Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102697)

sdcantrell56 15-02-2012 11:24

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by staplemonx (Post 1127219)
Really? I like the the kids with attitude to out maneuver the competition. i would hire a driven and innovative engineer in a hot second.

Totally agree JJ. That said, why would anyone even want to work at such a company. Maybe if more companies were focused on innovation and thinking outside the box this country wouldn't be so quickly moving towards being a second place finisher to so many other countries in innovation and invention.

MrForbes 15-02-2012 11:25

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
As usual, if you're designing your robot to take advantage of a single definition that's not even in the rules, and you have to ignore the common sense meaning of several aspects of the rules to do it, then you're setting your team up for a high risk of a big disappointment.

Most robots are designed to balance on top of the bridge.

179 designed a robot to balance under the bridge. They thought outside the box, but within the stated intent of the rules.

The trollbot does not balance on or under the bridge.

I guess that's a subtle difference? It's very obvious to me.

Taylor 15-02-2012 11:25

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by staplemonx (Post 1127220)
Bazinga

If only the maker of the animation were on the GDC ...

thefro526 15-02-2012 11:33

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by squirrel (Post 1127225)
As usual, if you're designing your robot to take advantage of a single definition that's not even in the rules, and you have to ignore the common sense meaning of several aspects of the rules to do it, then you're setting your team up for a high risk of a big disappointment.

The issue here is that the 'Troll Bot' Strategy was based on two questions posted to the Q&A in week 1 or 2. (don't remember dates of the top of my head)

Seeing that the same answer was given twice, one would think that it's a safe bet to bank that the answer will hold true - but this isn't the case, since the GDC has once again gone back on one of it's answers in the Q&A with a team update. Can we really even trust the GDC anymore?

In any case, we might just be beating a dead horse. The troll bot that I've seen should still be quite competitive even with a traditional balancing strategy.

Oh, and something to lighten the mood a bit. Stumbled across it in my internet travels: http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/364ww4/

wireties 15-02-2012 11:36

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber (Post 1127206)
If I build to the spec and don't get paid my lawyer gets involved. I don't work without my specs and my pay written out.


You can kiss that customer goodbye though - ;o)

wireties 15-02-2012 11:39

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by staplemonx (Post 1127219)
Really? I like the the kids with attitude to out maneuver the competition. i would hire a driven and innovative engineer in a hot second.

So would I if they mix that attitude with a little common sense, otherwise you end up with nothing to deliver.

wireties 15-02-2012 11:41

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sdcantrell56 (Post 1127223)
Totally agree JJ. That said, why would anyone even want to work at such a company. Maybe if more companies were focused on innovation and thinking outside the box this country wouldn't be so quickly moving towards being a second place finisher to so many other countries in innovation and invention.

I work a lot with engineers from other countries. The USA is the most innovative in the world - in fact innovation (and a mastery of logistics and productivity) is what American engineers are know for!

wireties 15-02-2012 11:49

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi (Post 1127208)
I think you are still basing your comments off the opinion that FRC is supposed to be a microcosm of the real world of engineering - I heartily disagree. I have a different opinion about what FRC allows students to learn before they may or may not have their creativity crushed by the corporate machine.

I'd rather learn about creativity and thinking outside the box in an environment that has little repercussions towards the safety or livelihood of another human (FRC) than come up with plain and safe solutions to problems or clients' needs in the real world where I have less opportunities to screw something up and possibly endanger a life (eg: Boeing engineer).

Not all of us think the same way you might about how to handle an FRC design because we think that this competition is probably one of the last times before entering the "real world" of engineering that we can take risks that won't really affect anyone but our own teams.

Hope you understand what I mean by that.

I do understand and I enjoy FIRST just as you do. I'm not an old stodgy manager. In my spare time I am trying to build an (industrial volume) ultrasonic desalination machine (talk about thinking way outside the box).

But I think you are missing (some of) the point of FIRST. They do not give us 6 months to try all kinds of cool ideas (which I would like). Why is the build season only 6 weeks? - to put the design teams under "quick turn" pressure like that seen in a "real-world" environment. They impose serious design constraints and rules/requirements - again like the real world. So (though I love to tinker and try wild new stuff also) I do not frustrate the students by advising such an approach given a 6-week window.

Clinton Bolinger 15-02-2012 11:55

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1127212)
We've decided to rebuild our robot to better reflect the GDC's intent. Since my team doesn't have any telepathic mentors -- at least, none that can read minds on the east coast -- our only insight into what they wanted us to build is the animation.

At this late stage, would anyone be willing to share what size boot your team is using to kick balls? Normally, we'd prototype this and try to find the very best boot for the job, but we have no time left and want to make sure we get it right this time.

Do members of the GDC prefer Doc Marten's or Red Wings?


Size Bullet Bill!

[2008 - EngiNERDs - Team 2337]


-Clinton-

lemiant 15-02-2012 12:00

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Hey guys I want to add two things to this discussion.

1. If you want to use common sense thinking instead of the rules 179 is clearly not "balanced" like most people expected at the start of build season. The only difference between their out of the box thinking and "troll-bot" out of the box thinking is that troll-bots would aggravate the game design (and lots of teams that didn't think of them) by having a really sweet ROI. Whereas swamp thing is different, but not particularly better, than other designs.

2. Here's one more thing to think about. If there were teams that built troll-bots, the GDC just bilked them out of $5000. This isn't just fun, they payed to be able to play the game they were given.

Akash Rastogi 15-02-2012 12:04

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wireties (Post 1127250)
I do not frustrate the students by advising such an approach given a 6-week window.

See what I think you missed here from my opinion is that I'm saying THIS IS the time to let kids take chances and make mistakes. Let these 6 weeks be challenging - if you fail or come short of expectations- so what? Its just robotics.

I guess we too can agree to disagree.

wireties 15-02-2012 12:11

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi (Post 1127263)
See what I think you missed here from my opinion is that I'm saying THIS IS the time to let kids take chances and make mistakes. Let these 6 weeks be challenging - if you fail or come short of expectations- so what? Its just robotics.

I guess we too can agree to disagree.

I see what you mean. There are multiple ways to run teams and multiple valid and instructive philosophies.

Good luck this year!

SM987 15-02-2012 14:17

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
We can argue, agree to disagree, split hairs, compare philosophies, but what's done is done (unless it is undone once again...). We don't have to be happy (or sad, depending on your design) about it, but all this enthusiasm and energy could be powerful. I want to know what the new "gamebreaker" is. Or, if I designed and built a trollbot what suggestions the community might have with only 6 days left?

My suggestions would be to try and decrease my footprint as much as I could, or perhaps devise a 179 inspired method of getting on the bridge, or have a ramp appendage. As many have said, many teams planning on building trollbots may lose little if any value to their alliance even with the changes.

Daniel_LaFleur 15-02-2012 15:21

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by squirrel (Post 1127225)
The trollbot does not balance on or under the bridge.

The robot does not need to be balanced. Its the bridge that needs to be balanced, and the score of said balanced bridge was according to the number of robots fully supported by said bridge.

I wonder ... now that the ball shield isn't part of the bridge ... can I somehow use that area to keep my opponents off of thier bridge?

artdutra04 15-02-2012 16:12

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 
This entire thread (minus the side discussions) boils down to one simple question:

Should we build robots based upon the intent of the GDC or should we build robots based only upon the rules written by the GDC?

While the latter is easy to determine/judge legality of a design if the rules are written clearly, the former is much more difficult. What is the actual intent of the GDC?

Unless you're on the GDC, it's nearly impossible to know for sure. We can take educated guesses, but different people will likely think the GDC had a different intent when reading the same rule (As evidenced this year with this team update). If the GDC decided to add another set of footnites to the manual, such as a green "Intent Box", I'd be concerned that all teams could follow the intent and come up with very similar robots and strategies.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 20:13.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi