Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

Driver for 1023 here (1st seeded at Centerline). Im sharing a few of my observations about this years game after competitng.

-Defense. Defense can shange a single power robot from running a 160 point match by itself to barely putting up 50.
-Penalties. While I was not here for 2010 like many people are referring to, I am aware that the majority of eliminations at centerline were decided by foul points.
-Technicals. After committing a technical, you're pretty much done. 50 points is insanely hard to come back from especially with defense.
-Referees. The referees missed fouls and missed called plenty of fouls. I believe it is because of how much responsibility they are given. Scoring and penalties and watching multiple (maybe all 6) robots at once. Its insane.
-Playing "dirty". Heavy defense and overwhelmed refs are not a good combination for a team that is trying to play the game with assists. Or shooting for that matter. Fouls could slip through unnoticed and damage would occur. Like it did.
-What I think should change immediately. Scorekeepers. They need to be there. They need to free up refs so they can focus specifically on fouls and making the right call. Or a technical foul should be decreased. Especially since the majority of technicals were forced by the opponent and ended up changing match results.

This is all based on my opinion and I am in no way singing out the referees. I just think they are overworked and overwhelmed.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

Expect balls to be over inflated, because they all are.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

I heard from Wil Payne that the balls were inflated to a good size.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

We triple-tested our ball intake and shooter with over-inflated balls because we knew they would be. Everything inflatable in FIRST ends up over-inflated, and you have to plan for it.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

A sizing standard other then "Eh, that looks alright!" should have been in place anyway, because the balls at Hatboro are rolling around more like hexahedrons then a round ball. What happened to sizing cubes?

It should be planned for, but the specs in the manual are terrible.

Pedestals - Should be a dedicated pedestal lighting guy or something. Heck, there already is! Why can't the guy standing behind the goal catching balls also control the lighting of the pedestal? Refs are way overwhelmed. Countless times dead ball cards have been raised, and it gets ignored for 45 seconds of the match until the entire alliance is banging on the glass with their fists to catch a refs attention so they can legally put another ball in play.

Scorekeeping vs Reffing - Theres a HUGE difference between the two this year. Like I said, Refs are overwhelmed. Refs should Ref. We need scorekeepers. (What about that dandy guy catching the balls behind the alliance station?)

Field Staff - Generally untrained. Wastes time in a match when a ball flies out of bounds and they have to figure out who its supposed to go back to. Why can't we just return it near the point it left the field?

This game places way to much on the people running the event. Props to the head ref at Hatboro for pausing matches midway through and getting it right rather then screwing an alliance because of a volunteer mistake/ped not lighting.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

They're much more cubical than round, to be sure!

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

I said that relatively, it's a very minor issue. It's not something we encountered because we dont have a design dependent on it. However, we had a strategy depending on at least one other robot functioning in the match. Apparently I overestimated...

I can't remember or care what rank we wound up in Alamo, but I saw a lot going on in Alamo Week 1 from behind the glass. There were a lot of... interesting things happening, and this is coming from someone who was also behind the glass at a Week 1 event in NJ in 2010.

It's not worth a lot of time for me to reiterate thoughts from either the people at events or the peanut gallery watching online, but I'll add in Alamo-specific observations to some that may not be specific to the venue.

Game observations:
The adage "you're only as strong as your weakest partner": multiply the truth of that by a thousand this year. I came into the evnet trying to execute a solid strategy with teams, only to get burned by robots that did not function, drivers that didn't understand the game, and human players that DEFINITELY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE GAME. I had to pull my human player off of the "islands" because I couldn't trust other human players to know how to look for the ball. We lost two matches because of this. If you have to pull out the rulebook and walk through with people, do it.

I don't know if this is the way things operate in the Lone Star State or will be indicative of the rest of competition, but there is no visible top 25% at events. Only 5 robots could earnestly play the game alone by themselves and win, while mid-top robots were thrown into a bind where they have to carry harder than usual.

If you want a visual representation of what kind of defense we're seeing in Aerial Assist, look here. That is a welded piece of 2x1, .125 in thick tubing, behind bumpers, totally broken. It's astounding. The "heavy defense" or what it should actually be called "pinning without fouls" will be prevalent as long as the game official setup is the way it is.

On the topic of Game Management Systems, Friday at Alamo had a few inbounders have grief with Tech Fouls. What isn't being considered are how some referees, at least on Friday, were not moving tablets out of the inbounder zone. It's hard to get a good pass off that is legal and controllable with that in the way, unless I tell my human player to throw the ball into the tablet and wait for a glare from a referee.

EDIT: In addition, the time wasted waiting for thigs to light up can be... enraging... in a high stress situation. In a match with 118, we had to wait 3 seconds with them at the goal for the assit counts to light up properly, then another 5 to light the pedestal. Things like that are killing the flow of matches and taking control of the game out of the hands of teams and into an inefficient managment computer (not FMS, but GMS).

This game is playing mostly as expected: qualification play is decidedly painful to witness, but eliminations can be the best they have to offer. The only caveat is that for a game that relies on live scoring more than any other event I can think of, getting the live score to reflect reality is as much of a given as 4 working robots in a given qualification match.

This game has potential, but they need to make a few administrative changes and wait hope that we're seeign Week 1 jitters and not season-long issues.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

That looks more like a referee scoring station in a human player zone to me. :p

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

Teams are being dumb trying to show off how they score into the high goal by themselves. They should score over the truss and have a partner score it in the low goal for more than double the points (10 truss, 10 assist, 1 goal), and no need to try 7 times to make it into the high goal. Coaches especially are being stubborn on this on some... certain teams. Read the rules and know the scoring, especially before you try to tell other teams you haven't scouted what to do.

Yet again, non-roller intakes are terrible. Why any team tries to make them anymore baffles me. Stop trying to make pinchers happen, they're not going to happen!

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

Some roller intakes are terrible. Generally roller intake>non roller intake, but some teams I'm sure have made the pinch work (I'm interested to see how 4334 and 842 do).

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

I have to disagree with this. I have been watching many steams of robots that have intakes that do not use rollers. They work just fine. What I do recognize is that fact that it does take more time for them generally to pickup a ball than a good roller intake. They can be better than some roller intakes as well.

It disappoints me that you would say something like that when it really isn't true. I think that there are a lot of teams that would be able prove you wrong.

What kind of intake does team 148 have?

*Note*
MY team isusing a Non-Roller intake this year.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

I am too. From our practice, it looks like our pinchers are a lot more effective than most rollers. Of course, that could be the effect of a "perfect scenario" without pressure on the drivers and with 5 robots in the way of vision.

Seems like the majority of the problem is rollers not bringing the ball in properly. And defense.

So much defense.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

Sodizzle, you kept that very polite. I intend to expound on this.

Centerline was perhaps the single most frustrating FIRST event I've ever attended. The qualification matches went well. The FTA's were wonderful working through problems. The refs were working hard and while the game was difficult to play, it was fun.

At the elimination driver's meeting the drivers were told that intrusions inside the bumper area were going to be called.

What wasn't understood was that it meant that ANY intrusion at ANY time, even one initiated by the defending bot, was going to be a foul. For example: we were shooting. Not moving. Intake down. A defensive bot came up from behind at full speed and slammed into us. WE were assessed the 50 point foul.

In the next match, we went to pick up our ball that was stuck in the corner between the opposing goal and the driver station wall. Again, a defending bot saw a good opportunity and slammed into us from behind to stop us from picking up the ball. That pushed a portion of our pickup into the goal. Technical foul again, on us.

Shooting the ball to the human player, but get hit in the process and have him miss the catch? Technical foul.

Going to pick up a ball at the edge of the field, but get hit so your pickup extends outside the arena? Called a foul.

I use these only as examples out of quite literally dozens that occurred during the elimination rounds. I appreciate the hard work the referees and other volunteers put in. However, I think it's important these issues be brought to light in the hopes that FIRST provide some guidance for their volunteers to try to ease some of the issues we saw at the event.

There were SO many penalties that for quite a while they weren't announcing who was getting penalized for what. No one had any clue - spectators or competitors. The 'question' box for the ref was full (there was a line at several points). At one point, upon being questioned, they were unable to tell us what the fouls were for!

I almost feel like we aren't playing the game FIRST intended us to be playing - offensive bots terrified to lower their intakes for fear of penalties while defensive bots battered away scoring more points in a couple seconds in penalties than most alliances scored on offense.

I am unsure if there was a single elimination match that wasn't decided by penalties. Hopefully the insights gained at Centerline can be used to improve the games going forward.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

Teams who have broken roller intakes need to iterate more and smarter. Existing designs from the 3 day robots provide an excellent starting point for prototypes that is quite good and adaptable. If yours is bad, there is something seriously wrong (I do agree though that some are terrible). Messing up on your intake is the worst mistake you can make in this game.

Pinching claws simply are not safe in this game. They rely too much on the ball and robot being still, which never happens. They are also easier to break from what I've seen (being at bumper level puts them in harm's way). I would advise any pinchers to seriously consider a design change.

It is true. Those teams could have decent intake using a pincher, or a great intake with rollers. The ceiling is always higher on a roller intake.

Rollers.

Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

I was little bit skeptical at first, but we are seeing the same. With control systems in place, our grabbers are currently working just as fast as well-designed roller intakes, and have advantages in some situations. Not to mention that death grip on the ball...

We hope to disprove every one of these points.