard to understand, I really don't know how the GDC expected it to be easy to understand. I know hindsight is 20/20 but to improve the understandability of the game, I would have done this:

1) Get rid of Litter
2) Divide all remaining point values by 2 (not really necessary, but it helps later)
3) Instead of gratuitously stamping the FIRST logo on every game piece even though the banners, scoring overlay, and logos on the field walls apparently aren't enough, and replace every logo with the point value stamped on to the object. Every tote has a big white "1" printed on each side and each can has each FIRST logo replaced by a big white "x3" stamped around the cylinders.
3-a) Change auto point values so we don't see the most useless auto period since 2010. Tote set is worth 6, robot set is worth 4, and stack set is 12, but the containers are x3 to your auto score for both consistency but also to encourage better auto play.
4) Replace the gold totes on the field at the start of the match with gray totes, or a different color. Keep gold totes off the field. Allow the new totes in the staging zone to be scored on the bumps. Stamp the +1 on those
5) Replace the vision targets no one uses with the "grabsomefeet" co-op logo on the cans. On each side of the step have a display that shows the current point value of the co-op stack. In eliminations, have the display show the seeds playing in the matches.
6) Maybe have displays on top of each backstop showing how many points currently sit on each backstop.
7) (Totally optional and a little crazy) Somehow get the bumps to illuminate where a scored stack is placed

If I had no clue what this game was when I saw it, I would wonder why teams are throwing scoring objects to the other alliance, why teams are delivering yellow totes to a center object in qualification matches for a lot of points but don't ever touch them in eliminations (when points matter more, right!), why a stack of 6 totes tall is not worth any more than 6 totes laying alone on the bumps, and understand exactly how much cans help.

I'm pretty sure as much as 11 years ago FIRST had scoring object values printed on the objects (Frenzy, right?). This way I could look at the field and figure out exactly what was happening. You count "1, 1, 1, 1, x3... that's 12 points!" You see the co-op display and know how much that is worth.

Post-match overlay could be really good if some thought was put into it. One idea I have at 2:30 AM is this:

1) Take a screenshot of the field before the field gets the green lights.
2) Have the first overlay take up the lower third, like the small one we see in the playoffs, while you see the field screenshot.
3) After that screen, move to a screen that shows the final score of the match as well as a sample of the standings. Have 16 slots to show at once. You get the top 10 + the 6 robots in the last match on the screen showing their rank and change arrow, QA and change arrow, Co-Op score, and Next Match. The teams not in the match are not highlighted while the ones from the match are highlighted in their alliance colors. If one of the teams from the last match are in the top 10, you show the 11th place team, 2 means you show up to 12th, and so on.

One concerning thing I have gotten out of this game so far has nothing to do with FRC the program. FRC is a product. A game like this is hard to sell as a product to potential sponsors, volunteers, media partners, schools, etc.
I agree with most of what you said but keep those vision targets we use them.

[Sperkowsky]

My life got too busy to continue mentoring, so I've been relegated to the position of robotics fan. The past few years I've really enjoyed cheering on my favorite teams via the webcasts. Based on week 1, I don't think I'll watch much this year. It's not an exciting game.

Every team's playoff strategy: Score the most points in the manner we can, and don't mess up. Maybe try to get the recycling containers in the middle if necessary.

If all the robots are functioning well, as everyone desires in a robotics competition, most of the playoff matches are a forgone conclusion. If it wasn't for mistakes (and robots getting disabled), the top alliance (seeding format pushes the best to the top) should win the majority of regionals and districts. Who wants to cheer for teams to make mistakes or breakdown? Defending against an opponent's strategy should be an important part of every FIRST competition.

Though, I must say I enjoy watching gymnastics and golf, which don't have defense, but usually have very close matches. Perhaps I'll like this game on Einstein.

https://gatsiesheikar.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/yawn2.jpg
Random but I noticed gymnastics and figured I'd have to mention im a competitive gymnast. Very few people actually purposely watch gymnastics so it's interesting when I find people out in the while who actually enjoy it.

[David8696]

I think we discovered from finals at places like Dallas and Inland Empire that this game can actually be quite exciting when played well in a competitive setting (that catch of the falling stack by Code Orange in the last match though...). So my question is, why remove that competition from all but two or three matches a competition? Is the goal to encourage gracious professionalism, because the competitive element encourages taking of sides? Because if so, then it fails: I found myself on more than one occasion actually rooting for both alliances to play badly, so we could have a chance to move on. It's a shame that FIRST feels that this is the best way to handle nearly all the matches at a competition.

[MrForbes]

One rule change in the Team Update today....

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/competition-manual-and-related-documents

3.2.2 Pre-MATCH and Post-MATCH
G14 ROBOTS will not be re-enabled after the conclusion of the MATCH, nor will Teams be permitted to tether to the ROBOT except in exceptional circumstances (e.g. during TIMEOUTS, after Opening Ceremonies, etc.) and with express permiession from the FTA or a Referee.

[AdamHeard]

I think we discovered from finals at places like Dallas and Inland Empire that this game can actually be quite exciting when played well in a competitive setting (that catch of the falling stack by Code Orange in the last match though...). So my question is, why remove that competition from all but two or three matches a competition? Is the goal to encourage gracious professionalism, because the competitive element encourages taking of sides? Because if so, then it fails: I found myself on more than one occasion actually rooting for both alliances to play badly, so we could have a chance to move on. It's a shame that FIRST feels that this is the best way to handle nearly all the matches at a competition.

Yeah...

It was awkward to wait 20 minutes to see if we really lost, all the while watching great alliances and thinking, "Well... it'd be a real bummer for them if they lost, but at least we'd get to move on... but that'd be a real bummer for them"

[Michael Corsetto]

Yeah...

It was awkward to wait 20 minutes to see if we really lost, all the while watching great alliances and thinking, "Well... it'd be a real bummer for them if they lost, but at least we'd get to move on... but that'd be a real bummer for them"

Looking forward to watching teams celebrate when other alliances make slight mistakes on Einstein.

Oh boy!

-Mike

[cglrcng]

Having watched beginning last Friday many week 1 events over multiple feeds, (and deciding on not watching some events that did not have a static full field camera capture after Friday at all)...Constantly Changing Camera Angles certainly ruin the watchers experience of this particular game when watching streamed live competitions. Please get that across to anyone filming these events for live feeds or even videos for YouTube...While all those super photographer videophiles that hold and control cameras very often like to switch camera angles quickly, show the individual robot action, and give those closeup camera single robot shots, and show their oh so great creativity, it really messes up the game viewing audience a bunch and angers the watching true FRC fan public.

This game is bad enough on the game watching fan. If you cannot see both sides of the field, 6 robots going at it all at once, you cannot possibly keep up with the real action, or the realtime tough scoring situation.

Please, if you wish for the feeds to be watched, set up a static 1 camera full field capturing camera (straight or fisheye, it does not really matter)....But, the viewing public needs to see all the action all the time if possible. Thank you to all those that take the time to provide the live action feeds and replay videos. Some of us depend on being able to watch all the events we can, live or later.

Your work is fully appreciated, and if the camera angles stay static full field, I promise I will seek out and view your work. If the camera angles constantly switch....Then I promise to also switch....Channels, vids, and streams that is.

Signed, a fan of the COMPLETE FRC GAME Action. (Instead of individual FRC Robot actions).

It's just that I personally watch the live feeds or videos to see the complete play of both alliances at the same time. When the actual game is interrupted for that extreme closeup shot of 1 single robot, the game actually ceases to exist at that moment. (I head for the kitchen for food like a NASCAR Commercial break, or to another feed, as that particular competition isn't the only game in town on a particular weekend). At least w/ NASCAR I have the DVR to fall back on and blast through the commercials.

I stayed w/ a few all weekend long, others not so much, since the maddening & constantly switching camera angles ran me off really fast. And I never returned. You wish to have all your hard work viewed throughout the event...Am I correct?

Thanks for listening. Your work is appreciated.:D

[Scott Kozutsky]

Having watched beginning last Friday many week 1 events over multiple feeds, (and deciding on not watching some events that did not have a static full field camera capture after Friday at all)...Constantly Changing Camera Angles certainly ruin the watchers experience of this particular game when watching streamed live competitions. Please get that across to anyone filming these events for live feeds or even videos for YouTube...While all those super photographer videophiles that hold and control cameras very often like to switch camera angles quickly, show the individual robot action, and give those closeup camera single robot shots, and show their oh so great creativity, it really messes up the game viewing audience a bunch and angers the watching true FRC fan public.

This game is bad enough on the game watching fan. If you cannot see both sides of the field, 6 robots going at it all at once, you cannot possibly keep up with the real action, or the realtime tough scoring situation.

Please, if you wish for the feeds to be watched, set up a static 1 camera full field capturing camera (straight or fisheye, it does not really matter)....But, the viewing public needs to see all the action all the time if possible. Thank you to all those that take the time to provide the live action feeds and replay videos. Some of us depend on being able to watch all the events we can, live or later.

Your work is fully appreciated, and if the camera angles stay static full field, I promise I will seek out and view your work. If the camera angles constantly switch....Then I promise to also switch....Channels, vids, and streams that is.

Signed, a fan of the COMPLETE FRC GAME Action. (Instead of individual FRC Robot actions).

It's just that I personally watch the live feeds or videos to see the complete play of both alliances at the same time. When the actual game is interrupted for that extreme closeup shot of 1 single robot, the game actually ceases to exist at that moment. (I head for the kitchen for food like a NASCAR Commercial break, or to another feed, as that particular competition isn't the only game in town on a particular weekend). At least w/ NASCAR I have the DVR to fall back on and blast through the commercials.

I stayed w/ a few all weekend long, others not so much, since the maddening & constantly switching camera angles ran me off really fast. And I never returned. You wish to have all your hard work viewed throughout the event...Am I correct?

Thanks for listening. Your work is appreciated.:D

+1

I'd also like the streams to be high enough resolution to actually read the team numbers. I can understand the livestreams being not so good but the archives are really lacking most of the time.

[Sperkowsky]

Having watched beginning last Friday many week 1 events over multiple feeds, (and deciding on not watching some events that did not have a static full field camera capture after Friday at all)...Constantly Changing Camera Angles certainly ruin the watchers experience of this particular game when watching streamed live competitions. Please get that across to anyone filming these events for live feeds or even videos for YouTube...While all those super photographer videophiles that hold and control cameras very often like to switch camera angles quickly, show the individual robot action, and give those closeup camera single robot shots, and show their oh so great creativity, it really messes up the game viewing audience a bunch and angers the watching true FRC fan public.

This game is bad enough on the game watching fan. If you cannot see both sides of the field, 6 robots going at it all at once, you cannot possibly keep up with the real action, or the realtime tough scoring situation.

Please, if you wish for the feeds to be watched, set up a static 1 camera full field capturing camera (straight or fisheye, it does not really matter)....But, the viewing public needs to see all the action all the time if possible. Thank you to all those that take the time to provide the live action feeds and replay videos. Some of us depend on being able to watch all the events we can, live or later.

Your work is fully appreciated, and if the camera angles stay static full field, I promise I will seek out and view your work. If the camera angles constantly switch....Then I promise to also switch....Channels, vids, and streams that is.

Signed, a fan of the COMPLETE FRC GAME Action. (Instead of individual FRC Robot actions).

It's just that I personally watch the live feeds or videos to see the complete play of both alliances at the same time. When the actual game is interrupted for that extreme closeup shot of 1 single robot, the game actually ceases to exist at that moment. (I head for the kitchen for food like a NASCAR Commercial break, or to another feed, as that particular competition isn't the only game in town on a particular weekend). At least w/ NASCAR I have the DVR to fall back on and blast through the commercials.

I stayed w/ a few all weekend long, others not so much, since the maddening & constantly switching camera angles ran me off really fast. And I never returned. You wish to have all your hard work viewed throughout the event...Am I correct?

Thanks for listening. Your work is appreciated.:D
I disagree completely and I'm a video guy. I was watching the Dallas regional on a 46 inch TV from a few feet away and couldn't see anything other then small blobs stacking bins. When they pulled in for some quick b-roll I got a lot more satisfaction. If possible I would like less static shots and more unique camera angles. An issue i did notice was the short periods of which they actually stayed on the b-roll. I feel like if you gave it long enough people who readjust to the action. It's all opinion but I'm a video guy and hate static shots.

[MechEng83]

One rule change in the Team Update today....

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/competition-manual-and-related-documents

3.2.2 Pre-MATCH and Post-MATCH
G14 ROBOTS will not be re-enabled after the conclusion of the MATCH, nor will Teams be permitted to tether to the ROBOT except in exceptional circumstances (e.g. during TIMEOUTS, after Opening Ceremonies, etc.) and with express permiession from the FTA or a Referee.

YAY!
Always fun being part of a rule change...

[Citrus Dad]

I'm sorry, when has this ever not been true? In 2013, could a team without excellent engineering, manufacturing and programming skills have built a robot with a 7 disk auto and a 30 point climb? Could a team without those skills have had a 3 ball auto for Aerial Assist? High scoring robots are built by teams that excel in all of these areas, regardless of the game.

The difference in the game is several fold. First the scoring premium for achieving the most difficult engineering task--balancing an RC on top of 6 cans--is much higher than any of the past premiums. And the difficulty of achieving intermediate premiums is not much less. Whereas going from 3 disk auto to 5 disk wasn't that hard, going to 7 disk was a big leap. Going from no RC to 1 RC turns out to be pretty difficult and getting to multiple totes is another big leap. The other difficultly is just acquiring an RC--so many teams spend the whole match chasing an RC.

But probably even more important was that in previous games a lesser robot (actually an alliance) could beat a better robot (especially acting alone) by devising a better strategy, of which there could be several. The only strategy this year is to be faster in the first second of auto, which really comes down to being better at engineering. If a strong robot uses common sense in planning, that team can beat an entire alliance of less well-built robots on its own. That does not encourage alliance teamwork as a good alternative. Running solo becomes the preferred route. That's the opposite direction FRC has been going for the last several years--rather successfully in my opinion.

BTW, this is a discussion better continued over in Defining Great Game Design: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1452301

[Steven Smith]

I disagree completely and I'm a video guy. I was watching the Dallas regional on a 46 inch TV from a few feet away and couldn't see anything other then small blobs stacking bins. When they pulled in for some quick b-roll I got a lot more satisfaction. If possible I would like less static shots and more unique camera angles. An issue i did notice was the short periods of which they actually stayed on the b-roll. I feel like if you gave it long enough people who readjust to the action. It's all opinion but I'm a video guy and hate static shots.

I think it depends on what you are watching for. If I'm just watching casually, because I want to see who wins, am trying to scout a particular robot that isn't being zoomed to, or am focused more on top level movement/strategy, the full field view is ideal (90% of the time).

If I'm scouting other robots remotely (for future events), or just curious how well ____'s robot/mechanism is working... a few B roll type shots of an intake as a robot is picking up a tote/RC are quite nice. The closeups as a robot is just zooming around the field are quite annoying though.

[IceStorm]

Having watched beginning last Friday many week 1 events over multiple feeds, (and deciding on not watching some events that did not have a static full field camera capture after Friday at all)...Constantly Changing Camera Angles certainly ruin the watchers experience of this particular game when watching streamed live competitions. Please get that across to anyone filming these events for live feeds or even videos for YouTube...While all those super photographer videophiles that hold and control cameras very often like to switch camera angles quickly, show the individual robot action, and give those closeup camera single robot shots, and show their oh so great creativity, it really messes up the game viewing audience a bunch and angers the watching true FRC fan public.

This game is bad enough on the game watching fan. If you cannot see both sides of the field, 6 robots going at it all at once, you cannot possibly keep up with the real action, or the realtime tough scoring situation.

Please, if you wish for the feeds to be watched, set up a static 1 camera full field capturing camera (straight or fisheye, it does not really matter)....But, the viewing public needs to see all the action all the time if possible. Thank you to all those that take the time to provide the live action feeds and replay videos. Some of us depend on being able to watch all the events we can, live or later.

Your work is fully appreciated, and if the camera angles stay static full field, I promise I will seek out and view your work. If the camera angles constantly switch....Then I promise to also switch....Channels, vids, and streams that is.

Signed, a fan of the COMPLETE FRC GAME Action. (Instead of individual FRC Robot actions).

It's just that I personally watch the live feeds or videos to see the complete play of both alliances at the same time. When the actual game is interrupted for that extreme closeup shot of 1 single robot, the game actually ceases to exist at that moment. (I head for the kitchen for food like a NASCAR Commercial break, or to another feed, as that particular competition isn't the only game in town on a particular weekend). At least w/ NASCAR I have the DVR to fall back on and blast through the commercials.

I stayed w/ a few all weekend long, others not so much, since the maddening & constantly switching camera angles ran me off really fast. And I never returned. You wish to have all your hard work viewed throughout the event...Am I correct?

Thanks for listening. Your work is appreciated.:D

I agree with having the whole field view. Other thing that really needs to be there is the bottom portion of the screen like what is shown on the big screen at the events, not all webcasts seem to have this. At least then you can read the numbers of the teams as well as see what the live points are at. With that I can usually figure out who a team is even if i'm not able to read the number on the bot. It also lets me leave the audio stream muted and quickly look to see what match is running if i'm waiting to watch a certain match number.