Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

We did during a match in Orlando when we shattered our wheel (a lot went wrong that match) we didn't notice it till we went to remove it from the field

They are also more dangerous when manipulated by robot as Dean can testify to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnE0j69_gYk

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

116 had an arm like that as well, but it was only long enough to take out the nearest couple columns.

A lot of familiar faces in that video...

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

John, I was more pointing to the need to disassemble the field to pick up that much junk. However, we are still using the bins. How many games have that kind of lasting influence on teams?

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

I agree with you on that.

I usually consider the first "Modern" game to be Aim High, which was a year later in 2006.

It's not that big of a surprise to me that many like Stack Attack...but I find it interesting how many want to see the game be upgraded and replayed. I wouldn't want to go anywhere near that game system again...but I would be interested in trying to figure out a better way to play it. I'll make it a side project.

Also there are two r's in Upgrade in the thread title.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

One could debate the start of the modern era starting in 2005 with the introduction of the Kitbot as we (roughly) know it and 3v3 play, but no matter.

As for Stack Attack, I think it's because of three things:

1) We haven't had anything like stacking bins on the field in the cRIO era. You might (might!) be able to argue tetras in 2005...but that was eight years ago. It's a fresh challenge.

2) The robots are way different now than they were in 2003. Back then, you didn't have AndyMark (they were just then shaking off the Small Parts era), you had the obnoxious drill motor gearboxes, there were no bumpers, and you definitely didn't have anything like the modern kitbot. With some semblance of stack protection, you take that fresh challenge and make it a very fresh challenge.

3) FIRST hasn't really had that many games in recent years where there was more than one right answer (you could argue the 4334 and the mailbox dumpers this year, or 469 in 2010...but those were exceptions). With a hypothetical Fixed Stack Attack, you have a lot of answers--arm knock-down, big-sweeper knock-down, stacking specialist, king of the hill control. There are trade-offs to each approach, and that is what has me geeked about the idea.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

Why so few for 1999 (double trouble)? It's original form might have been not so interesting, but if you upgrade it (actually score the floppies, for example) and keep the aspect of fighting over the puck and you have a very good game.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

I say 2006 because of Bumpers, but it really doesn't matter when the Modern Era officially starts.

I agree with the first and third point. Other than Tube Scoring, there hasn't been much "Manual Object Scoring", and the events have been dominated with shooting or launching of balls. Stacking robots in 2007 was exciting, but it does seem like it's time for stacking and/or stack protection. What if the game was about protecting a series of stacks from invading robots, and rebuilding stacks that were broken down can earn back lost benefits? then you'd have Shield Bots and Defense Bots and Stack Bots and Multi Bots. The problem of Stack Attack has to be in the King of the Hill end game. I have a feeling it would be Co-Op Points related in a future game.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

2003 showed it's far easier to break down than to build up. There needs to be a protected stacking zone, but perhaps the open space allows for some risk-and-reward by making stacks worth more there. Human players get a zone to orient bins as desired and push them back into the field--a team that can reorient them with the robot has an advantage, but a team that can only stack one way isn't out of the game.

And since it's not a FIRST game these days without an element of coopertition, a special zone in front controlled by red and blue lights to take turns. Red (flip a coin) puts a bin in place, and the light goes to blue. Blue stacks a bin, the light goes to red. Repeat and award coopertition points (to be used as a first tiebreaker after wins, losses, and ties, FIRST...) based on the height of the finished stack.

PS: Having read the way eliminations worked, use the modern method.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

FYI that type of coopertiton was a new feature Rebound Rumble (not seen in previous games)... I personally suspect that type of coopertition will be like minibots were in 2011 and will not be seen in 2013.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

Why not keep the king of the hill endgame mechanic? Each robot on the top is worth x points, but one of each must be up there to get coop points.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

Building off of the "modern era" debates, here's an incomplete timeline of significant changes from year to year. This is purely off of memory, so I apologize for mistakes or missed events. Feel free to edit/add whatever events.


1999 - Alliances (2v2) introduced
2000 - Optional bumpers
2001 - 4v0 alliances
2002 - Return to 2v2 alliances
2003 - Introduction of autonomous
2004 - "Powerful" CPU with programming in C instead of BASIC
2005 - 3v3 alliances, fixed elimination alliance (no more rotating in a partner), no more drill motor in kit of parts, switch from 130lb (with battery) to 120lb (no battery) weight limit, introduction of kitbot, introduction of vision targets
2006 - Current bumper design introduced (still optional), wedges disallowed, introduction of serpentine alliance selection
2007 - Different height/weight classes (4ft/120lb, 5ft/110lb, 6ft/100lb)
2008 - Mandatory bumpers, return to 5ft/120lb
2009 - FiM district system, switch from IFI controller to cRIO
2012 - MAR district system

In my mind, it's pretty clear that 2005 was a watershed year for FIRST in many ways. There was a bigger shift from 2004 to 2005 than any recent switchover in games.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

[my additions in bold]

1999 - Alliances (2v2) introduced
2001 - 4v0 alliances
2002 - Return to 2v2 alliances
2003 - Introduction of autonomous
2004 - "powerful" CPU with programming in C instead of BASIC
2005 - 3v3 alliances, fixed elimination alliance (no more rotating in a partner), no more drill motor in kit of parts, switch from 130lb (with battery) to 120lb (no battery) weight limit, introduction of kitbot, introduction of vision targets
2006 - Optional bumpers, wedges disallowed, introduction of serpentine alliance selection
2007 - Different height/weight classes (4ft/120lb, 5ft/110lb, 6ft/100lb)
2008 - Mandatory bumpers, switch from IFI controller to cRIO, return to 5ft/120lb
2009 - FiM district system
2012 - MAR district system

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

I've said it every year before and I'll say it some more. One year we need to have cones as our game piece. They're heavy, flexbile, durable, stackable, and commonly attainable. I'd vote for a 2003 game repeat with some slight modifications and with any number of a variety of traffic cones, most of which are cheap. I mean, geez, someone built a dang concert pavilion out of cones! I'm sure we can adapt a game to use them.

FYI Sean, the cRIO was introduced at the 2008 championships and saw its first competition in 2009.

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

Your memory is pretty good. I'm pretty sure the first year for optional bumpers was 2000. Back then there was no mandatory construction method, so ChiefDelphi use a carbon fiber (I think) skirt to act as their bumpers under the rules that year: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/12941

Re: Modern Upgrrade
 

I think you can see it next to CD5, forgive my son for standing on the trophy.



Kids!

-Clinton-