Next Year's game idea....

[Gusman1188]

So anybody come up with any ideas for next years game or am i just getting a little ahead of myself?

[pi_guy578]

am i just getting a little ahead of myself?
There is no such thing as ahead in FIRST, if anything its behind...

I think it would be cool to do somthing besides balls again. I liked the idea of rubbermaid bins from last year, way to many competitions have had to do something with manipulating balls.

[Jay H 237]

I wonder if they'll ever bring back the floppies. As long as I've been involved in FIRST the floppies have been the most challenging to pick up. The totes were a good idea too. If they really want to make it interesting they could have a pile of Tupperware in the middle of the field and give the robots two minutes to locate a matching lid! :p :D Just think of trying to write an autonomous mode for that! :ahh:

[Marc P.]

I saw in another thread, someone posted the possibilities of having the team colors controlled by the arena. It was mentioned how strategically interesting thing would get if halfway through a match, the alliances flip-flopped. One team would switch from red to blue and vice-versa.

[RoboMom]

There is no such thing as ahead in FIRST, if anything its behind...

I think it would be cool to do somthing besides balls again. I liked the idea of rubbermaid bins from last year, way to many competitions have had to do something with manipulating balls.

It definitely should not include dodge balls to allow the world supply to regenerate or whatever dodge balls do to multiply. :)

[Scooter]

Now that we have an absoulute way to determine where on the field we are, move the autonomous period to the end of the match.

-Bill

P.S. What are floppies?

[Jay H 237]

P.S. What are floppies?

The floppies were stuffed round disk shaped objects. Basically like round pillows. They were the main part of the game in '99. Your robot had to pick them up and raise as many of them as possible up about 8' (don't recall exact height) in the air to score points. They didn't hold they're shape, think of throwing a pillow around and how it could land, and how much fun (difficulty) it was to pick them up.

[tkwetzel]

Floppies were used as scoring devices in 1999 and are round cloth things that are somewhat hard to describe. They are about 2.5-3' in diameter and the middle is sewn together to make it flat, however, around the sewn together part the rest of it is stuffed with something. It isn't stuffed with much making them very floppy (hence the name). If anyone has corrections or additions to that description, please add. I have handled one of them in the recent past (my brother has one somewhere), but I was not around when they were used in the FIRST game.
edit: Basically like round pillows.
I woudl agree that they are sort of like pillows, but they are not as stuffed as most pillows are. They were very floppy and as he said don't hold their shape.

As for future years...I would like to see pyramid or cylindrical shaped pieces. a device to pick up something pyramidal in shape would need to be a little more complex than most of the arms that pick up the balls.

[geo]

So anybody come up with any ideas for next years game or am i just getting a little ahead of myself?
you may want to check out THIS

[MikeDubreuil]

For instance, this year there were two types of objects to pick up: small balls, and large balls. What if you had to manipulate 2 completely different kids of objects? Like bowling pins and frisbies.

It would be cool if during autonomous you could either:
1. trigger the release of fribees on the playing field.
2. Use your IR sensor to find a "mobile bowling pin stash" and attempt to collect the pins. The stash has been randomly placed on the field at the begining of a match. The mobile stash is very similar to the puck in the Floppie year.

The object of the game is to collect the most bowling pins and raise them 8 ft in the air. Robots may also collect friesbees and bring them to the human player. From there the human player would throw them at a 3 foot diamteter hole-goal on the opposite side of the field, located inbetween the 2 allliances.

If you're on the puck at the end of the game, you also receive some type of bonus. Any frisbees in your goal also receives points, Bowling pins in the air at the end of the match also receive points.

EDIT: To mix things up.... if a human player scores a frisbee, a random robot of the opposing alliance is disabled for 10 seconds. Frisbees are no longer used as points.

[Aaron Lussier]

Frisbees... hell yea Mike. That would be just about the coolest thing ever. The problem is that they would be the small crappy ones that get blown away with a gust of wind... It would still be fun though.

-Aaron

[Rob Colatutto]

Water game anyone? ...just kidding.

I think we'll be seeing something vertical again next year. Hopefully some large moving object will return such as the 99' puck or the 01' bridge. I would like to see the 14.75" field divider take another year off since we've had too much of that recently, however it is fun when there is a step under it similar to the 3" step in 01'. I think we should see another non-uniform game object (but not totes) since there are many many good models now for picking up small balls and large balls due to thier frequent appearances. A completely new object (soda bottles? maybe we could see that game preview photo with the mysterious road cone come in) would be a good idea.
One thing I would like to see is the entire driving area go back to carpet or go to a completely new surface all together. Maybe a surface where metal would be allowed to contact it.

I'm sure sometime soon Dave will post his official "so how about you design the 2005 game" thread.

In my oppinion, changes are always good in FIRST games.

[Ryan Foley]

well, using hints and observations from this year, heres some stuff i think next years game will involve.

Remember how Dave said that we need to get used to the IR sensors and learn how to use them? Also look at how FIRST has finally introduced an automated field.

Perhaps next year, there might be an active field element. In other words, something that moves around the field on it's own power, controlled by the arena controllers, like the EDU-RCs that controlled the bal dumps this year.

Why do I think this? IR is the only way (in FIRST at least) to track a moving target. Yuo can't track a line, wall, or use dead reckoning to find something constanly changing position.

I think an active field element would make next years game so awesome.

I also like the idea of frisbees.

another thing to ponder over. This years game uses elements of the past 5 or 6 games. Perhaps this was intentional, building up to something next year that is completely different using nothing any of us have ever seen in a FIRST game before.

[Billfred]

I did a bit of reading on some of the older games...personally, I'd love to see a return to an inch and a half of corn for a field.

But more realistically for FIRST purposes, I'd like to see a few things. Like a really challenging field for drivers. Who knows? We might even see a suspension on a FIRST robot!

And I agree that it'd be pimp to do something besides balls. Perhaps some kind of capture the flag element? Or even cooler, make it so that some parts of the field are impossible to see from the driver's station. Make the human player into a HP/spotter where they can see, and you've added yet another level to the game.

Or, if balls must remain an option, I think you'd see some good action if they were really small balls...like tennis balls or smaller. Get a ton of 'em on a FIRST Frenzy-sized field, and you've got a lot of action. (You've also got field reset's worst nightmare, but that's another story.)

And there's always pink lawn flamingos...

[suneel112]

They should do something balace -ey. Like Diabolical Dynamics 2001. I also liked the three color system of alliances.

I'd like a game 5 minutes long. FIRST MEGAFRENZY!!! balances, bars, slippery ramp, balls, 2x multiplier totes (yes, put 8" balls in the totes themselves (opening required)), spikey things, pyramid things, floppy things, 4x multiplier 48" balls, 6 autonomous beacons. THis will be super hard, and tax good thinkers. We need to raise the bar. And by the way, 8 teams per match.

[hansTP2S]

They should do something balace -ey. Like Diabolical Dynamics 2001. I also liked the three color system of alliances.

I'd like a game 5 minutes long. FIRST MEGAFRENZY!!! balances, bars, slippery ramp, balls, 2x multiplier totes (yes, put 8" balls in the totes themselves (opening required)), spikey things, pyramid things, floppy things, 4x multiplier 48" balls, 6 autonomous beacons. THis will be super hard, and tax good thinkers. We need to raise the bar. And by the way, 8 teams per match.

8/3=2.666...

[tkwetzel]

Why do I think this? IR is the only way (in FIRST at least) to track a moving target. Yuo can't track a line, wall, or use dead reckoning to find something constanly changing position.

That would only be during autonomous that you would need IR sensors.

And to everyone who says look at what Dave has hinted at: Look at everything he says and does. He can relate two totally bizarre things. These hints may hardly mean anything about the game.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Now that we have an absoulute way to determine where on the field we are, move the autonomous period to the end of the match.

I like this idea! Finally something that will give programmers (and not drivers) some respect! :) :)

[Steve W]

How about pyramids instead of balls?

[DCA Fan]

Inner tubes, staircases, and/or evil inflatable clown punching bags. Pick your pick.

I'd love to see autonomous at the end of a match, but I'd like to see a balance of difficulty so rookie teams get a fighting chance out of the gate.

[Mike Rush]

I did hear that it would be to every teams advantage to learn how to use the IR sensors that were on this years game. Apparently it is going to be much more important than this year. I don't think a lot of teams used the IR sensors. Most appeared to be dead reckoning or line following. Not all but I think most.

[Ryan F.]

I did a bit of reading on some of the older games...personally, I'd love to see a return to an inch and a half of corn for a field.




Great idea...us Iowans would dominate ;)

[Don Knight]

Footballs, moving targets, humans and robots score points

[Zzyzx]

Somthing underwater would be insanely different! And if there was a way to use inertubes filled with metal or somthing, that would be great.

[Billfred]

Footballs would be genius. They're available, yet harder to grip from an unknown direction.

The only hard thing about moving targets is making it so that teams can replicate it. But a suspended bag would be pretty neat--just attach some braces that go outside of the field.

Or, if we were feeling especially devilish...good ol' play sand? That'd be a real test of drivetrains.

[Ryan F.]

That'd be a real test of drivetrains.

Personally, I hope that next years game will be a test for the drivetrains in some way. That was something that was really neglected this year. Some teams built complex gearboxes etc., but in the end, they weren't that crucial. Though, I have a feeling a match like this would be very high contact, so people would also have to build very sturdy robots, something I was surprised at the lack of.

-But then, I may be a little bias

[AJunx]

Having attended the past five FIRST National Competitions, I think that the most exciting games (to watch as well as to compete in) have been fast-paced. I recognize, of course, that not every second of every match has been fast-paced. However, I would suggest to anyone thinking up a new game idea to make sure that they allow for the game to be fairly fast-paced. After all, speed and excitement are two of the many aspects of robotics that inspire young people to become involved in FIRST.

[sburro]

Water game anyone? ...just kidding.


I think you are on to something. Water would be interesting. Just imagine.

[Ryan F.]

This has been discussed many times. Just run a search for the thread.

[Greg Needel]

i was talking to a few friends at nationals and we came up with a solution to save first money and keep things very interesting.....i think that they should keep the field the same but just change the rules

things like the doubler ball would half the points in the goal

robots can score balls in the goals

balls start on the field and are worth twice as much if they are scored in the ball drop bins and the balls on the tees can be knocked off at any time to descore those balls

the field would be set up that the mobile goals are sitting infront of the stairs on the opposite side of the field.

human players serve the same pupose as this year

and the bar will be broken in to sections painted red and blue and depending on where you are hanging depends on what team gets the points.....



these are just a few of my ideas.....

[Clell Chatman]

For anyone who does not know what a floppie looks like, and i have to say i thought the manipulation of the sterilite, not to be confused with rubbermade the quality is just not as good, was the most worldly practical.


These are pillows on my bed, beat that first addicts.

[RBrandy]

What about a game with a verticle pole? That would be challenging. Use bean-bag chairs for scoring objects. Have the goals for the bean bag-chairs be closed unless opened during autonomus mode. That all would be cool.

[Ryan Foley]

What about a game with a verticle pole? That would be challenging. Use bean-bag chairs for scoring objects. Have the goals for the bean bag-chairs be closed unless opened during autonomus mode. That all would be cool.

I would love to see bot's climb vertical things, such as a vertical pole or wall. A pole is a bit more reasonable though, simple scoring too. A bot that has climbed the pole gets the number of points equal to the number of inches the lowest part of the robot is above the floor.

heres a cool midfield barrier, 2ft high vertical poles, spaced 1.5ft apart.

footballs or frisbees would make great scoring objects, easy to get from stores, and hard for robot's to pick up.

I like the idea of very small scoring items, like tennis balls that someone else suggested.

[mtaman02]

Heres a few ideas!

1) All scoring objects will get the value of what there worth only if it fits in the correct keyed space. No 2 scoring objects will be keyed the same way.

2) Autonmous yes many teams like Auton but I would prefer to see it at the end of the match to see if the built robots can score anything by themselves that could change the outcome of a match - difficult yes but i'm sure its dooable!

3) it would be nice to see another combination of games brought together like this years game

[sanddrag]

I always thought it would be cool to see a giant pyramid in the middle of the field and whoever is on the sides at the end of the match gets some points but whoever is on top gets more points. Or maybe the pyramid covers the whole playing field and the scoring objects would have to be passed over it; also, the robots would never be driving level. Or what if it was a stepped pyrimid, with different tiered levels that have to do with scoring. Or what about an inverted pyramid - like the sides of the field are higher than the center and it all goes down into one point - and it is stepped! Or what if each corner of the field was a different level. Or what if the field was like you were inside half of a sphere, like a totally rounded swimming pool (but empty).

What about something like an elevator or a big conveyor belt or a turntable. Now that would be cool. I've always wanted so see powered elements of the field but the cost would never allow it. Come to think of it, the cost would never allow any of my ideas. :(

[Greg Needel]

I've always wanted so see powered elements of the field but the cost would never allow it.


just FYI on this comment the center field structure this year cost upwards of 20,000

[Koko Ed]

My wife and I thought FIRST should come up with a game about folding laundry. :p
I can see it now: They'll be a big to do on Chiefdelphi about teams illegally using cans of starch on the clothes and there will be a bonus 100 points for teams that can make wet clothes dry within two minutes. :D

[Specialagentjim]

there will be a bonus 100 points for teams that can make wet clothes dry within two minutes. :D

Easy, just run the drill motors without heatsinks or fans ;)

[Koko Ed]

Easy, just run the drill motors without heatsinks or fans ;)
50 point penalty for burning the clothes. :p

[suneel112]

Then the robot will still be in competition even after the season is over.

Heck, I'd keep it to do my laundry, but I would have to fight over it with 80 students (luckily I'm a senior next year ;) )

Great Idea!! :D Let the robots that we build do the work that we FIRST-ers don't have the time to do.

[Zzyzx]

50 point penalty for burning the clothes. :p

Come on! a 50 point penalty? It should be somthing like a 0.5x if you burn the clothing.

[FizMan]

The only problem I see with increasing the match time drastically (i.e. to five minutes) is battery power...

And I really like the idea of having the robot out of view in a particular section with the human player spotter... I doubt it'll ever happen, but I like the uniqueness of it.




Maybe we'll have the robots pick up random, unmarked CD's, pop them in a stereo, and see if they find YMCA. ;)

Not too keen on the idea of disabling opponent's robots though... but again, an interesting idea.


I'd like to see some sort of thing, where you get points for accomplishing a task. Whereas all the games I've been a part of where the score is based on the final configuration of the field, maybe if your bot does something in autonmous mode... or does whatever task, you GET 20 points or something.


EDIT:

I just realized that there were two more pages of posts in here when I replied (thought there was just one) so sorry if I went and said something that the lot of you already discussed in great detail :P

[tkwetzel]

An idea for goals:
Have goals like the mobile goals this year, but with a tod on them. Have a whole in the top just big enough for the balls. Just under the hole, have something that will hold onto a ball, but loosely enough that a robot could easily push it through. Sort of like a sock...cut open the closed end...you can put a tennis ball in it and it stays in the same position in the sock, but you can push the tennis ball and it will move through the sock. Have something like that that would hold a single ball very loosely (just tight enough to hold the ball). Any balls pushed in the goal belong to the other team, unless you have a ball in the capture device, then you get the points. So you would want to get as many balls in the goal as possible, but if you couldn't get a ball in the sock-like thing at the end of the match, the points would go to the opposite team. And you would have to be able to push the balls gently, otherwise they would just fall through. Teams would also want to protect the top ball near the end of the match, but there should be something like the bar this year that attracts the robots to do something at the end of a match. You would also have to make sure that the goals mentioned above could not be completely stuffed quickly and easily so as the top ball will remain there without a chance of falling. I'm not saying that you can't have enough balls to fill the goal...it just has to be difficult, so good teams could fill teh goal and not have to worry about defending their "top ball". For a multiplier, you could require the goal to be lifted onto a 2' high platform or something like that. This would most likely be a past-paced entertaining game with multiple options scoring and playing as there were this year.

[Zzyzx]

I like the idea of extra poits for certain tasks, like drying clothing :D

[Ryan F.]

Points for things like....the fisher price motor you used in the drivetrain lasted the entire match :ahh:

Seriously though...I would really like a a more open field. It would really give advantages to those teams with better drivetrains...and be a good change.

[RogerR]

my idea (minus any details):


similar to 2002 field, except scoring zones for balls would be a red/blue trough at opp. ends of feild. robot scoring zone is middle of feild. at any given time, there may be only three balls on the feild at any given time. if a ball is scored, or otherwise removed from play, only the alliance that removed it can put a new ball into play. the human players are the only ones who can put balls into play.
there are also two non-functional obstacles that the robots can interact with that do not affect the score.

[mtaman02]

Ok Another change I would like to see is the alliance colors ( yes something petty I know ). For many many years ( subtract the early years when FIRST started out) the alliance colors have revolved around Red and Blue. To my knowledge there was only 1 year where FIRST had used 4 - 5 different Alliance colors and that was 2001 Red, Yellow, Green, Blue and whatever color to identify the fifth team during the finals (the unselected team during a match)

Now I think the only reason why Red and Blue and white have been used b.c thats the USA national flag Color and the UK's. (Personal Opinion!) but since we have Brazil in the FIRST Org. Why not we have a season of just Yellow and Green and White. not asking FIRST to change their colors just the alliance. It would be nice to see a color change.

Just like the balls this year not only where they Yellow and Black similar to 2000 - 2002 Colored Balls but they also threw in Purple Balls.


I think the field should be slightly bigger at least in length for those teams (cough cough T25) who like to have fast Drivetrains and use that in Auton mode. Like a few of u said field should be bigger for fast drive trains to be used.

now onto fun stuff.....

Start Rant Here://
There should be magnets in the game - Strong powerfull ones. The team must build a non magnetic robot but be able to use metals to give the robot robustness and strength.

Weight Limit should be increased an additional 15lbs to compensate for battery weight 140 -Robot plus 15lb for Battery = 155. Thats 15lbs extra to play around with.

Judging what the game may be, height restriction should be raised or lowered. This years robots did reach 10ft+ after the start of a match. and thats fairly unsafe if one should tip at its peak altitude.

(BTW everyone remember that chin up bar could be lowered. I have not seen that function At ALL. It was suppose to prevent teams from over working themselves in getting the robot off at the end of the match and yet I still saw teams lifting 140lbs to get the robot off. Some teams where smart anc carried around their tether or a PVC tube to get the robot un hooked. Point is Why design a field to have a saftey aspect if its not going to be used. I didn;t see it used in NYC, NJ, SVR, or the Nats. And taking two much time to reset the field using that function is not a good excuse either, Safety is more important then trying to hurry up and start the next match)


Just a thought or 2

P.S. not bashing FIRST just sighting a flaw thats all. FIRST does a very good job in making sure teams are kept safe while handling their robots such as the 4 gates around the field that weren't exsisting up until the 2002 season began. and I look forward to seeing more safety enhancements embedded into the field in future games

Mike

[FizMan]

Start Rant Here://
There should be magnets in the game - Strong powerfull ones. The team must build a non magnetic robot but be able to use metals to give the robot robustness and strength.

*insert erased robot controller here* I don't think employing powerful magnets will happen... cool idea... but I don't think it's really feasible.



I still saw teams lifting 140lbs to get the robot off
...
Weight Limit should be increased an additional 15lbs to compensate for battery weight 140 -Robot plus 15lb for Battery = 155. Thats 15lbs extra to play around with.

Since when was the weight limit 140 pounds? I don't think they should compensate for the battery... if they did that, eventually they'll start saying, "Well... since you NEED the controller, we'll compensate for that too... and the victors... and the motors, and the wiring..." The battery is part of the robot and it should be included in your weight... if it's too heavy... I guess you could find a whack of AA batteries :P



Judging what the game may be, height restriction should be raised or lowered. This years robots did reach 10ft+ after the start of a match. and thats fairly unsafe if one should tip at its peak altitude.

(BTW everyone remember that chin up bar could be lowered. I have not seen that function At ALL. It was suppose to prevent teams from over working themselves in getting the robot off at the end of the match and yet I still saw teams lifting 140lbs to get the robot off. Some teams where smart anc carried around their tether or a PVC tube to get the robot un hooked. Point is Why design a field to have a saftey aspect if its not going to be used. I didn;t see it used in NYC, NJ, SVR, or the Nats. And taking two much time to reset the field using that function is not a good excuse either, Safety is more important then trying to hurry up and start the next match)



Does anyone recall team members dropping their robots trying to lift them off the bar? I know my team had no problems lifting it off there. I don't recall seeing a robot that was so high up that it would be a danger to lift... no more danger than carrying it onto the field and whatnot... Maybe if it was just one person lifting it :P


Rather than increasing the field size (which would probably happen if the following happened) what aboot having a non-rectangular field? Laff... FIRST Mini Golf ;)

[Greg Needel]

what aboot having a non-rectangular field?



don't count on it......first has put alot of money into those fields and prob wont waver from the shape or size for a few years now...especially because they build 3 new ones this year

[tkwetzel]

I would really like a a more open field. It would really give advantages to those teams with better drivetrains

I don't think FIRST likes giving advantages to teams. It is nice to have a good drivetrain, but you should not give advantages to certain teams. If you want a good drivetrain for most of the fields FIRST designs, design an omni-drive system.

Ok Another change I would like to see is the alliance colors ( yes something petty I know ). For many many years ( subtract the early years when FIRST started out) the alliance colors have revolved around Red and Blue. To my knowledge there was only 1 year where FIRST had used 4 - 5 different Alliance colors and that was 2001 Red, Yellow, Green, Blue and whatever color to identify the fifth team during the finals (the unselected team during a match)

I have had similar thoughts, and I agree it would be nice to see some other colors used. However, if you look at the FIRST logo, it is red, white, and blue also. It would be neat to see a tribute to our international friends by making it yellow, green, and blue one year, but I doubt we will see that from FIRST any year soon.

There are all sorts of great ideas that could make the field much more interesting, but it all costs a lot of money and FIRST is trying to keep this competition somewhat affordable, otherwise a lot of teams will start dropping out due to lack of funds.

[Greg Young]

We've heard over and over that IR tracking is going to be essential in the future. I think Dave's been reading too much Harry Potter. Think Golden Snitch.

One game piece is a small autonomous robot with an IR beacon on top that moves around the field. The direction of motion is under control of a random number generator with ultrasonic range sensors for object avoidance so it can run away from robots that are trying to capture it. Its maximum speed is 3 to 5 feet per second.

Catching the snitch during autonomous is worth 100 points, catching it during driver mode is worth 50 points, and breaking it gets you no capture points and a 50 point penalty. You can extend autonomous mode to keep trying for the 100 points if you choose. Placing the snitch in a basket 8 feet off the floor gets you an extra 50 points, but if you drop it the chase starts over.

It's not a complete game. Other scoring methods would be needed along with a role for the human player.

It would explain the fascination with IR tracking.

[Adam Y.]

Why do I think this? IR is the only way (in FIRST at least) to track a moving target. Yuo can't track a line, wall, or use dead reckoning to find something constanly changing position.
Actually, there are other ways of tracking a moving target but I am not telling.:) Its a secret. Well its not a secret persay but just something I found on the internet.

[dlavery]

I'm sure sometime soon Dave will post his official "so how about you design the 2005 game" thread.

It's coming soon.

We will be asking for your ideas and creativity in developing the 2005 game. But first, everyone just needs to take a break for a little while - decompress and relax for a few days. It is OK to take at least one 24-hour period and not think about FIRST at all!!! :) We will be back shortly with a few of the design heuristics and constraints that will factor into the 2005 game, and let you go all-out to come up with the best, most creative, most exciting concepts you can for next year.

In other words, watch this space for more info!

-dave

[RogerR]

...It is OK to take at least one 24-hour period and not think about FIRST at all!!! ...you make it sound as if it isn't an effort to go through a 2-hour class without thinking about multi-motor drive trains and CVTs....

[FizMan]

Indeed... I have a nice tan from my computer monitor displaying chiefdelphi.com and websites ;)

I like the idea of trying to catch the "snitch" thing. But I think it'd have to be something more simple and robust... I think it might not be exactly financially feasible to have this little bugger getting crushed every other match ;)

Maybe instead having an IR beacon or something on/in a ball? Dump two dozen balls and the bots have to fish out the "special" balls that are indistinguishable from the normal balls. That'd probably promote some sort of feedback from the robot to the field crew or autonomous programs running during the match to detect, point out, and acquire the "special" object(s).

It might be interesting to involve that kind of "cooperation" between the robot and the players; the robot would be the driver's "eyes" in this case.

[DangerDanger!]

Imagine a Tractor Pull start followed release of the electromagnet coupler.

I believe it would also be fun to have a Musical Chairs ending where there are 3 platforms of different difficulties. Each platform would have corresponding higher points for the more difficult or smaller platform.

I very much like scoring games. :) I also like to compare capabilities and performance of robots. As a source of ideas, I use existing non-robot games and imagine them played by robots.

[sanddrag]

I think they'll keep the overhead dump but fill it with something new.

[Pin Man]

I would like to see a game with this many options and more next year... It boring seeing the same outcome match after match... But look at this years game you could win by scoring balls and capping, hanging, and things like that... Options are what make the game... Maybe we'll see a game with balls, bins, and tubes all on the same field... Who knows... That would be neat because then the robots would look nothing a like... I think that would be awesome to have a lot more options... I don't know... Thats just my two cents...

[SuperJake]

Call me crazy, but I liked the time multipliers from 2001.

Seconds Remaining Multiplier
0 - 29 1.0x
30 - 59 1.5x
60 - 89 2.0x
90 - 120 2.5x

It really added a great twist for strategies. It was a little difficult to explain to people that weren't well versed in the scoring rules, but it was great for those strategical thinkers I know a bunch of teams have.

[dlavery]

Call me crazy, but I liked the time multipliers from 2001.


OK - you're crazy.

But this does help prove that, no matter how nuts it may be, there is always someone that will like just about any idea! :)

-dave

[Andy Grady]

Call me crazy, but I liked the time multipliers from 2001.

Seconds Remaining Multiplier
0 - 29 1.0x
30 - 59 1.5x
60 - 89 2.0x
90 - 120 2.5x

It really added a great twist for strategies. It was a little difficult to explain to people that weren't well versed in the scoring rules, but it was great for those strategical thinkers I know a bunch of teams have.

Makes ya think though doesn't it? What would happen if there was a time multiplier in a 2 on 2 game? Speak of evil....ipes...Dave is listening...shut up Andy...don't give him any ideas!!! ;)

[Manoel]

I think they'll keep the overhead dump but fill it with something new.

Water!!
:p

[tkwetzel]

Makes ya think though doesn't it? What would happen if there was a time multiplier in a 2 on 2 game? Speak of evil....ipes...Dave is listening...shut up Andy...don't give him any ideas!!!

Oh man....that would be so awesome. I would love to see that.

[Pin Man]

OK - you're crazy.

But this does help prove that, no matter how nuts it may be, there is always someone that will like just about any idea! :)

-dave
Well... I like the idea of hover crafts... :D THAT WOULD BE SICK!!! It's possible... I don't know maybe set up walls around the playing field inorder to protect people...

[Max Lobovsky]

I am kind of surprised at how people focus so much on "scoring elements" that everyone assumes must be some sort of small, movable object that there are several dozen of on the field, which the robots manipulate for score. I think things like hanging on the bar or last years ramp are more interesting methods of scoring than just moving around bunches of balls, floppies, or whatever else you like. If there is stuff to manipulate, it would be interesting if there were fewer so robots wouldnt spend time "farming", especially when the match is so short. I like the idea of something like the capture the flag where there would be few elements and which would require alliances to work together to a much greater degree.

[RiceRobotica]

So anybody come up with any ideas for next years game or am i just getting a little ahead of myself?

Well, well, well, Chris... Aren't we just the excitable one? ;)

[Ryan F.]

I am kind of surprised at how people focus so much on "scoring elements" that everyone assumes must be some sort of small, movable object that there are several dozen of on the field, which the robots manipulate for score. I think things like hanging on the bar or last years ramp are more interesting methods of scoring than just moving around bunches of balls, floppies, or whatever else you like. If there is stuff to manipulate, it would be interesting if there were fewer so robots wouldnt spend time "farming", especially when the match is so short. I like the idea of something like the capture the flag where there would be few elements and which would require alliances to work together to a much greater degree.

I really like that idea too. Though the thing I fear is how much it would turn into a battle bots type match. It would be robot vs. robot the whole time.

[Specialagentjim]

I really like that idea too. Though the thing I fear is how much it would turn into a battle bots type match. It would be robot vs. robot the whole time.


I think to remedy that you take a cue from FLL. Rather than do a LOT of Robot vs. Robot, do more Robot Vs. Field. Throw some more obstacles out there.
Maybe the robot has to trigger a lever to let down a bridge (NO, I am NOT serious, this would cost insane money and I'm using it in an exaggerated sense to demonstrate a point).

...Although I've always seen FLL as the graduation from Robot vs. field to Robot Vs. Robot, and I LOVE robot vs. robot.

[Max Lobovsky]

I really like that idea too. Though the thing I fear is how much it would turn into a battle bots type match. It would be robot vs. robot the whole time.
I do think that this is probably the major concern with having less "robot vs field" and more "robot vs robot" as specialagentjim calls, but this is where the real challenge in designing the game comes from. Robot vs Field just seems to defeat the purpose of getting dozens of teams and thousands of people together when the robot could be doing everything its doing with only 1 other or no other robots. I think a larger degree of interaction between robots than this year had is important.

[Billfred]

I've seen some examples of robot vs. field, and I'm personally not a fan. And if I can't get into it, I have little hope for spectators. But maybe that's me.

I could seriously see a CTF game in FIRST. Or, if we were gonna get really sweet, perhaps laser tag. I mean, we've already had to deal with infrared sensors once before, now let's have the robots go to town with 'em!

Thing is, how would you reset after a capture? Have a ref release another flag once an alliance scores, or just have a lot of flags? One requires a lot of neutral human (ref) intervention mid-match, the other puts us right back where we were to begin with. Ah well...FIRST has a way of working that out.

[Max Lobovsky]

I've seen some examples of robot vs. field, and I'm personally not a fan. And if I can't get into it, I have little hope for spectators. But maybe that's me.

I could seriously see a CTF game in FIRST. Or, if we were gonna get really sweet, perhaps laser tag. I mean, we've already had to deal with infrared sensors once before, now let's have the robots go to town with 'em!

Thing is, how would you reset after a capture? Have a ref release another flag once an alliance scores, or just have a lot of flags? One requires a lot of neutral human (ref) intervention mid-match, the other puts us right back where we were to begin with. Ah well...FIRST has a way of working that out.
Well i wasn't thinking about exactly a CTF game, just the idea of all teams focusing on one or a few objects. To make the game as complex as this year, their would need to be more to it, like a human player's involvement and the oppurtunity to put lots and lots of things on your chasis other than a drivetrain so it can't be just grabbing an object and driving with it. The field could have many manipulable/movable items that could affect gameplay. just a simple way to deal with the problem you mentioned, scoring could be based on the time a flag is in the scoring zone, not just entering the scoring zone, that way the opposing team could recapture it. Obviously, a significantly larger amoutn of thought needs to go into this than we can give here just typing away at our PCs.

[Pin Man]

I am kind of surprised at how people focus so much on "scoring elements" that everyone assumes must be some sort of small, movable object that there are several dozen of on the field, which the robots manipulate for score. I think things like hanging on the bar or last years ramp are more interesting methods of scoring than just moving around bunches of balls, floppies, or whatever else you like. If there is stuff to manipulate, it would be interesting if there were fewer so robots wouldnt spend time "farming", especially when the match is so short. I like the idea of something like the capture the flag where there would be few elements and which would require alliances to work together to a much greater degree.
I didn't like the ramp... You see too many robots tipping because of their center of gravity or robots having "plows"... I hate it when robots tip because matches just get boring... You need a lot of excitement and the more options and different ways to score then the more excitement there is...

i don't konw... just my opinion...

[Ryan F.]

With the capture the flag kind of idea, you could have some sort of object that the robot had to manipulate as the "flag."

Ex..some sort of ball..bin...floppy....or some other unknown object. It would allow for both talented veteran teams and rookie teams to compete...because a robot could get in the way no matter how simple it is.

[greencactus3]

a double decker field with ladders will be interesting. ramps, stairs... thats already been done. a rope ladder would be even more interesting.

or maybe a game that uses deflated balls and you get points by blowing them up

[Pin Man]

a double decker field with ladders will be interesting. ramps, stairs... thats already been done. a rope ladder would be even more interesting.

or maybe a game that uses deflated balls and you get points by blowing them up
I have always thought about a double decker field... I would absolutely love to see HOVERCRAFTS!!! That would be crazy but I think that that would never happen... Well, not in this decade...

[mtaman02]

A water Competition would be good but.... not to put all the teams down but some teams have a hard time building a robust robot. To build one thats 100% waterproof will be trying and hard espicially with the currently set 130lbs. w/ battery.

Another issue that may arise is this robots would be small ones. for the simple fact that you cannot lift a 130lb robot out of the water w/o a crane. The playing field would not be very big either.

I too would like to see a water competition but it would be too hard of game. Many things would have to be changed and the problem would be how interesting could it get.

If anything I would like to see Multipliers and many scoring options available with the "Winner Gets the Loser Score for QP's" And the 0 - 1 - 2 Method for Ranking.

Same Field, maybe with hanging objects in which robots have to retrieve and place in their Respective alliance zones. Maybe put the E-Stop Buttons to use again and end the match at your own free willing. Almost like in 2001 where where if you ended the match after a certain time you get an X amount of points. This type of game wouldn't be very spectator friendly but nevertheless has some ideas that could be usable.


Ahh the copy and paste is such a godly tool - thanks to jessica she had posted in a newly started thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=257145#post257145)that was created by anonymous (too lazy to look) the link to this one.

Thank You Jessica

[Pin Man]

A water Competition would be good but.... not to put all the teams down but some teams have a hard time building a robust robot. To build one thats 100% waterproof will be trying and hard espicially with the currently set 130lbs. w/ battery.

Another issue that may arise is this robots would be small ones. for the simple fact that you cannot lift a 130lb robot out of the water w/o a crane. The playing field would not be very big either.

I too would like to see a water competition but it would be too hard of game. Many things would have to be changed and the problem would be how interesting could it get.

If anything I would like to see Multipliers and many scoring options available with the "Winner Gets the Loser Score for QP's" And the 0 - 1 - 2 Method for Ranking.

Same Field, maybe with hanging objects in which robots have to retrieve and place in their Respective alliance zones. Maybe put the E-Stop Buttons to use again and end the match at your own free willing. Almost like in 2001 where where if you ended the match after a certain time you get an X amount of points. This type of game wouldn't be very spectator friendly but nevertheless has some ideas that could be usable.


Ahh the copy and paste is such a godly tool - thanks to jessica she had posted in a newly started thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=257145#post257145)that was created by anonymous (too lazy to look) the link to this one.

Thank You Jessica
High school students + electronics + water = hahhahahahah

That could be cool if it would work...

[Ryan Foley]

[QUOTE=Greg Young]We've heard over and over that IR tracking is going to be essential in the future. I think Dave's been reading too much Harry Potter. Think Golden Snitch.

One game piece is a small autonomous robot with an IR beacon on top that moves around the field. The direction of motion is under control of a random number generator with ultrasonic range sensors for object avoidance so it can run away from robots that are trying to capture it. Its maximum speed is 3 to 5 feet per second.
QUOTE]

so how about this.

there is a Roomba (that robot vacuum) on the field, with an IR beacon attached to it. catch the roomba.

The time multiplier concept would be great to have. A fun time for strategy. Once you clock out your are dead for the rest of the match, leaving your opposing alliance freedom of teh field. Interesting.

I think the game next year should focus more on precision. We've seen the drive train feature gaes, like 2002 and 2003, and basic manipulation of an object, so how about something harder. Place a tennis ball atop a 6ft pole. Turn a doorknob to trigger somthing.

[Ein]

I have information from an inside source that the field will most likely be the same general side next year. One interesting idea I heard was to have the robot assemble something from parts on the field then use that thing to do thing X (climb, stack, push, open, etc.). A larger vertical element to the field (i.e. things hanging from the ceiling) would also be nice.

[Billfred]

I have information from an inside source that the field will most likely be the same general side next year. One interesting idea I heard was to have the robot assemble something from parts on the field then use that thing to do thing X (climb, stack, push, open, etc.). A larger vertical element to the field (i.e. things hanging from the ceiling) would also be nice.
I could understand the field being about the same size...if nothing else, FIRST can re-use most of the walls. Just patch up the ball chute.

Assembly of something would be good, as long as the parts were easy to manipulate. Rubbermaid containers are one thing, baseball-sized parts are another.

Perhaps robots have to stack up a staircase to climb? (The only hitch would be making the staircase stable--can't have other robots knocking your stairs from under you, can we?)

[fred]

Maybe they are just dropping all these hints about IR sensors just to throw us off?

Anyway, I think a cool idea would be to have autonomous mode in the middle of a match instead. It would be even cooler if things just went to autonomous in the middle of the match and your robot had to move itself somewhere in autonomous and depending on where it moved itself, that is how many points they would get. The only problem I could see here would be for the referees. They could also have something when in that autonomous, you had to trip some kind of switch to get extra points.

Let's just remember that while there are plenty of great veteran programmers out there, there will also be newbies coming on who barely know C and will have trouble doing an autonomous, period.

[BoyWithCape195]

Well my first comment is how about a differnt starting posistion. Not RIGHT in front on the drivers but maybe up on a ramp? And if the same old boring starting possitions stay, maybe one side consists of a red and a blue, two opponents on the same side and visa versa for the other side.

Now that I got that out, how about a task that a robot can do, to give their team an advantage, for example: A button that if pressed (one time per match) the opposite team gets a blind sheild for 15 seconds. Maybe there could be mutiple tasks and your alliance can only pick one to use against the opponet, if they can reach it (maybe very hard to get?) I think that that would be a GREAT idea. It would involve alot of challange, a big race to do what ever the task is, and ALOT of strategy. (maybe have to do it in auto or else it doesnt do anything like this years.) Well those are my ideas...what do you think?

[Chris P]

A few of the main things that I think will be kept for all FIRST games are the elements of safety, mobility and "cheapness".

Safety: Making sure everybody is safe (or else they might have some legal issues). I think the reason they choose larger objects is because it is harder for them to fly off the field and hit somebody. If you have people throwing frisbees and tennis balls, it gets a little harder.

Mobility: Not sure if this is the right word I want, but it will have to do. FIRST is growing to like 29 regionals or something similar, and they need to make sure they can take all of the materials needed for the game easily. You can't guarantee heights of ceilings and whatnot, and constructing one isn't very feasible.

Cheapness: Keeping things cheap. I remember talking to one of the Regional Directors last year (after 2003 game) and they were really upset at that game (for many reasons obviously) partly because the bins would break constantly. Not very many bins lasted more then a few matches. This year was slightly different, but the 2x ball bursting was another cost hitter. I believe FIRST will go for something that will not take a hit on the budget.

But then again who knows...

Chris

[ric2006]

So anybody come up with any ideas for next years game or am i just getting a little ahead of myself?

I want to see some limited visibiility in the next game. I am kind of a fanatic about FIRST, and I love how this year there was no "best bot" this year, like wild stang last year. I

Back to the limited visibility,

This would be crazy, and it involves an elevated human station

1 1/3 of the field is visible to all
2. the remaioning 2/3 of the field is variable, (starts split 1/3 red 1/3 blue)

3. Human players, with the aid of robots, get frisbees and throw them at frisbee golf hoops. If a player's frisbee hits the chain, then some of the variable feild swithes to the other teams.


I know that this would be a nightmare game, but it would be a very interesting and crowd-pleasing game, i would like to see something like it.

[Bcahn836]

I would like to see more contact with other robots. Like last years king of the hill. So when we go back to the pits we haved something to fix. This year we had hardly nothing to fix. No motors no electronics, just some angle aluminum and that was it.

[ric2006]

if you want to fix stuff, build a robot with poor structure (serves you right to have a strong robot. We didn't have to worry about not having things to fix.

[Specialagentjim]

I would like to see more contact with other robots. Like last years king of the hill. So when we go back to the pits we haved something to fix. This year we had hardly nothing to fix. No motors no electronics, just some angle aluminum and that was it.

If that ever happens to you, go ask other teams if they need help. Our team never stopped working in the pits, and team 100 out of some boredom just started helping us. It was pretty cool.

[Bcahn836]

If anybody needs help we will be there to help. as far as a sturdy robot we always go with a 1/4'' or so drive plate. And make sure everything is well protected.

[Yan Wang]

Seeing as how Dave Lavery has the connections with NASA, I'd like to see a competition next year where robots compete in a simulated zero-G environment aboard the vomit comet.

If that's not possible, I'd go with more small balls and goals. There's just so many ways that you can make it work.

[Ryan Foley]

Just patch up the ball chute.

funny you should say that. Look at the driver station walls of the fields for this year (from the driver's point of view). You can see the ball chute from the 2001 game, it's patched over with a piece of diamond plate of course. I noticed it in one of my matches at BAE.

[Billfred]

funny you should say that. Look at the driver station walls of the fields for this year (from the driver's point of view). You can see the ball chute from the 2001 game, it's patched over with a piece of diamond plate of course. I noticed it in one of my matches at BAE.
So THAT'S what that was!!! I have been wondering all season why they had that chunk of diamond plate right where the robots were touching the wall. It didn't serve any purpose, I figured.

But props to FIRST for reusing that stuff.

Now I know what'll be THE game for next year...for some thirteen years we've had humans telling robots what to do on the field. Next year, I predict that we'll see robots telling humans what to do on the field. :D

[Max Lobovsky]

I would like to see more contact with other robots. Like last years king of the hill. So when we go back to the pits we haved something to fix. This year we had hardly nothing to fix. No motors no electronics, just some angle aluminum and that was it.
I can always find something wrong wiht a robot, even one that works flawlessly 100% of the time. See, a robot that works flawlessly 100% of the time is likely to be built many times stronger/more accurately/expensively or to sum up all those resources into one word over-engineered. In general, because the strength of something or its performance usually does not relate linearly to its reliability, a part that works 90% of the time could take significantly less resources than one that works 100% of the time. So all these resources could be used to make say another manipulator which also works at 90% reliability and which may very well create a robot that overall performs better than one with a singly manipulator at 100% reliability.

See thats why it is excellent that 1257 was frantically dashing around all the time between matches. We had completely intended those parts to break occasionally... :)

[hansTP2S]

i stated my problems with end auto in the other thread and i will say them again:
I am fully against autonomous at the end. Part of the game is the suspense at the very end, hoping that your team can hang/cap or that one of the other teams will lose their "grip" on the bar. That suspense is totally ruined if you know exactly what will happen during the last 15 seconds (scouterz represent!). It makes it so much better to have a last 15 seconds that is totally dependent on the situation. Additionally your autonomous could be totally ruined by field problems (a movable goal or robot in your way); i realize this could happen with autonomous in the beginning because of collisions in autonomous. Also (this may be a good or bad thing) since usually after the 1st or 2nd match you know what the robot's autonomous is, a team could totallly mess up another teams autonomous with the slightest effort.

my suggestion for the game is this:
if you think about this years game as a cake, in my opinion the 5 point balls and the 2x were the cake, and hanging was the icing (461's robot was a small/big ball). I think that as the "icing" next year we could have a pseudo-capture-the-flag in which there is one item that starts of on the top of a pole (maybe the aforementioned "floppies") and it is worth an extra X points, this object is symmetrical, one half of it is one alliance's color, the other half is the other color (basically if you were to lay a pillow flat, the top half would be red and the bottom half would be blue). To get those points at the end of the match you must fullfill two requirements: your robot must be on the opponent's half of the field (or maybe up on top of some stairs or something) and the item must be laying on your robot somewhere: laying is defined as (this definition is made to make as few loopholes as possible): touching only your robot(not other robots or the ground) and only touching your robot where your color is on the object.