Re: 2015 Game
 

I would like to see the game piece be a tube. Not an inflated inner tube, but a piece of hollow tubing. For example, a 6" diameter x 18" long piece of PVC pipe or some such thing. Length, diameter, weight, surface texture, material could be almost anything. Perhaps different tubes for different tasks and scores.

The objective should include pickup and placement. I don't really care what they have us do with them. It would be an interesting challenge to see how teams picked the game piece up and manipulated its orientation placement.

I have seen enough spheres and toroids for a while.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Did you mean:

Re: 2015 Game
 

Played on a low traction surface...with specific low traction wheels mandated under the game rules.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I've totally got this one.

*Ball Pit*

Harkening back to Maize Craze a bit. Imagine a standard field, filled up to 2 ft high with 6" plastic balls. Robots have to "swim" through the pit to push balls over a weir into a goal. Add some rules for goalies and incentives for team-ups (still thinking about that) and you've got a really neat new game for 2015.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I'd like to see heavy game pieces; objects that will change the dynamic of robot interactions.

Say game pieces are 16 lb bowling balls, object is to place the balls on a teeter-totter. Some scoring formula for number of balls per side and all of that, and let the robots balance on the teeter-totter for points as well.
Game pieces can be de-scored, and bonuses for having the teeter-totter balanced at intervals in the game.

Don't limit the number of bowling balls that can be possessed, which will force teams to make difficult design choices.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Considering that this is starting to sound like Lunacy control-wise, and considering the fact that a lot of people disliked Lunacy, I highly doubt that it will be played on a low traction surface, therefore making hockey a very unlikely game. Without a low traction surface it also wouldn't be as interesting.

This would actually be a quite interesting game that I would be really excited to make a robot for. I myself was also thinking that it may be a stacking/balancing game which would be interesting because it would focus more on exact precision which many games have not focused on up to this point. It would also be interesting because you would not score by a goal, but instead by how something is stacked/balanced, or how many objects are stacked/balanced.

This is a creative idea, and would most certainly be one of the most unique FRC games ever. However, I see a variety of problems that would make this game difficult, and a variety of variables that would unfairly change the game as each competition progressed.
-Ball damage - We're talking plastic balls here, they will break easily when force is applied by robots
- Sinking robots - If the balls don't break and are stiff, the robots will most likely sink deep, deep down right into the darkness of the pit
- Driver visibility - Once this happens the driver won't see the robot... then what?

I completely understand that it is only 2 ft of balls, but that can be a major issue. Teams would need to build high enough robots that can be seen, but what happens if they need to be rather tall? Taller robots are more prone to falling, and with the added challenge of a surface of a bunch of plastic balls, I predict that a lot of robots would be falling over.

It's a unique idea, but I think it may just be a bit too much for a good and understandable game.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Continuing the trend of the past ten years or so, the game piece will not be a ball.

This year's field didn't have any major obstructions at all. I expect that to change.

I would really like to see a game where movement is crucially important, a la 2008. The "race" format of that game was a lot of fun and refreshingly different from anything else they've done.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I wish :rolleyes:. But has anyone else noticed that the first three posts almost mirrored the discussion we were having about the 2014 game? Getting redundant if you ask me.

Regardless, last year's game involved many of the same elements of overdrive (large balls and launching them over a truss at least). Personally, I think we could assume then that the game is going to be involving similar elements of a previous game.

So in considering what the 2015 game will be, podracing, poker, blimps, driving with bopits, robot water polo, and anything else FIRST has yet to consider could be ruled out of the picture...could be ;)

Re: 2015 Game
 

I can't imagine testing locomotion methods for this. If a game like this were the case, I'm guessing we'd see a lot of teams that wouldn't be able to move effectively.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Exactly. If it was a shooting based game as well I could see teams all going for a stationary shooter which would most likely be more effective then driving all around extremely slow. Or just moving. Defense would also most likely not be an aspect of such a slow moving game as well. It would eliminate some of the key components of games that previous years have had.

By stationary shooter I mean something like that of what was used in Breakaway (2010) by a few teams, in which they would lock themselves into the tunnel and redirect balls via two chutes. However, this would only be possible if the game permitted that.

Re: 2015 Game
 

How about a game similar to quidditch? 3 robots on each side working together to get each game piece in the goals located on each side of the wall. The goals would be in the form of the FIRST logo and alliances would work together to earn assist points.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Here's my two cents:

Stacking game, but with the aerial assist methodology of extra points for assists. Either boxes or tetras; likely boxes as tetras were used most recently, and we've already had "ring-on-peg" games. Plus shipping container cranes give me an engineering boner.

Endgame? steal the other team's boxes in the last 30 seconds. each stolen box is worth extra points.

Optional twist- boxes cannot touch the ground during transit/extra points for not touching ground

Re: 2015 Game
 

Seeing as how 2015 is the release of Star Wars VII. I would like to see a game where the robots have to reflect lasers at targets to get points. (think lightsaber training drones similar to what Luke used on the Millennium Falcon)
This would give the defense opportunity to reflect lasers from the opponent into their own goals as well with some properly angled redirection.

Played in the dark of course! :D

Re: 2015 Game
 

and then straight into someones eyes

Re: 2015 Game
 

I could see a static beacon with multi-colored LEDs that flash in a spread-spectrum sort of way (for security) and robots have to manipulate something large in the middle of the field with a mirror on top that redirects the light from the beacon to a goal. You get points based on how long the light is redirected toward the goal.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I like this idea a lot.

You could have it such that stacks of game pieces receive significant bonus points if the pieces in the stack were placed there by different robots. Stacking lends itself naturally to providing an easier "intro-level" job for less-capable teams that, regardless, is crucial for success - namely, placing the first object in the stack.

To be really tricky, you could have an end-game which involves removing a piece from the middle/bottom of the stack while keeping the rest of the stack intact.

I'd also like to see the trend of small numbers of game pieces continue - it makes it much easier to keep track of what's going on and makes defense way more important.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Maybe you all will feel this is counter to FIRST's ideals but an idea that's been floating around my head is this: uneven alliances. Instead of the usual 3v3 go 2v3 or 2v4. This would force teams to have different strategies based on whether they have the advantage. Just a thought

Re: 2015 Game
 

Here's my idea for a cool FRC game

Name: ???

Game pieces per an alliance: 2x 8" balls, 6x 4" frisbees

Game Field: Flat, with 2008-like overpasses on the left and right sides of the field.

Objective: Teams must score the balls into their goals, with 1 6' x 1' high goal, and a 12' x 1' medium goal on their sides of the field. Frisbees may be used to add points.

Autonomous: Each alliance begins with 4x frisbees and 1x ball on either the left or right corner of their side of the field. They must begin beyond the half marker of their side of the field. Each frisbee shot into the middle goal gives an alliance 5 points. Each frisbee shot into the high goal gives an alliance 8 points. The ball may ONLY be scored into the high goal. If the ball is scored, it gives the alliance 25 points. If the ball is missed, the ball MUST be scored before other balls are added to the field, and will be worth 0 points.

Teleop: Each alliance may have either 1 or both of their balls on their field. Each Ball scored into the high goal gives an alliance 8 points, and each one scored in medium goal will give an alliance 5 points. Balls can be scored from anywhere on the field. An alliance may have up to 6 frisbees on the field at once. Frisbees may ONLY be scored from the middle zone-ahead, and may ONLY be shot into the medium goal. Frisbees act as point adders, and do not count until a ball is scored by the alliance which shot the frisbee. 1x frisbee = +2 points, 2x = +5, 3x = +8, 4x = +12, 5x= +15 6x =+ 25.

Each ROBOT may only posses up to 4 frisbees during teleop. A ROBOT may hold up to 2 balls during teleop. A ROBOT may NOT posses both frisbees AND >1 ball.

ALL Frisbees an alliance chooses to have on their side of the field must be scored for the bonus to count. If a ball is scored before all the firsbees are scored, the amount of frisbees on the field must then be scored for any additional bonuses. (EX. if 3 frisbees were on the field, 2 were scored, and a ball was scored, the additional frisbee will be considered the ONLY frisbee at that point in time, and if it is scored BEFORE the next ball is scored, a +2 point bonus will be added to the alliance's point count)

If an alliance chooses to have 2 balls on their side of the field at any point in time, they will recieve a +1 to frisbee bonuses past 5 frisbees.

End Game: Teams may climb the overpass on their side of the field *left or right* for 15 points. *Overpasses will be 6' tall* They may also place frisbees on top of their overpass during the last 20 seconds of the match for their last frisbee bonus to be x2. A team that places frisbees on top of the overpass MUST also climb the overpass for the bonus to be counted.

Opinions?

Re: 2015 Game
 

Well, this is most certainly a very well thought out idea, nice job. It would be a very challenging game for sure, considering the large variety of features to do different operations for different game pieces. Or maybe one feature to do all of them? Although I doubt this will be the 2015 game, I think it would be an interesting idea. One problem is that it would be very chaotic, and therefore the referees would have a difficult time, trying to keep track of everything occurring.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Thankfully goal keeping for balls could be done with sensors instead of humans, and the amount of frisbees on the field could also be measures by a sensor *checking how many frisbees were initially placed on the field*. I'll look into amending some of this to make it easier to referee. :)

Re: 2015 Game
 

Yes, that would work. Loading station would also be a bit difficult however. Big enough for a ball, but a frisbee shouldn't be able to fit through or that would be dangerous, and then a separate slot for frisbees. And then of course there would be the netting used in Ultimate Ascent. However, overall, combining game pieces would be new and unique.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Bold is new.

What these additions mean.

1. Ball can now be scored in only the low or the high goals, meaning a pressure sensor can now be used to detect ball scoring.

2. A pressure sensor is used on the overpass, removing human reffing errors from the end game.

3. The medium goal is now used only for frisbees, meaning this is now automatically scored.

4. There is now a low goal for beginner or weaker teams to work with.

Opinions

Re: 2015 Game
 

Death Race 2000.

Just sayin.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I was looking at the trends of game pieces, and because of the trends I've come to believe that the game piece will be not spherical.

Trends:
2014- Aerial Assist- Perfect sphere
2013- Ultimate Ascent- Disks, irregular
2012- Rebound Rumble- Perfect sphere
2011- Logomotion- Irregular, inner tubes
2010- Breakaway-Perfect sphere
2009- Lunacy- Imperfect spheres
2008- Overdrive- Perfect sphere
2007- Rack n' Roll- Inner tubes, irregular
2006- Aim high- Perfect sphere
2005- Triple play- Irregular, triangular
2004- First Frenzy - Perfect Spheres
2003-Stack Attack- Squares, irregular
2002- Zone Zeal- Perfect Spheres

And after that, poof goes the trend, with Diabolical Dynamics being perfect spherical objects again of a variety of sizes. With such a long and consistent trend, it's fair to say that this year is presumably going to be an irregular shaped object, and that's why I strongly believe that it will be football. FIRSTly, it's an all american sport. It has to be done eventually, and people will love it. Second, intaking would be difficult. I would imagine that there would be lots of problems with clogged intakes. Also, shooting perfectly with the right spin would be important yet difficult.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I think FIRST wouldn't put assists in FRC games two years in a row... Good idea though.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Very true, although I can see them still enforcing something to promote teamwork in the game.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Teamwork is good.
Although footballs. That would be a metaphorical hell for many teams. FIRST wouldn't disadvantage rookies like that... I think. If they did that, there would have to be an endgame to even it out.
Hockey pucks would be interesting.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Picking up footballs and dumping them into a low goal (as opposed to throwing them) would be a very rookie-level activity.

Re: 2015 Game
 

traffic cones
difficult to pick up, but you can still push them around
extra points for stacking them

Re: 2015 Game
 

Some rookie teams did do that in 2013. They would dump Frisbees into the low goal.

Re: 2015 Game
 

First 2015 game hint is released:




Just kidding of course

Re: 2015 Game
 

Red and yellow mixed together? Just like the pins from the Rick Astley game hint... Yellow alliance confirmed!

Re: 2015 Game
 

If they did three alliances the third would white to go with the FIRST logo.

Re: 2015 Game
 

How will us "reversible bumpers" teams manage a triple reversible bumper? I suppose it IS possible, though I feel sorry for the seamstress/seamster who has to do it

Re: 2015 Game
 

I doubt it. White bumpers would be insanely dirty, and would also be harder to notice compared to red and blue possibly, giving the white alliance a disadvantage.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I agree. I think a green alliance would be the most likely color for a third alliance, though my opinion still stands that we will see 4v4 before any NvNvN matches.

Re: 2015 Game
 

A green alliance would seem practical, it would also be the same darkness as blue and red roughly so no advantages/disadvantages with visibility. Yellow is quite bright, good for game pieces but maybe not for bumpers. Imagine a yellow high goal for aerial assist. With the lights too. Owch.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Does anyone think that there may be a possibility that coopertition points will return? I apologize that this off topic.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I hope not. I've seen nothing but negative feedback regarding them. I think assists were FAR more effective at an incentive for teamwork than giving your opponents points in edition to yourself.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I 100% agree with this. Assist points were much more effective and promoted FIRST's goal of teamwork much better.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Ok, i see why assists would be better teamwork wise.

Re: 2015 Game
 

To be fair, the co-op bridge predates me as a FIRSTer, and my feedback is based solely on opinions I've seen and heard. Either way, it does seem a bit like 2009, where teams would purposely lose by large amount during elimination matches to activate G14 and *hopefully* limit their opponents' super cell count. I've seen a few 2012 matches where teams refused to use the bridge, to prevent rival teams from ranking higher than them. Honestly, I view FRC as "Cooperation off the field, competition on the field".

That being said, I do like the idea of something like assists returning allowing lower end teams to be powerful alliance members. (I say lower end teams and NOT rookies due to very powerful rookies this year like 4911 and 5172)

Re: 2015 Game
 

My opinion was primarily derived from the bridges in 2012s game

Re: 2015 Game
 

Wanna bet on that last statement? (Or the first one, for that matter?)


Take my advice, don't bet. I only take bets I'm fairly sure can win. The White Alliance last played in 1998, in a 1v1v1 game. After too many 1v2 games that were supposed to be 1v1v1, FIRST decided to change it to 2v2, then 3v3 in 2005.

Although there was the 2001 game, where the green robot, the yellow robot, the red robot, and the blue robot all had to work together in a 4v0, where up to two of them could get some bonus points.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I think you misunderstood. My statement is totally in agreement with yours

Re: 2015 Game
 

This is going to be challenging. My team is new so we have no idea what to do. Any advice?

Re: 2015 Game
 

My point was that we'd actually already seen NvNvN (N=1), with a white "alliance". This occurred BEFORE any NvN (N>1) matches ever happened. Thus, NvNvN most definitely occurred--with a white alliance, not a green alliance--prior to 4v4.

That said, because of that experience, for anything going forwards, I'd agree on the number, but not the color. (White is, after all, the third color of the FIRST logo.)



For Dakota: Find a veteran team to mentor you (there are 4, and at least 3 are active on Chief Delphi). Also, just so you're aware: Nothing in this thread actually applies to the 2015 game. We don't know what it is yet. You've got until January to learn the ropes, so make the time count, and learn well.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Assist-structured gameplay also has way more strategic depth and makes for a much better spectator sport, to my eyes. It's much more rewarding to see three robots functioning as a team than three disjoint robots doing tasks in parallel.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Considering games are prepared 2 or 3 years in advance, I'd be surprised if we see Assists as a major part of this years game.

I hope it's not another shooting/launching game but it's definitely trending towards put Object A into Target B and get X amount of points plus Y amount of bonus points for any particular game functionality. Unless they have a simpler scoring structure for picking up/capping/stacking an object, I think we'll be seeing more objects in goals of some kind.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Don't be too concerned. All of this is just speculation. Here at Chief Delphi we are all crazy and none of these games (*cough cough* water game) will happen. Since you are are a first year team, try to find a mentor team in your area. You will survive (coming from a second year team) Good luck!

EDIT: Meant for Dakota/RoboLynx

Re: 2015 Game
 

I'd be pretty disappointed if FRC keeps going with shooting games. 1 more will mean that the class of '15 went their whole FRC career in shooting games. There's nothing particularly wrong with the challenge of distance scoring, but variety helps round out the experience.
I'd at least like to see a game where shooting is left as an option, instead of being a requirement (e.g. 2014 - no height extension, 2008 - height extension allowed, so you could choose to lift or shoot).

Re: 2015 Game
 

I think that if assists return, it won't be explicitly spelled out with the focus of the game based around them as was the case last year. I could definitely see a game with "virtual assists" though. 2010 and 2012 are both good examples of this concept. Rather than rules, they used barriers on the field to make it more efficient for robots to play a zone based strategy, and pass balls from one end of the field to the other.

I'd also like to see this concept reborn in the endgame. I strongly believe that 2007 had the best endgame FRC has ever seen, followed by 2012. Both required all three robots to work seamlessly together to score the most points, and in many cases, designs centered around "user friendliness" were common. 2010 had the potential to top either of these, but the lack of point incentive for suspension resulted in a great concept rarely actually taking place.

Re: 2015 Game
 

This was a game where shooting was left as an option. Our team built a robot without a high goal shooter, and worked purely for assists. As a result, we did better in MAR than we ever have, reaching MARCMP eliminations for the first time. On the whole, though, I'm behind your point. It would really be a pity for an entire class to go through the FRC shooting things at a distance.

Re: 2015 Game
 

My years (2005-2008) we built an arm-type robot 3 of the 4 years. Currently there are 0 team members on our team with experience competing with a "pick up and place" type game. That is why this summer we built a very simple "Arm-bot" with the intention of getting the students some experience with seeing/operating a robot of this size and type. Once they have that basic experience they can much easier think of and design improvements should we need to this coming year.

Re: 2015 Game
 

We've had some type of shooting game the last 3 years now, I doubt they'll do 4. We're due for an arm or some type of stacking or puzzle game

Re: 2015 Game
 

I feel that FIRST, realistically, is going to give us some other sports ball next. Maybe a football? Even better would be playing Hockey. In Water. While Podracing.

Re: 2015 Game
 

It's been hockey for the last three years now...

Re: 2015 Game
 

Since 2002, FIRST has followed the pattern of even years being balls and odd years being alternative objects. Although 2009 was a "ball shape" I still consider it a different object. I would say that more than likely, there will not be a football this year as that is technically a ball. It is a weird shape to work with but I just hate the idea of 4 shooting games in a row. I'm hoping for another stacking or lifting type game that has tasks taking low cycle times(ex: everyone lifting their own tubes continuously instead of "assisting" them to one another.) This would allow more teams to partake in the finishing aspect of games that can really only be one at a time if done in a assisting/zone type game.

Re: 2015 Game
 

"It's a ball, but it breaks the pattern so it's not really a ball" :rolleyes:

Re: 2015 Game
 

Confirmation bias and the "law of close enough"

Re: 2015 Game
 

Especially since most people would consider a Lunacy game piece to be closer to a ball than a football.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I know this probably wont happen anytime soon, but i think that an air game would be awesome

Re: 2015 Game
 

Hi, I Was Looking At The Posts On The Site And I Found A Clue About The 2015 Game



I Think We Are Finally Getting It This Year !

Edit: I Can't Find It Anymore :c

Re: 2015 Game
 

I have solved it:
Boats float on water
Boats have poor "traction" (if you will)
Lunacy had poor traction

Regolith is back!

Re: 2015 Game
 

Maybe its more of the waves in the water rather than the water. My assumption now will be a mowing goal game. This could be a wire you have to hang things from that sways or movable goals you have to stack things on.

Re: 2015 Game
 

We mustn't overlook that FIRST often tries to relate the competition to recent events. It appears that NASA will be in the news quite a bit with the Dawn spacecraft landing on Ceres, the New Pathfinder studying Pluto, and the launch of the LISA Pathfinder. There will also be a total and a partial solar eclipse on 2015. My money is on something space-themed, but far from Lunacy, I'm sure the GDC doesn't hate us too much...

Re: 2015 Game
 

What I find interesting about the blog post is that Frank says everything is on the table, year after year. I seem to recall that some very clever folks here last year connected a "hint" (legit or not, I dunno) to GPS coordinates, and a bridge with a weight limit road sign. Anybody else think a reduced weight limit, say 110lbs, might be specified, to go with the new(ish) 112" perimeter? It might force some difficult decisions on strategies, meaning fewer "do everything" robots. It might it also help level the playing field for rookies and struggling teams. What does C/D think?

Re: 2015 Game
 

It's a water game with twist...as in ice bucket challenge! Each alliance is allowed to carry, pass and pour water into goal tank. The goals are at different levels. And no, water pumps are not allowed!

Re: 2015 Game
 

I could see this happening eventually, but not until control systems become more integrated.

Re: 2015 Game
 

No. Just no. Please no.
:(

Re: 2015 Game
 

So in all seriousness, Andymark sells a field (am-2800) that "has the ‘fit and function’ necessary for use in the 2015 FRC". So we at LEAST know the size of the 2015 game!

http://www.andymark.com/Field-p/am-2800.htm

Re: 2015 Game
 

Has anyone tried buying one of these to check for watertightness?

Re: 2015 Game
 

$19,600 is a bit high just to check if a field is watertight... :p

In all seriousness, I think we're going to be looking at something similar, but not exactly like, to Aerial Assist's field.

Re: 2015 Game
 

It's not watertight, but it IS Jello-tight.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Yes. Please.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Dave has corrupted yet another...

Have we ever had a game with 2 very distinctive game pieces? By "very distinctive" I mean something like a ball and tubes, not necessarily like 2004's multiple ball sizes.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Just because the field might not be water tight, doesn't mean that you can't put a tank within the perimeter....

What I want to see is a submarine type game where the robots much adjust their density to float to the different goals. Unrealistic? Probably. Super Cool? Absolutely.

Re: 2015 Game
 

If the field size stays relatively the same, I think obstacles will be added. 2014 was wide open with an emphasis on mobility and teamwork, so 2 years in a row of open fields seems unlikely. I'm guessing it'll be a large field with obstacles + an unorthodox "ball."

.... a watergame where we navigate coral reefs ;)

Re: 2015 Game
 

But... 2013 was open as well! Of course, it wasn't AS open due to the pyramids, but it was also a field that emphasized mobility. Still, I do agree that we're probably not going to see a completely flat field again.

Re: 2015 Game
 

With all the complaints related to high speed 6 CIM drives and open courts facilitating hard impacts, I agree.

Re: 2015 Game
 

All the field needs is something like the bump from 2012. It split the field and seemed to make moving very fast harder to accomplish while also going over the bump.

Re: 2015 Game
 

I still say, that instead of the bump from 2012, the bumps from 2010. That would make the game ENTIRELY different

Re: 2015 Game
 

Yes it would. I wish January was now. I like new games. They keep me busy.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Stairs from 2004! It'd be interesting to see how teams adapt to multiple heights and widths of stair cases. Perhaps even have different patterns. (EX. Spiraling stair cases and straight ones.) Not only would you see teams try and climb stairs, but you'd also see teams just climb over them, and teams go across them. Honestly, I'd LOVE a mix of 2004, 2008, and 2013.

Re: 2015 Game
 

Stairs or ramps haven't been seen in a while, and would be a break from let's-drive-really-fast-for-everything. It would make for a good design challenge. Either something exciting like the 2013 pyramids, or something you have to do repeatedly to score particularly well.

And on a possibly off-topic note, there is a stair climbing robot in the upcoming Big Hero 6 movie (alongside a cat with rocket boots and a robot arm playing table tennis in the same scene around 0:17-0:19).