Official FIRST Stronghold Teaser! [Archive] - Page 2

angelah

16-10-2015, 10:09

From when bumpers started in 2006 through 2009, they could be any (http://geekdad.com/images_blogs/geekdad/images/2007/04/18/first039_2.jpg) color (http://moe365.org/gfx08/DynaMOE%20Folded%20-%20JAW11843w400q7.jpg) of (http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh70/thefro526/DSC02318.jpg) your (http://www.team811.com/_images/robots/2008_EllaVader.jpg) choice (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/fb/1d/ec/fb1decfc4c1f13c368fdf2d0a479630c.jpg) (they could also say other (http://frc971.org/sites/default/files/styles/square_thumbnail/public/2007.JPG?itok=2I7bl7CY) things (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fe/Chewy2.jpg/220px-Chewy2.jpg) in addition to your team number). Other means (flags, posts on the Lunacy trailers) were used to identify alliance members. It wasn't until 2010 that bumpers became regulated as blue and red to signify alliances.

Changing bumpers can be a logistical issue, so maybe we are going back to freedom in bumpers, but flags mounted to the top of robots to show the alliance (thus the two holes in the top of the robot and them draping a flag over it.)

Also, about the conversation about reaching people outside the tent. I wonder if this is an attempt at the folks "outside the tent but not too far away." Sometimes you can go TOO far outside the tent (you see this sometimes with efforts to recruit more young women to STEM, FIRST, etc.) and then you reach no one. I don't know what the thought was, but I do know we get the most interest from folks when we talk about basketball and frisbee robots.

burde1jb

16-10-2015, 10:28

19358
19359

Given the difference between the red and blue flags, here is my thought:

Capture the flag begins with red alliance's "flag" (likely a large bright light that can change between red & blue) already lit. Midfield is broken up by a significant barrier (like 2010) such that you could use only cameras to see once on the other side.

If ALL three blue alliance robots position themselves around the "flag", the "flag" turns to blue and the blue alliance gets X super mega awesome points. The red alliance must defend against them while also manipulating a game piece at midfield.

Game is over when the red alliance moves all game pieces to the center, the blue flag is lit, or 2:15 is over.

STRRRROOOOOOONNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHOOOOOOOLLLLLL LLDDDDD!!!1!1!1!!!111!1!

P.J.

16-10-2015, 12:41

Finally, my English degree is useful!

One aspect that I think many people are ignoring are the creatures represented on the flags, the griffin and the dragon. The griffin appears far too many times to just be random, and is even the first thing shown in the trailer. They could have just as easily chosen a different creature (unicorn, wolf, stag, Frank's face, whatever) or just left the flags solid colors. So I feel like the fact that they had designs on these flags has to have some sort of significance.

So the question becomes, what do both of these creatures have in common?

As someone a few posts above pointed out, they both have wings. But I'm not even going to go there.

In the myths of both griffins and dragons, one recurring theme is that the creatures are obsessed with their hoards of treasure. So what if each alliance has a set "hoard" of some sort (tennis balls?). They each begin the game with a certain amount of treasure, maybe spread through a few different goals/baskets/scoring areas and they have to both protect their "hoard" while trying to steal from the "hoard" of the other alliance. What would one use to protect their hoard? A stronghold, of course.

That's all I've got.

notmattlythgoe

16-10-2015, 12:48

I keep going back and forth on the 6v0 aspect. On one hand it is interesting that the number of kids they chose is 6, and they mention facing the challenge ahead together.

On the other hand those same 6 kids are all working on the same robot, the kingdom could be the community, and facing it together could just be because it is a team. Also, those same 6 kid are on the "drive team" and 2 of them are just cheering so you could take that as that's the team just cheering on their drive team and robot.

And of course since Frank said it wasn't a hint, nothing in the video could matter except setting a theme for the name.

robert1356

16-10-2015, 12:58

Not sure how this video is supposed to get the general public interested and excited about FIRST......

Completely agree

rick.oliver

16-10-2015, 13:05

While scanning the posts, I noticed one comment similar (or the same) as one of the thoughts which came to mind while contemplating the Teaser.

Alliances assemble their "Champion" from prefabricated sub assemblies and the Champions compete in the match with or without other robots from the team.

I discounted this idea, but since I wasn't alone in that observation, I thought that I would second it (at least, as I did not read all of the 248 posts).

I wonder, when was cheesecake first served?

Rangel(kf7fdb)

16-10-2015, 13:17

Had another thought about the game. Perhaps this year, FIRST will allow different customization without penalizing teams weight wise? Like maybe there are vastly different tasks in this attacking defending game and robots will need to be build completely different depending on their role. While teams can be effective if they build for one role, this would encourage teams to be adaptable and powerhouse teams would have a new level of skill to achieve? Still think the holo lens will be involved somehow in the game. Perhaps drivers need to see through the holo lens when attacking or something in that regard.

rick.oliver

16-10-2015, 13:19

... both protect their "hoard" while trying to steal from the "hoard" of the other alliance. What would one use to protect their hoard? A stronghold, of course...

Perhaps each alliance has a fixed amount of treasure which must be placed in the Stronghold to count towards the score. One robot on the alliance is designated the "Champion" and that robot is the robot allowed to attack the stronghold of the opposite alliance and/or defend its own alliances stronghold.

The two remaining robots are tasked with placing the treasure in the stronghold and are prohibited from interacting with the Champions.

The Champions carry their respective flags, which may be acquired by the other Champion, once it is raised over the stronghold. The flag acts as a multiplier of the treasure stored in the stronghold.

A Champion may also place their own flag on their opponents stronghold claiming the treasure of the other alliance.

Seeding is similar to last season, where teams earn treasure points.

Jalerre

16-10-2015, 15:46

In the myths of both griffins and dragons, one recurring theme is that the creatures are obsessed with their hoards of treasure. So what if each alliance has a set "hoard" of some sort (tennis balls?). They each begin the game with a certain amount of treasure, maybe spread through a few different goals/baskets/scoring areas and they have to both protect their "hoard" while trying to steal from the "hoard" of the other alliance. What would one use to protect their hoard? A stronghold, of course.

I really like this idea and I think it matches the name and theme well. I'm imagining a really defense heavy game.

Jacob Bendicksen

16-10-2015, 16:28

I wonder, when was cheesecake first served?

An ancient form of cheesecake may have been a popular dish in ancient Greece even prior to Romans' adoption of it with the conquest of Greece. The earliest attested mention of a cheesecake is by the Greek physician Aegimus, who wrote a book on the art of making cheesecakes (πλακουντοποιικόν σύγγραμμα—plakountopoiikon suggramma). The earliest extant cheesecake recipes are found in Cato the Elder's De Agri Cultura, which includes recipes for two cakes for religious uses: libum and placenta. Of the two, placenta is most like most modern cheesecakes, having a crust that is separately prepared and baked.

So cheesecake was around in medieval times...

Oh no.

Foster

16-10-2015, 17:28

So cheesecake was around in medieval times...

Oh no.

You should focus your research on the more important question "When did the Corn Dog first appear". We know there were sausages then, was there a batter dipped fried version back then?

E Dawg

16-10-2015, 17:29

Of the two, placenta is most like most modern cheesecakes, having a crust that is separately prepared and baked.

Placenta = pregnancy.

9 month long build season confirmed.

Jared Russell

16-10-2015, 17:32

You should focus your research on the more important question "When did the Corn Dog first appear". We know there were sausages then, was there a batter dipped fried version back then?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_dog#History

BOCsouthpaw

16-10-2015, 18:01

What do you do with strongholds? Attack them and knock them down. Or defend them and repair them.

My thought is that it could mean you need a Strong Hold on something.

JB987

16-10-2015, 18:07

My thought is that it could mean you need a Strong Hold on something.

As I also wondered. Maybe a strong hold on a pole or cross bar?

GaryVoshol

16-10-2015, 19:10

My thought is that it could mean you need a Strong Hold on something.

Unlimited pinning. :eek:

Trey178

16-10-2015, 19:55

What do you do with strongholds? Attack them and knock them down. Or defend them and repair them?

What about lifting yourself onto the stronghold? I love watching teams take on a hanging/climbing feature.

CurlyFries

16-10-2015, 20:59

A few observations/ponderances (not sure if these have already been stated)

1. There are blue, red, AND yellow flags on the tents. Probably not three alliances, but then what are they?
2. You never see an opposing alliance in the video.
3. If the name really is "Stronghold" this year, that is starkly different than past game names, where the pattern is "adjective noun" (two words). Does this mean big changes?
4. At the end of the video, it says "prepare for the challenge now" keyword being CHALLENGE. Why would the video makers choose this word over "battle" or others, escpecially if the running theory is that this is a vs. game?

Alex Chamberlin

17-10-2015, 12:55

Some things I've noticed if the blueprint is the field map. (See attachment)

On to the video:
They used the words together and challenger, so most likely the alliance will put forth one bot to do a task the others can't.
Cooperition is in full swing, perhaps in the form of "Killing" the dragon.
First likes throwing things (noodles Frisbees exercise balls moon rocks ect.) there will likely be some form of bombardment.

bEdhEd

17-10-2015, 14:11

Another thing I'm curious about is how the teaser image says "Build your champion."

I'm quite certain that the "champion" in the video is your team's competition robot.

runneals

17-10-2015, 18:16

I just came across Stronghold (http://stronghold.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page) that may or may not have been what the GDC based the game off of... The logo looks similar, but my team said "No Boots", so I guess you can take it or leave it... :D

kpaul

17-10-2015, 18:59

My first thought after seeing the teaser was "Are our robots going to be jousting each other??"

Same. I showed this video to a bunch of non-frc friends and they said that too.

GeeTwo

18-10-2015, 00:09

While cooking dinner this evening, I pulled a bunch of pieces together in my mind:
http://www.usfirst.org/sites/default/files/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/Game_and_Season__Info/2016/frc-2016-hero2.jpg

Teaser Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVLdJdoKK2E

Website Link: http://www.usfirst.org/node/4174

Capture the flag

My guess would be some sort of tower defense game possibly?

Just a thought: The video said "Face this task together" and showed a second "team" or "Alliance." Does this mean return of an end game like in 2012 where alliances have to tag-team to do it?

I'm considering the flag element may be similar to 2011 Logomotion with the minibots. Thoughts?

Maybe you need to build a pacifier to turn everyone into infants...

7. The new improved plowie [sic] is made out of stones from the castle.

9. At 42 seconds the robot's arms are in a karate fighting position. I assume this means the robot will have a manipulator come out of the bumper perimeter to interact with game pieces.

I'm surprised the dialog hasn't gotten more attention.

"Build your champion" "rally your kingdom" "Face the challenge ahead together".

I have long thought that FIRST is going to move FRC into the same format as FTC, FLL, and JR. FLL.....

Did anybody notice that Dozer no longer has a "dozer" and now has hands with fingers?

Alternatively, maybe we have another end game where you must raise the opposing flag up fastest (think 2011 but with flags, not minibots).

The manipulators on Gripper (the robot in the video) seem better adapted to pick up and position a flagpole than a ball.

What about lifting yourself onto the stronghold? I love watching teams take on a hanging/climbing feature.

I'm quite certain that the "champion" in the video is your team's competition robot.
That's what I thought, and still sort of think:

Looking even closer at Gripper's claws, they seem better at picking up small rectangular objects than round ones like balls or flagpoles. Gripper is also shown in the video at around 0:42 watching the action with the humans.

Synthesis:
Teams must build a robot which will assemble a Lego minibot from a bin of loose Lego parts. The minibot will enter the stronghold (probably also made of Legos), climb within the stronghold and fly a flag atop it.

MooreteP

18-10-2015, 11:42

Waited to post.

I'm gonna go with Flag Football.
tl;dr
Lunacy on carpet? Defend the trailers.While teams in general disliked Lunacy, its game theory was interesting. While you were taking the time to score, you could be scored upon in your trailer.

FIRST logo pieces will be triangles (flags).
Each Robot will have a flag attached to it that can be taken and scored.

I'm still stuck on the Game Stop (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1498594&postcount=29) hint that Frank supplied.
Co-opertition based upon ending the game early with the alliance members agreeing to hit the E-Stops. Your score gets multiplied.
You may be losing the battle, but improve your rank with a score multiplier by calling it a day.

Boltman

18-10-2015, 18:57

Its obvious at end of video the robots arms are positioned to carry a flag. Pretty sure the robot will have to transport a flagpole to some point on the tower.

Zac Schofield

18-10-2015, 20:07

So on usfirst.org, the banner they had for Stronghold on their main page had this on it before they edited it.
http://puu.sh/kL76B/4489c4c4ed.jpg

Why was "more" Spelt "m0re"?

LlNUX

18-10-2015, 20:09

kyle_hamblett

18-10-2015, 20:38

sanddrag

18-10-2015, 20:54

I've noticed the banner appear on DoubleClick ads while browsing online. Interesting.

Mr. Rip

19-10-2015, 10:31

I think everyone should start working on TreBotchets.

JohnSchneider

19-10-2015, 15:40

I think everyone should start working on TreBotchets.

I don't know that launching robots will be a part of the game :ahh:

Nevada Reno

19-10-2015, 18:16

i think it is a capture the flag or king of the hill or battle bots

team 5430 is still trying to figure it out

Alex Chamberlin

19-10-2015, 19:28

I don't know that launching robots will be a part of the game :ahh:

But what if it's legal. :ahh:

TheRozb

19-10-2015, 20:25

But what if it's legal. :ahh:
Then the safety award would mean soo much more.

On another note, I really like the idea of incorporating a vision system as a 'requirement'. It seems like FRC is trying to move towards having teams build more than a epic drive base. Last year was all about the super-structure. I would not be surprised if this year involved maybe a smarter autonomous and an important vision system.

EricH

19-10-2015, 20:34

I've noticed the banner appear on DoubleClick ads while browsing online. Interesting.

You aren't the only one. I've seen it on 2+ spots per page on occasion.

TheRozb

19-10-2015, 20:52

You aren't the only one. I've seen it on 2+ spots per page on occasion.
What if (and this is totally crazy) they are designing a mobile game that coincides with the actual FRC competition? It would explain the ads, the style of the video, and FIRST's attempt to have a wider appeal. Just a sort of crazy thought... (PLEASE! I hope I am wrong)

Shifter

20-10-2015, 00:04

From the field map (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/42374):

Lanes up the left side of the field allow a human player to draw back the tent flaps at mid-field that otherwise prevent drivers from seeing the opposing end of the field. Withdrawing both red and blue curtains for the majority of the match raises the yellow flag and increases co-op points. As long as the flaps stay “closed”, the drivers must rely on hand signals from their human player or cameras mounted to their robot when trying to score in goals at the far end of the field.

Three moveable goals start on the driver’s right on the near side of the field. Lines on the field map show where two of the goals have been dragged to the left side of the field for protection. Note that the human player on right side wall loaded game pieces into one of the goals on it’s way by. North/south lines track game pieces being thrown by a human player toward the relocated goals.

From the flags:

Shapes on the red and blue flags represent round balls (or maybe hex balls (http://www.petmountain.com/product/ball-toys-for-dogs/11442-503708/jw-pet-jw-pet-hol-ee-roller-dog-chew-toy.html)) being scored in one of three, three-compartment hexagonal floor goals. Game pieces are red, blue and yellow. Most balls in a goal (somehow) raises a flag of that color – red flag counts red balls in the goal for the red alliance; blue flag counts blue balls in the goal for the blue alliance; yellow flag scores total of all balls in the goal (red, blue and yellow) for both alliances.

Nevada Reno

21-10-2015, 10:50

again this is a hard competition, so i think it is capture the flag.

bmire3206

21-10-2015, 15:06

I think everyone should start working on TreBotchets.

don't you mean trebuchets:confused: or are we shooting minibots

Citrus Dad

21-10-2015, 16:39

So my theory is that this year is that FIRST is gonna enforce teams to use vision tracking or cameras. Teams would have to enter the opposing alliance Stronghold to retrieve flags from it however I think there will be some kind of wall preventing humans from seeing the robot inside the stronghold so our robots are gonna need cameras to be controlled and retrieve the flags. As for an end game I think there is gonna be 2 towers on the middle of the field in which teams can rise their flags to gain extra points. That is at least how I imagine the game from the teaser shown.

I hope not as that would add yet another technical hurdle too far for less resourced or experienced teams. The stacking plus capping task was too much this year and contributed to a spreading disparity in the ability to teams to contribute to their alliances. Using cameras to drive is similarly difficult.

Citrus Dad

21-10-2015, 16:43

By the way, didn't you notice on the field blueprint that there is a tree standing next to a pond in the middle of each zone? Water game!!! ;)

Doug Frisk

21-10-2015, 16:49

I hope not as that would add yet another technical hurdle too far for less resourced or experienced teams. The stacking plus capping task was too much this year and contributed to a spreading disparity in the ability to teams to contribute to their alliances. Using cameras to drive is similarly difficult.

The issue with Recycle Rush wasn't that capping was hard, it was. It was that capping was so overvalued that it became the only way to win. If scored recycling containers were worth 6 points plus 1 point per level the matches last year would have looked significantly different.

Which is to say, having a difficult engineering challenge as part of scoring is a great idea, but the harder the challenge is, the less it should impact the score of a match.

The hot goals in 2014 would be an example of a good pairing of technical challenge and scoring. It's a nice bonus, but a good team didn't need it to win.

Lil' Lavery

21-10-2015, 17:15

I hope not as that would add yet another technical hurdle too far for less resourced or experienced teams. The stacking plus capping task was too much this year and contributed to a spreading disparity in the ability to teams to contribute to their alliances. Using cameras to drive is similarly difficult.

Using cameras for tele-operation is not nearly as hard as you're saying it is. I'd wager that a majority of teams already have a camera display on their driver station dashboard. If the cameras are provided in the KoP, almost any team should be able to handle that challenge. That's not to say there won't be teams getting help in the pits (with either software or camera positioning), but it's not really a difficult technical challenge.

GeeTwo

21-10-2015, 20:26

By the way, didn't you notice on the field blueprint that there is a tree standing next to a pond in the middle of each zone? Water game!!! ;)

While I'm not the first to say this, it's been a while. The longer I look at those blueprints and how they fit into the video, the more I'm convinced that they are the design for Gripper, not the field.

Electronica1

21-10-2015, 20:28

By the way, didn't you notice on the field blueprint that there is a tree standing next to a pond in the middle of each zone? Water game!!! ;)

Sounds more like golf. The bp on it could also be golf clubs. Wouldn't make a ton of sense for the game name though.

Oblarg

21-10-2015, 20:54

So my theory is that this year is that FIRST is gonna enforce teams to use vision tracking or cameras.

The day an FRC game requires the use of a camera is the day that a huge number of low-resource teams are completely screwed.

EricH

21-10-2015, 21:03

Roborunner230

22-10-2015, 07:59

Red, Blue, Yellow, and Green tents in the intro.

They are also in the final logo. They were not accidentally placed there.

Lil' Lavery

22-10-2015, 10:32

The day an FRC game requires the use of a camera is the day that a huge number of low-resource teams are completely screwed.

Or, more to the point: teams that don't have time and programming resources for it. Particularly the programming resources. Think you (reader) don't know any of those teams? You're probably wrong.

As I recall, one of the game design requirements has historically been that ALL resource levels need to be able to play the game.

http://wpilib.screenstepslive.com/s/4485/m/24194/l/144985-configuring-an-axis-camera

http://wpilib.screenstepslive.com/s/4485/m/26401/l/255428-viewing-the-roborealm-output-in-smartdashboard

If the camera and appropriate guidance is provided in the kit, it wouldn't be an issue. Will there still be teams that show up to events without it working? Of course, we have teams that show up with robots that can't drive as it is. But this is an issue that can be worked through in the pits on practice day, not some unmountable obstacle.

To be clear, I'm not endorsing any theories that cameras will be required to play this game. But getting video feedback to your driver's station is not difficult or resource intensive.

Oblarg

22-10-2015, 11:30

To be clear, I'm not endorsing any theories that cameras will be required to play this game. But getting video feedback to your driver's station is not difficult or resource intensive.

Getting it to work reliably through competition certainly is.

Last year, we spent more time at competition debugging fritz-y webcams than anything else on the robot. Eventually we had to give up and continue without camera feedback.

feverittm

22-10-2015, 14:23

Rangel(kf7fdb)

22-10-2015, 14:37

Regarding a Camera on the robot. Even if all we needed was to put the image on the dashboard to allow us to drive the robot, I think it still would have issues. I know that with the bandwidth limits and other parameters on the computer/controller the image is rather jerky and difficult to track.

Who knows this might make it resemble teleoperated robots in distant regions (think Mars), but it would make driving much more difficult.

So long as the lag and jerkyness is equal for all teams playing, I think this would be a pretty neat challenge. Teams would have to develop a method, strategy, or driving style to perform consistently despite the somewhat unpredictable lag.

zinthorne

22-10-2015, 15:23

So I saw a post earlier saying the two circle type objects in the middle of the blueprint picture look somewhat like a gripper.

My question is, What if FIRST wants us to believe the blueprint is a field? but it is actually clues to the type of game.

Moving left to right.
The vectorized (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/42390?) picture makes it easier to see.

The vertical and line angled in on the left could be just miscellaneous lines made to throw us off. The next object to the right looks like a mouse. Possible minibot? Or some type of device we must deploy or field element that moves. The swirly circles look like possible wheels or pivot points throughout the photo.

The next object to the right looks somewhat like a lamp. This could be some type of arm used for picking up an object and placing it high up on something, or an arm or something. Looks somewhat like the arms on the robot in the video. My other thought is that the lamp type object could be a long pole with a pivoting camera uses to see over an obstruction in the field.

The next object to the right in the middle of the picture looks like a two sided mechanism for gripping a pole or odd object. The circle in the middle of the claw could be a pivot point.

Possibly the reason that the picture was made symmetrical was to show that both alliances must use these elements to succeed in the game. I am probably wrong, but this was just an idea I had.

AdamHeard

22-10-2015, 15:24

So long as the lag and jerkyness is equal for all teams playing, I think this would be a pretty neat challenge. Teams would have to develop a method, strategy, or driving style to perform consistently despite the somewhat unpredictable lag.

That would be awful for spectators.

Rangel(kf7fdb)

22-10-2015, 15:47

That would be awful for spectators.

You are right that totally slipped my mind. It's an awful idea for a spectator perspective.

Comandercaorenn

22-10-2015, 17:26

What is on that Blue Print. It may describe how the field may be laied out on the [00:12]. give me some ideas.

Catherine57

22-10-2015, 18:45

What about that glove? Maybe we'll get a big-kid version of this: http://www.techtimes.com/articles/57358/20150602/disney-playmation-toys-marvel-

Brianna_G#839

23-10-2015, 15:39

Hopefully king of the hill!

JacobD

27-10-2015, 21:16

A game hint is released to start up the chatter. Before the release, this forum did not even exist. Now look at it. I would say they are doing a good job of stirring up the pot. Otherwise, I always write down my predictions to prepare for that "I told you so" moment.

BBray_T1296

27-10-2015, 21:35

That would be awful for spectators.

What if they piped all the video feeds to the A/V switcher they use for the other field cams? For the projector/LED panel/Livestream.
Also the spectator/Ref sides could be clear and easy to see through. Also human players could assist from there aswell

Edxu

27-10-2015, 22:50

What if they piped all the video feeds to the A/V switcher they use for the other field cams? For the projector/LED panel/Livestream.
Also the spectator/Ref sides could be clear and easy to see through. Also human players could assist from there aswell

Something tells me that linking 6 laptop-run video feeds to an AV switcher would be a logistical nightmare, seeing as a large amount of teams have enough problems plugging in the ethernet cable and connecting to the FMS before matches..
Perhaps we should pursue another train of thought.

BBray_T1296

27-10-2015, 23:07

Something tells me that linking 6 laptop-run video feeds to an AV switcher would be a logistical nightmare, seeing as a large amount of teams have enough problems plugging in the ethernet cable and connecting to the FMS before matches..
Perhaps we should pursue another train of thought.

All the video feeds run through the FMS presumably on a separate port to the driverstation. I'm no networking engineer but it seems very possible to intercept the feeds at that point, instead of sending to the laptop then back.

I digress.

JoshWilson

28-10-2015, 05:51

Something tells me that linking 6 laptop-run video feeds to an AV switcher would be a logistical nightmare, seeing as a large amount of teams have enough problems plugging in the ethernet cable and connecting to the FMS before matches..
Perhaps we should pursue another train of thought.

Also, it would be a nightmare for rookie teams and teams with very few resources to even set up the cameras and get them to work, much less use them for display footage during a match.

Koko Ed

28-10-2015, 06:09

Hopefully king of the hill!
What Stack Attack eventually became.

Daniel_LaFleur

28-10-2015, 07:06

What Stack Attack eventually became.

I enjoyed Stack Attack ... but I'm a little weird like that :yikes:

CadetGizmo

28-10-2015, 08:32

"Launching January 9th."

Flying game confirmed.

IronicDeadBird

28-10-2015, 10:12

Okay I think I read all the posts man you guys can take an object and run a mile with interpretations...

So here are my observations / thoughts the questions I asked in my head and thought them through. Again nothing is known so this is all guess work but hey lets add some hype.
Problem: Why does the blueprint look... wrong.
Answer: Just right off the bat it looks too long and too skinny to be a full playing field. Plus it isn't even symmetrical. If this were to be the field and it did actually have a different "footprint" making venues have to change because the venues aren't all standardized in what kind of building they are in, or like how big of a space that building has. They use what they can get that works.
Solution: Assume that the blueprint is a fraction of the field. http://https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B-RZBaph-OvydjNsS3RTTnRsX00&usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B-RZBaph-OvydjNsS3RTTnRsX00&usp=sharing) that is a link to a folder with the blueprint mirrored and flipped where the blue print is 1/4th of the field and where it is 1/9th of the field. There is that weird like angled line on a page full of relatively straight lines so I put that weird angle line where I saw it in past games, like the tote chute. I know other configurations are possible and I just chose to mock it up these ways because it is 8am and I am not doing all of them.
Result: You know have a field with 4 zones. King of the hill and capture the flag don't have to be limited to two teams a popular variant I played at a summer camp is called four corner elimination where each corner has a ball and to win one corner must get all the balls. The equivalent here could be still 1 ball per corner just 4 balls on one side. Of course this doesn't solve the issue that in capture the flag and 4 corner you actually have to reset the field after every score and that would be a logistical nightmare.
The other thought I had is that the advantage of capture the flag with 2 points per team and 3 robots per team is that you can't just stall out a game by turtling up. If each side dedicates one robot to defending each corner that leaves one robot free to roam. That robot needs to then overcome the defending robot and the roaming robot on the other side in order to make progress. So take a robot off defense, now all of a sudden you have an open objective with no robot defending it and two robots out to make some plays. That is actually a fun dynamic to watch and see where objectives open up and you dart around and react to the opponents moves in real time.

Also I will be disappointed if FIRST blows the medieval theme without having some form of jousting...
There is actually another important field variation worth discussing but it is seriously too early in the morning for me. I'll compose my thoughts and add it onto here later.

JacobD

28-10-2015, 14:55

Getting it to work reliably through competition certainly is.

Last year, we spent more time at competition debugging fritz-y webcams than anything else on the robot. Eventually we had to give up and continue without camera feedback.

Yeah, my team had the same problem. We were using too much bandwidth in a match and there was only one volunteer in the entire competition that knew how to fix the problem. Then, our next match the code wasn't loading on the robot so we didn't move...

autobot

28-10-2015, 15:05

http://www.usfirst.org/sites/default/files/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/Game_and_Season__Info/2016/frc-2016-hero2.jpg

Teaser Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVLdJdoKK2E

Website Link: http://www.usfirst.org/node/4174

I have no idea. But it looks exciting!!!

billbo911

28-10-2015, 15:26

What is on that Blue Print. It may describe how the field may be laied out on the [00:12]. give me some ideas.

Good catch and question!

(I'm sure some of what I am about to say has been mentioned already, so please forgive the redundancy.)
It does appear to have complete symmetry about the mid-field line. Very typical for a FRC two alliance field.

Depending on how you interpret the markings, there may be ramps at both ends as well as scoring platforms similar to this year's.
Although, the "ramps" may be human player loading stations with safe loading zones on the far side of the field from the ramp top.

Notice the flag on top of the tower at 00:05 but missing at 00:27.
Red and Blue flags=Red and Blue Alliances.

GaryVoshol

28-10-2015, 20:30

"Launching January 9th."

Flying game confirmed.

Boats are launched too. Into water. ;)

BBray_T1296

29-10-2015, 17:51

Boats are launched too. Into water. ;)

Video games are launched. Early access game denied.

Gabe Newell is now on the GDC.

GeeTwo

29-10-2015, 20:54

Launching? Who do we know on the committee? Oh, yeah, Dave Lavery, that guy who's day job is with...NASA.

Space game! ;->

amannababanana

29-10-2015, 23:32

Optimistic:
Multiple "flags", 3 alliances. Alliance A has the flags in their base, alliance B and C sort of work together to capture all of them. Alliance A scores based on how long they can defend the flags. Once all the flags have been taken, whichever alliance captured the most flags gets to defend. Possible obstacles that can be pushed. Really hoping for more emphasis on autonomous, but I don't know how it would work for that.

Pessimistic:
Alliances push around towers to prevent the other alliance from scoring in them, Lunacy-style.

amannababanana

29-10-2015, 23:35

The preview seems more like the preview for a web game than an FRC game. The robots obviously have to connect to USB ports on the field and play videogames autonomously.

Navid Shafa

30-10-2015, 13:44

Launching? Who do we know on the committee? Oh, yeah, Dave Lavery, that guy who's day job is with...NASA.

Space game! ;->

Is he back on it? I thought he stepped away (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90538) the same time as Woodie...

TechWaffle

30-10-2015, 18:30

I think it will be robotic tents. They do show a lot of tents in the trailer!

CanadaQapla

01-11-2015, 20:23

According to this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J5aHLeVa4A , the blueprint is of "a pair of shoes and some rope" so I wouldn't put so much faith in that blueprint.

EricH

01-11-2015, 21:11

Is he back on it? I thought he stepped away (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90538) the same time as Woodie...

He even stepped away from doing the animations (side note: Bring Back Dozer!) as of last year.

That being said, Dave remains on the Executive Advisory Board, as does Woodie (and there are a large number of other people who you'd probably recognize on that board).

Navid Shafa

03-11-2015, 01:06

He even stepped away from doing the animations

https://theharbesongroup.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/tough-discussion.jpg

PayneTrain

03-11-2015, 01:32

He even stepped away from doing the animations (side note: Bring Back Dozer!) as of last year.

You couldn't tell

you could tell

MechEng83

03-11-2015, 05:52

He even stepped away from doing the animations (side note: Bring Back Dozer!)

The story I got from Frank was that Dave not doing the animation last year was a decision based on timing due to the broadcast schedule -- not based on pushing him out or him "stepping away"

mwmac

03-11-2015, 12:21

My take on the teaser: Medieval theme + Historical context (1066 + 950 years) ->Battle of Hastings fought on a field with natural obstacles (bounded by marsh on one side and woods on the other) resulting in a decisive victory by William the Conqueror whose forces took the high ground, slew Harold and captured his standard. William solidified his victory and control by instituting a major castle/stronghold building policy.

Takeaways: Hopefully a return to W-L-T scoring (difficult to see how an average score would work in a capture the flag type setting and they do not call him William the nice guy); defensive and offensive roles for robots; a playing field with challenging or movement restricting terrain features.

Doug Frisk

03-11-2015, 14:52

GKrotkov

03-11-2015, 16:23

I'd like to see total score/average score (with rounding to the nearest integer) and W-L-T points used as the tie breaker. Frankly, you get a better distribution using average score than you do with the W-L-T method.

For Recycle Rush, I think that you're totally right - qualification average as the 1st order sort was one of Recycle Rush's greatest successes. If defense is permitted, though, I don't think this would quite work. Match schedule would begin to matter more, because the placement of strong defensive robots could make or break a team's rank. Also, it would hurt strategies that are perfectly valid for simply winning the game, say something like game piece starvation, or anything else that would intentionally keep both scores low, but put you on the winning side.

Furthermore, it could open up a can of worms or six, like: "we know we're outgunned in this match, but let's tell the other alliance that we will play a totally defensive match to deflate their ranking unless they let us take the win by a small margin." ...or something like that.

Of course this is all speculation. I admit, I'd expect that FIRSTliness would help us get over the "can of worms" scenarios as a community, and there may be games where that method of ranking is appropriate - say, there are no strategies that would intentionally keep both alliances at a low (or lower than possible) score. But for most FRC games that I've seen or read about, I don't think that qualification average would be the most appropriate order sort.

Doug Frisk

03-11-2015, 19:44

For Recycle Rush, I think that you're totally right - qualification average as the 1st order sort was one of Recycle Rush's greatest successes. If defense is permitted, though, I don't think this would quite work. Match schedule would begin to matter more, because the placement of strong defensive robots could make or break a team's rank. Also, it would hurt strategies that are perfectly valid for simply winning the game, say something like game piece starvation, or anything else that would intentionally keep both scores low, but put you on the winning side.

Furthermore, it could open up a can of worms or six, like: "we know we're outgunned in this match, but let's tell the other alliance that we will play a totally defensive match to deflate their ranking unless they let us take the win by a small margin." ...or something like that.

Of course this is all speculation. I admit, I'd expect that FIRSTliness would help us get over the "can of worms" scenarios as a community, and there may be games where that method of ranking is appropriate - say, there are no strategies that would intentionally keep both alliances at a low (or lower than possible) score. But for most FRC games that I've seen or read about, I don't think that qualification average would be the most appropriate order sort.

The thing is, going for a defensive strategy is a perfectly valid way to play, and in fact it gives a weak alliance something to actually attempt, don't forget that while the strong alliances qual average may not be as high as it could be, by going strictly defensive the weak alliance is probably hurting their own qual average by more.

No matter what, the best strategy for a high qualification average over a series of matches is to concentrate on getting the highest score possible in each match never to try to hold the other alliance down.

Plus, if their average is 100 and your average is 60, bringing them down isn't going to put you ahead of them, at best, you're acting on behalf of the team that has a qual average of 98.

Zach101

03-11-2015, 20:59

(First off my bad if I repeated any ones idea from this thread by accident). On the idea of defending your "stronghold", maybe you have to stop the opposing alliance from stealing game pieces from your side of the field(stronghold). That brings me to my main point, that instead of starting at zero points each team will get lets say 300 points and if an alliance member takes a game piece from the opposing side and brings it to yours, your alliance will get more points while the other gets less, example it is 300-300 and now you have an opposing alliances game piece on your side of the field, it is now 310-290. We haven't seen this in a FIRST game to my knowledge and it might be an interesting scenario.
There are probably loop-holes and bad parts to my idea and I will leave it to you guys to discuss that but I thought it might be an interesting concept for this coming up game.

GeeTwo

03-11-2015, 23:12

Furthermore, it could open up a can of worms or six, like: "we know we're outgunned in this match, but let's tell the other alliance that we will play a totally defensive match to deflate their ranking unless they let us take the win by a small margin." ...or something like that.

But if WLT is primary, and points scored is a tie breaker (even if it is the first), this wouldn't appeal to the dominant alliance at all; they would still do better by winning a low-scoring match than losing a high-scoring one. On the other hand, if the points are primary and WLT is secondary, I'd rather play offense and "lose" 150-100 than play defense and "win" 40-30.

GaryVoshol

04-11-2015, 20:11

But if WLT is primary, and points scored is a tie breaker (even if it is the first), this wouldn't appeal to the dominant alliance at all; they would still do better by winning a low-scoring match than losing a high-scoring one. On the other hand, if the points are primary and WLT is secondary, I'd rather play offense and "lose" 150-100 than play defense and "win" 40-30.

Wouldn't it be in teams' best interest to collude to not play any defense at all, if points scored are the primary ranking?

Lil' Lavery

04-11-2015, 20:43

Wouldn't it be in teams' best interest to collude to not play any defense at all, if points scored are the primary ranking?

See 2003, 2010.

sdangelo

04-11-2015, 23:03

maybe....[I]nstead of starting at zero points each team will get lets say 300 points and if an alliance member takes a game piece from the opposing side and brings it to yours, your alliance will get more points while the other gets less, example it is 300-300 and now you have an opposing alliances game piece on your side of the field, it is now 310-290. We haven't seen this in a FIRST game to my knowledge and it might be an interesting scenario.
I think this may be the best way to do what the rest of the people on this thread are currently talking about--Qualification Average seeding in a non-alliance-separated game. This would make defense a valid strategy because, by definition, the average score of any of the (and therefore all of the) matches would be 300. So purely playing defense with equally matched alliances, where neither team scores, would still give you 300, the competition average, instead of tanking your score by giving you a 0. Throwing a match, however, wouldn't be a good strategy: losing or tying a match could bring your score up, if you had a really low score, but it would never bring you up above the average score.

EricH

04-11-2015, 23:33

See 2003, 2010.

And the Noodle Agreement from 2015 (before it was nixed).

If I was going to go in and do a rewrite of the seeding, I'd do it W-L-T, then the average of the score differentials from low to high, THEN average scores high-low.

GeeTwo

05-11-2015, 06:17

And the Noodle Agreement from 2015 (before it was nixed).

If I was going to go in and do a rewrite of the seeding, I'd do it W-L-T, then the average of the score differentials from low to high, THEN average scores high-low.
So the very best you can do is to win every match by exactly one point, and (should two teams both do this) have high scores at that?

notmattlythgoe

05-11-2015, 09:02

And the Noodle Agreement from 2015 (before it was nixed).

If I was going to go in and do a rewrite of the seeding, I'd do it W-L-T, then the average of the score differentials from low to high, THEN average scores high-low.

You now run yourself into a Breakaway situation, where it may be beneficial to score for your opponent.

Lil' Lavery

05-11-2015, 10:23

You now run yourself into a Breakaway situation, where it may be beneficial to score for your opponent.

Scoring for your opponent was not only beneficial, but actually encouraged for a decent chunk of FRC history. It wasn't always permitted by game mechanics (such as 2005 and 2007 where you couldn't possess the opponent's scoring objects), but for much of the alliance era, you were rewarded for your opponent having a high score. Prior to "WLT" being the first sort, the first sort in the standings was based on match scores (winning socre + 2x loser's score for winning alliance, losing score for losing alliance). This obviously encouraged high scoring matches, and particularly high losing scores. WLT sorting was first implemented in 2004, but the first tiebreaker for the next several seasons was the average loser's score in your matches. Thus, while winning was now a greater priority than high scores in qualifications, a high loser's score was encouraged. It was not uncommon to see powerhouse teams start scoring for their opponent once they had a sufficient lead (especially in 2006).

notmattlythgoe

05-11-2015, 10:25

Scoring for your opponent was not only beneficial, but actually encouraged for a decent chunk of FRC history. It wasn't always permitted by game mechanics (such as 2005 and 2007 where you couldn't possess the opponent's scoring objects), but for much of the alliance era, you were rewarded for your opponent having a high score. Prior to "WLT" being the first sort, the first sort in the standings was based on match scores (winning socre + 2x loser's score for winning alliance, losing score for losing alliance). This obviously encouraged high scoring matches, and particularly high losing scores. WLT sorting was first implemented in 2004, but the first tiebreaker for the next several seasons was the average loser's score in your matches. Thus, while winning was now a greater priority than high scores in qualifications, a high loser's score was encouraged. It was not uncommon to see powerhouse teams start scoring for their opponent once they had a sufficient lead (especially in 2006).

Which is totally not confusing for spectators... :rolleyes:

Zach101

05-11-2015, 18:20

I feel like capture the flag is always up for grabs but with the the new FRC Standards (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/blog-something-new-team-standards) (thread for it (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=138930)) I think the game could totally be different. Cause the flags in the teaser may only be talking about the 'Standards' and nothing about the game.

billbo911

05-11-2015, 18:33

Zach101

05-11-2015, 18:50

I see you and I are thinking along the same lines (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1503504&postcount=123).

Personally this video is just out to make us do super random guesses. Yes maybe there may be small hints in the video but now that they released the team standards ... like i said, this video might as well mean nothing since it was all about the flags. Only thing that we know is there is defense. This game is not going to be what we think even with all the guesses in this thread though who knows, some guesses may be closer than we think.

Zac Schofield

06-11-2015, 17:57

So because the flags in the teaser may just be referring to the standards we're seeing now. Any other theories as to what the game might be? I'd like to see King of the Hill, but It'd be hard to play it.

#DenimDerbyConfirmed?

the_42nd_parado

12-11-2015, 09:22

It's very unlikely that FIRST will reuse game pieces from last year, especially in a very similar way. It puts rookie and newer teams at a huge disadvantage against teams who already have excellent stacking mechanisms from last year.

We do have to consider the fact that, every year rookie teams are at a disadvantage. No matter the game.

Doug Frisk

12-11-2015, 13:10

We do have to consider the fact that, every year rookie teams are at a disadvantage. No matter the game.

Which is why I'm sure the Game Development group makes an effort to avoid increasing that disadvantage.

MxMarkov

12-11-2015, 23:05

The teaser has castles. Castles mean moats. Moats mean WATER GAME!!!!

Koko Ed

17-11-2015, 05:49

Off topic: What is the font used in the FIRST Stronghold logo?

Foster

17-11-2015, 08:27

I don't know, but the should have used Trebuchet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trebuchet_MS) :rolleyes:

JustinCAD

17-11-2015, 09:06

Off topic: What is the font used in the FIRST Stronghold logo?

It looks very similar to the Lord of the Rings font called "Ringbearer". (http://www.1001fonts.com/ringbearer-font.html) I don't think it's exact, but very similar to the font used for the Stronghold logo.

DrewMatic

19-11-2015, 18:45

True teaser! To my knowledge after watching the video, I think it will be an interesting year full of excitement. I can't wait.

lewislongbottom

19-11-2015, 19:34

The teaser has castles. Castles mean moats. Moats mean WATER GAME!!!!

And moat rhymes with goat...

Koko Ed

20-11-2015, 18:40

It looks very similar to the Lord of the Rings font called "Ringbearer". (http://www.1001fonts.com/ringbearer-font.html) I don't think it's exact, but very similar to the font used for the Stronghold logo.

I contacted FIRST. They said it's called Prophecy (http://www.identifont.com/show?ARP).

josephus

01-12-2015, 22:37

:O FTA's Vs. Teams...

I think this might be worth considering. The dragon on the red flag is a different design than on the blue flag, and there is mention of attacking the challenge together (I'm not sure exactly what the verb used in the video is). No students were shown with a red flag, or in the same area as the red flag. All students were in a fairground that was oddly reminiscent of a pit area with different teams having different colours and set ups, so the setting of the video could be representative of a competition with largely separate areas. Field staff competing with students would introduce too much inconsistency, but it does seem like teams might be cooperating more than ever.

GeeTwo

01-12-2015, 22:59

but it does seem like teams might be cooperating more than ever.
More than 4 vs 0?
2001 - Diabolical Dynamics
Four teams work together as one alliance to try to achieve as high a score as possible in each match. Points are scored by placing balls in their goal, and by positioning their robots and goals in designated areas at the end of each match. At the start of each match, the alliance station contains twenty small balls. In addition there are twenty small balls and four large balls on the far side of the field which may be used to score points.
At the end of the two minute match, points are awarded as follows: the alliance will receive one point for each small ball in the goal and not in contact with a robot, and ten points for each large ball in the goal and not in contact with a robot. Each alliance will receive ten points for each robot that is in the End Zone. An additional ten points will be added if the stretcher is in the End Zone. The alliance doubles its score if the bridge is balanced. The alliance multiplies its score by a factor of up to three by ending the match before the two minute time limit. Each team receives the alliance score. A team multiplies its’ score by 1.1 if its large ball is on top of a goal. Scores are rounded up to the nearest whole point after applying all applicable multipliers.

Jsteel

02-12-2015, 00:17

Is there another teaser coming out before Kickoff?

billbo911

02-12-2015, 08:53

Is there another teaser coming out before Kickoff?

Quite often FIRST will provide an official game hint the week of Christmas. The timing of which is variable, so keep your eyes open.

Rebecca Wasmer

21-12-2015, 10:50

No, I have not read through everything, but did anyone notice the new slick bumper material that AndyMark is selling? :::rtm::

From the description: "This material is slick in comparison to other bumper material like am-2676. This may be useful in situations when you want objects or elements to slide on your robot bumper rather than grip to it."

GreyingJay

21-12-2015, 12:33

AndyMark has been putting out all kinds of weird and wonderful new things. Slick bumper material, tank drive... one can only wonder what you would do with those...

orangemoore

21-12-2015, 12:41

AndyMark has been putting out all kinds of weird and wonderful new things. Slick bumper material, tank drive... one can only wonder what you would do with those...

I wouldn't take what Andymark is producing too seriously. Andy said on the FUN podcast/show thing said it was geared to a more industrial customer and not is wasn't solely for FRC.

GreyingJay

21-12-2015, 13:05

I wouldn't take what Andymark is producing too seriously. Andy said on the FUN podcast/show thing said it was geared to a more industrial customer and not is wasn't solely for FRC.

Oh, I realize that, but it's still fun to speculate ::rtm::

I wonder what industrial customers are building FRC-size tank drive vehicles though. :cool:

EricLeifermann

21-12-2015, 13:10

Oh, I realize that, but it's still fun to speculate ::rtm::

I wonder what industrial customers are building FRC-size tank drive vehicles though. :cool:

Conveyor systems not drive platforms.

orangemoore

21-12-2015, 13:17

Oh, I realize that, but it's still fun to speculate ::rtm::

I wonder what industrial customers are building FRC-size tank drive vehicles though. :cool:

Conveyor systems not drive platforms.

Industrial was a poor word choice. More like Commercial Use he used examples like: Firefighters and Swat Teams

https://youtu.be/EmN0v9IZb38?t=48m25s

zacube

29-12-2015, 07:40

Well, I haven't read all of the pages, but I did make it through about half, plus the couple before this one, so I figure I'll throw in my (late) two cents.

1. The font. The similarity to the "Ringbearer" LOTR font has been brought up on a few different occasions (I know that someone also found out that that is not the exact font used, but bear with me). The font is also somewhat similar to the fonts in the titles of a few different Disney movies (Again, somewhat with a loose definition). Seeing as WDI made the video, I went through to look at the plots of the different movies. It seemed that all of the ones in question were medieval and involved sneaking into somewhere to either retrieve or deposit something precious to them (Pun intended, since that pretty much describes Frodo's mission as well). This, in part leads to #2

2. Capture the Flag. There have been a few indications that this is a possibility. The font, the missing flag, and the flag on the robot. There are probably a few I missed.

3. The blueprint. I am of the opinion that first has revealed the field layout through the blueprint. I also think that, because it's a themed game, we may be seeing a lot of "static", if you will, not only in the form of random lines and the like, but also possibly in the form of aesthetics on the field drawing that will either not be there, or won't be very prominent. It looks like a very busy field, but there are certain things that wouldn't quite fit. Too much that, if it was very tall, would block driver vision way too much. So, some of those things (like the double lines going to the circles on the other side of the field) could be short, like the steps from last year, or could be higher up, like the return chutes from 2010.

4. What has thusfar been implied about the field components (I'm gonna include the blueprint in this one, just because). The blueprint suggests that we have a few different circular protrusions, maybe turrets, but what catches my interest more is the things at the center, and at the sides. The center part that some people has said looks like a hill to me looks almost like a motte and bailey (http://41.media.tumblr.com/6f52c60e4168063ceba414f4f9dccd72/tumblr_inline_nsxakt5hdT1rtdfb6_500.jpg) style castle, with two separate walled in sections and a moat around. I'm not sure what purpose they would serve, but one thought is that they could have to do with any "capture the flag" elements. At the ends of the field are also some strange looking shapes, which I think could be what was looked at in This video (http://www.firstinspires.org/node/7221) at about 0:20. The camera is tilted up, indicating something tall, maybe visible from the pits (As has been brought up with respect to the tower visible from the tens in the teaser video). As for the game pieces, well, that's a bit annoying to try to figure out.

5. Game pieces. Well, a lot depends on if we take what is said at 0:15 of the "Security Breach" video as sarcastic/ deliberately misleading, or as serious. If it's serious, we probably have capture the flag/king of the hill, since we haven't had a game piece that resembles a flag before. If it's sarcastic, then we probably have balls that we're trying to score somewhere, which would fit the pattern that FIRST has kept with for the last 12 or so years of having every other game be a ball game, with a pattern of small, small, large, small, small, large.

I think that we are going to end up with a game with two different scoring methods, one being capture the flag or king of the hill style as a point booster/multiplier/infusion, and the main one being shooting or herding balls somewhere on the field. That said, I think everything is designed to confuse us, and nothing will make sense until kickoff.

Essentially, FIRST is trying to screw with our heads, and a lot is uncertain right now, but if I got any of that anywhere near right, I'm going to be jumping with joy more than normal at kickoff.

See you all there, and good luck this season folks!

Citrus Dad

29-12-2015, 16:23

Alex Chamberlin

29-12-2015, 23:10

One more image of the blueprint.

brosephp

07-01-2016, 17:07

The blueprints look like the playing field.
Here's the map with contrast increased, skewed to correct angles, and lines traced:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19650&stc=1&d=1452204079
Now just the lines traced:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19651&stc=1&d=1452204079
Now removing unnecessary lines:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19652&stc=1&d=1452204079
Finally, colored in:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19653&stc=1&d=1452204079

As you can see, it looks like there are two catapults or trebuchets-- one on each end. Appears to be two "strongholds" in the center, along with two smaller "buildings." Along with a truss on each side, like the 2014 game.
My guess from this is it's a projectile game, where there will be towers in the center, and the teams will have to use some sort of provided ammunition to knock down the opponents towers. (images attached too in same order)