Chief Delphi
Page 3 of 5 < 12 3 45 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Week 1 Analysis (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127313)

cadandcookies 02-03-2014 00:08
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Main observation:
The game is significantly different than anyone's predictions I heard before this week.

As almost everyone else mentioned, this is a ridiculously penalty heavy game, and I think that's hurting more than a little bit.

I sincerely hope we see a Tuesday rule update that addresses the concerns brought up in this thread.

Anupam Goli 02-03-2014 00:19
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Man, I could go to town on what happened at Palmetto

This has to be the worst scouting I've ever seen. EVER. You can't trust the FIRST rankings AT ALL this year. Teams like 4451 got absolutely awful schedules, but were the best assisting bot out on the field, and one of the most consistent low and high goal scorers. They weren't picked at all. I'll be honest, our robot was having a lot of issues, I don't think we (1648) deserved to be picked at all, but team 3571, coached by a certain world championship winning drive coach, and one of the best trussers and best intakes in the field, was also left out of eliminations. We saw teams in elims that had no business being there, there were teams that didn't understand game rules in elims here. Defense may win a lot of matches, but when teams as good as 4451, 3571, and 4452 get overlooked because the FIRST rankings show they were on weak alliances all day, there is a problem. I seriously hope 3571 gets polled in FRC Top 25, that's how good I felt their intake and shots were throughout the day.

I have had enough of week 1 ref issues now. Last year, we lost in quarterfinals because of a ref not calling a pyramid contact, but calling a human player stepping behind the line. I swallowed that one up as having scouting mistakes and having a weaker robot and lucky schedule. This time, I was absolutely livid after watching many matches end in high scores because of unnecessary tech foul calls. When my human player is in no immediate danger of hitting a robot, and barely extends over that yellow tape for a fraction of a second to in bound the ball, I don't think G40 should apply to that. We racked up 150 foul points in a match by ourselves because this ref was too focused on watching millimeter portrustions of hands over the yellow tape*. FIRST, PLEASE FIX THIS! THESE TECH FOULS ARE RIDICULOUS AND I ASSURE YOU AREN'T PREVENTING ANY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS.


I'm glad we don't compete again until week 5, I think it's going to take me a couple of weeks to calm down and refocus on how to improve.

*1024 and 5130, we apologize for incurring so many foul points and making a winnable match into a loss.

Woolly 02-03-2014 00:35
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Here's my opinion:

Penalties:
G40's penalty should be reduced if the alliance at fault gained no advantage by running afoul of it.
G12 may need to be reworked to become like the pinning rule, to where you can posses the opponents ball for five seconds if the ball was acquired without the use of an active mechanism on the robot, but you must get X distance away from their ball before you can attempt to posses it again. That way if the opposing human player drops their ball in your robot you don't get the "death penalty" for it. EDIT: Also, the robot may not distance itself from the ball by launching it via a mechanism on the robot.

Defense:
Defense is always part of the game, but I doubt this is quite what the GDC envisioned when they made a game all about the concept of assists. Pushing matches tend to be the least damaging type of effective defense played, and what they tend to break (transmissions, motors, wheels) are more readily replaceable than all the frame bends and tweaks that usually result from these high speed ramming maneuvers I've seen. Usually once the frame is bent, the robot is never quite right again.

tl;dr push and bump, don't ram.

Though, would be interesting to put shock watches on some of these robots, and see how hard some of these hits are.

Abhishek R 02-03-2014 00:45
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1351633)
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.
I completely agree with everything here. The coordination required to play this game is insanely high, and so many teams seem to not have gone through the rules. In addition, the field problems and other issues (not having a working hot goal for quite some time) only compound the frustration. However, I do think things will get straightened out soon.

PayneTrain 02-03-2014 00:48
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek R (Post 1351703)
I completely agree with everything here. The coordination required to play this game is insanely high, and so many teams seem to not have gone through the rules. In addition, the field problems and other issues (not having a working hot goal for quite some time) only compound the frustration. However, I do think things will get straightened out soon.
I know an issue I had to personally deal with were human players and drive teams not knowing the rules. Since we were running a skeleton crew I was running back and forth and didn't get to have super-long alliance meetings. Aside from finals, I never had time to watch a match you guys played in. Do you know how you handled human players who didn't know rules?

RyanShoff 02-03-2014 01:15
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woolly (Post 1351701)
Usually once the frame is bent, the robot is never quite right again.

push and bump, don't ram
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.

Abhishek R 02-03-2014 01:36
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1351704)
I know an issue I had to personally deal with were human players and drive teams not knowing the rules. Since we were running a skeleton crew I was running back and forth and didn't get to have super-long alliance meetings. Aside from finals, I never had time to watch a match you guys played in. Do you know how you handled human players who didn't know rules?
We took quite a bit of time to make sure our alliance's human players knew the rules, especially about the safety zone, and taught them how to load our robot and vice versa. We were fortunate to have pretty great alliance partners throughout the regional, however, when we did have a human player who had violated rules in the past according to scouting, we usually would try to get our human player to fill the role. The main thing though was reinforcing the safety zone rule over and over again before each match. We probably iterated it maybe 6 times before each match.

Laaba 80 02-03-2014 01:51
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anupam Goli (Post 1351697)
When my human player is in no immediate danger of hitting a robot, and barely extends over that yellow tape for a fraction of a second to in bound the ball, I don't think G40 should apply to that. We racked up 150 foul points in a match by ourselves because this ref was too focused on watching millimeter portrustions of hands over the yellow tape
Have you ever heard the phrase "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." The rules are very clear; you can't reach past the yellow line. I don't understand how you can blame the refs for receiving the same penalty three times in one match.

JosephC 02-03-2014 01:52
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laaba 80 (Post 1351714)
Have you ever heard the phrase "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." The rules are very clear; you can't reach past the yellow line. I don't understand how you can blame the refs for receiving the same penalty three times in one match.
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?

JTEarley 02-03-2014 02:01
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephC (Post 1351715)
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?
As a HP, I agree with this. I don't necessarily think that the rule should be changed, because it is written out very clearly, but I think that then this tech foul is called, the ref should make the HP aware of it. Although i was always aware and cautious, It was called on me once at the Alamo regional, and I had to ask my coach when it happened after the match was over

Laaba 80 02-03-2014 02:05
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephC (Post 1351715)
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?
I could see from the webcasts when a human player received a penalty. If a human player can't see the ref waving the flag 3 feet from them they need to become more aware. That said, it is unacceptable if a ref calls a penalty without waving the flag, or signaling in some way.

jeremylee 02-03-2014 02:17
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanShoff (Post 1351708)
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
Ouch, that sounds like a lot of work. Im hoping we didnt miss any damage beyond our air cylinders.

JeremyLansing 02-03-2014 02:23
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanShoff (Post 1351708)
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
That's quite unfortunate, but not really all that surprising to me. Everyone in those finals was playing all out, its just a shame that it turned into such carnage on the field. I know that one of out pickup cylinders has a 30 degree bend in the rod, and our blue bumpers need to be rebuilt. Best of luck to you guys getting your frame fixed. It was a pleasure playing with you guys in elims and I look forward to hopefully getting to play together in Milwaukee.

JagCode 02-03-2014 02:26
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
What fun being the Week 1 guinea pigs was. Our pairings were absolutely dreadful this year at WAAMV. We were often paired with unreliable teams, of which had confused drivers and didn't communicate. Our event's game breaking problem? An FMS that failed at least 5 times over the course of the last two days, causing mass robot DC's, and not to mention that fact that the field broke down several times. In the end, we leveled out at 6-6 for Qualifiers, and loosing our Semifinal Games.

Drive Issues
Our ability to shoot was somewhat hindered by our team having ONE driver manning all the controls, which led to multi-tasking being a nil topic. We were easily able to be shoved around, (even though we're on traction wheels) and the fact that we couldn't set up our launcher WHILE driving led to wasted time being stationary. By next event we're going to install a 360 Gamepad onto our drive station, so I can load the launcher while our driver focuses on ball acquisition, and getting our butts to the goal.

Autonomous
We were pretty reliable on our Autonomous, missing about 4 or 5 out of 12 balls we loaded. We ended up being 4th on autonomous score, which led other teams to be interested in us once it came to alliance selection. Our code's rundown is Mast - 1 Sec - Drive 30% (2.7 Sec) - 3 Sec - Launch(.25 Sec) x3

Elimination
During Quarters, we were paired with 1294 (Top Gun) and 4579 (RoboEagles). 1294's bot was the best loading bot at our district, with a backboard that rebounds into the holding area, and let us get some quick assist points out. We were facing an alliance containing 2990, a robot that near-severely damaged our spinner. 2990 was their destined shooting bot, and as such, 1294 and 4579 pressed on them hard as soon as their assists counted. 1294 kept bashing them to the point that they got under them, causing 2990 to, technically, ENTER 1294's robot. That gave us 50 Foul Points. At that point, 3220 bashed 1294, toppling 2990 and giving US even MORE Foul Points.

As this is MY first year, I'm quite pleased with our performance. Because this is our team's 5th year, the last of our founding members have left us for better lands. As such, we have 8 members with 1+ years of experience. The rest of us (15+ Members) are Rookies and Freshmen. It's like back to square one. May luck bless us at Event Two.

To all of you guys, good luck!

S.P.A.M.er 17 02-03-2014 02:31
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
I wanted to comment how I feel the bar may impact ref'ing. As a ref for a week two event, I feel like there are two ways I could handle keeping score for an alliance. *Note: refs do not have the ability to undo ending a cycle*

A.) Have a itchy scoring finger: This ensures the second a ball is through the goal, and *scored,* the next cycle can begin. But what if that bar hits the ball back into play. Now a new cycle is started, and the first ball was never scored. The ref now is to blame.

B.) Patience is key: Not wanting to mess up, you will always have to make sure the ball is completely scored before ending a cycle. This means the ball crosses the plane, wait a second. The ball hits the bar, wait a second. Ball bounces around on the bar for a bit, wait two seconds. Finally, the ball falls off the bar, END CYCLE. While its true that no field fault occurred, it came at the expense of play time for an alliance.

Either way, this bar will be playing psychological games with refs, something I am not looking forward to. Hopefully it will be more clear when on the field, but from the videos, it was never 100% when the ball would be accepted or not.

JosephC 02-03-2014 02:34
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laaba 80 (Post 1351717)
I could see from the webcasts when a human player received a penalty. If a human player can't see the ref waving the flag 3 feet from them they need to become more aware. That said, it is unacceptable if a ref calls a penalty without waving the flag, or signaling in some way.
Webcast =/= on the field. I can tell you that from first hand human player experience. When you're worried about getting balls to your robot as fast as possible, you don't notice when a ref is waving his flag. If the safety zone was more noticeable, we'd have a lot less G40s. A small strip of yellow tape isn't really cutting it.

They should just remove the tape and extend the safety zone all the way to the edge of the field.

Abhishek R 02-03-2014 02:35
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by S.P.A.M.er 17 (Post 1351724)
Either way, this bar will be playing psychological games with refs, something I am not looking forward to. Hopefully it will be more clear when on the field, but from the videos, it was never 100% when the ball would be accepted or not.
Yes, this creates a lose-lose situation for the referees. The field should have a change to a slightly inclined ramp rather than a bar to ensure the ball leaves the field after passing through the plane of the goal.

JosephC 02-03-2014 02:39
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by S.P.A.M.er 17 (Post 1351724)
Hopefully it will be more clear when on the field, but from the videos, it was never 100% when the ball would be accepted or not.
Unfortunately, it isn't. Even as Field Reset being right behind the goal, I was never 100% sure if a ball was going to bounce out or not.

jeremylee 02-03-2014 03:19
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woolly (Post 1351701)

G12 may need to be reworked to become like the pinning rule, to where you can posses the opponents ball for five seconds if the ball was acquired without the use of an active mechanism on the robot, but you must get X distance away from their ball before you can attempt to posses it again. That way if the opposing human player drops their ball in your robot you don't get the "death penalty" for it. EDIT: Also, the robot may not distance itself from the ball by launching it via a mechanism on the robot.
Interesting suggestion if I understand you correctly. Might also help in the case of a ball randomly falling in your robot after an opposing teams truss shot causing you to loose the match in finals due to a "50 point" technical to start you packing. I'm sure this would never happen...

Anupam Goli 02-03-2014 07:07
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephC (Post 1351726)
Webcast =/= on the field. I can tell you that from first hand human player experience. When you're worried about getting balls to your robot as fast as possible, you don't notice when a ref is waving his flag. If the safety zone was more noticeable, we'd have a lot less G40s. A small strip of yellow tape isn't really cutting it.

They should just remove the tape and extend the safety zone all the way to the edge of the field.
This.

I understand why G40 exists, but I don't think calling it every single time there is some portrusion is in the spirit of the rule. The initial team update added the rule because there were robots extending past the field perimeter when intaking the ball, so to keep human players safe, we need to have some saftey zone. When there is no robot extending past the field perimeter, and our human player wants to have some sort of accuracy when loading our robot, we shouldn't be penalized if we extend an inch into the zone. Especially if our player is in no immediate danger. Maybe we can define a "robot interaction zone" just like we did in 2005, but without pressure plates.

MooreteP 02-03-2014 07:34
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephC (Post 1351715)
The refs don't tell you when you do it. If your a HP feeding balls to your robot and you don't think you're doing anything wrong, why would you change what you're doing?
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw

mechanical_robot 02-03-2014 08:04
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink (Post 1350997)
On the scoreboard, there is a number adjacent to the team number. What does it represent? Seems too high to be total assists.

Edit: It appears to be the current ranking.

The green dots represent the number of assists. You are talking about the rank number or the team number.

Wayne TenBrink 02-03-2014 08:17
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anupam Goli (Post 1351744)
This.

I understand why G40 exists, but I don't think calling it every single time there is some portrusion is in the spirit of the rule. The initial team update added the rule because there were robots extending past the field perimeter when intaking the ball, so to keep human players safe, we need to have some saftey zone. When there is no robot extending past the field perimeter, and our human player wants to have some sort of accuracy when loading our robot, we shouldn't be penalized if we extend an inch into the zone. Especially if our player is in no immediate danger. Maybe we can define a "robot interaction zone" just like we did in 2005, but without pressure plates.
Proposed wording for updated rules:

<Proposed G21> ROBOTS may not extend outside the HUMAN PLAYER BARRIER. (Note: the HP barrier is the 20" wide zone above the field perimeter pipes)

<Proposed G40> TEAMS may not extend any body part into the FIELD during the MATCH.

G41 (no HP/robot contact, no HP/Ball/Robot contact) remains as is.

This would make the HP barrier a "transition zone" where either robots or HP's could reach, but there could be no contact between them. You still couldn't lay a ball directly into a robot.

Sparky3D 02-03-2014 08:49
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanShoff (Post 1351708)
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
Man, that sucks. Let us know if you guys need any help.

ToddF 02-03-2014 09:03
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1351633)
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.
From the wiki on 6061 aluminum:
"6061 is highly weldable, for example using tungsten inert gas welding (TIG) or metal inert gas welding (MIG). Typically, after welding, the properties near the weld are those of 6061-O, a loss of strength of around 80%. The material can be re-heat-treated to restore -T4 or -T6 temper for the whole piece. After welding, the material can naturally age and restore some of its strength as well. Nevertheless, the Alcoa Structural Handbook recommends the design strength of the material adjacent to the weld to be taken as 11,000 psi without proper heat treatment after the weld."

That compares to 35ksi yield strength of properly heat treated 6061-T6.

Teams that use welded aluminum construction need to realize that your welded joints are now incredibly weak. And that's if the welding has been done with perfect technique (certified welder with years of experience). High school grade workmanship will be way worse.

ToddF 02-03-2014 09:28
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MooreteP (Post 1351748)
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw
That was Awesome!

Great technique by the human player. We'll be using this as a training video.

Racer26 02-03-2014 09:32
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
GTR West Q49. The blue alliance just executed a beautiful strategy with 3 weak robots and succeeded in 2 31pt cycles.

ToddF 02-03-2014 09:49
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer26 (Post 1351773)
GTR West Q49. The blue alliance just executed a beautiful strategy with 3 weak robots and succeeded in 2 31pt cycles.
Link to video?

Daniel_LaFleur 02-03-2014 10:12
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MooreteP (Post 1351748)
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw
I'll be showing this video to my team ... and ALL of our alliance partners.

Thanks for the link

sdcantrell56 02-03-2014 11:23
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToddF (Post 1351765)
From the wiki on 6061 aluminum:
"6061 is highly weldable, for example using tungsten inert gas welding (TIG) or metal inert gas welding (MIG). Typically, after welding, the properties near the weld are those of 6061-O, a loss of strength of around 80%. The material can be re-heat-treated to restore -T4 or -T6 temper for the whole piece. After welding, the material can naturally age and restore some of its strength as well. Nevertheless, the Alcoa Structural Handbook recommends the design strength of the material adjacent to the weld to be taken as 11,000 psi without proper heat treatment after the weld."

That compares to 35ksi yield strength of properly heat treated 6061-T6.

Teams that use welded aluminum construction need to realize that your welded joints are now incredibly weak. And that's if the welding has been done with perfect technique (certified welder with years of experience). High school grade workmanship will be way worse.
In this particular example they also ground most of the weld away. It is not surprising that this joint failed.

Navid Shafa 02-03-2014 11:35
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Just watched a rather amazing match at GTR.
Match 59: 1310 facing off against 610 (&Company)

1310 beats 610 by a score of 161/160 to clinch the number 1 seed. :yikes:

orangemoore 02-03-2014 11:41
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Navid Shafa (Post 1351824)
Just watched a rather amazing match at GTR.
Match 59: 1310 facing off against 610 (&Company)

1310 beats 610 by a score of 161/160 to clinch the number 1 seed. :yikes:
It will be interesting to see who gets picked. :cool:

NickTosta 02-03-2014 11:43
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MooreteP (Post 1351748)
Check out how the Human Player inbounded the ball each time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi8ZEie7uw
I'm more amazed by the poor defense being played than anything else. The blue alliance was certainly efficient, and certainly had two extremely capable robots, but it should have been trivial for a red robot(s) to shove one or both of the blue robots out of alignment.

ThomasClark 02-03-2014 12:10
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 

sodizzle 02-03-2014 12:20
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasClark (Post 1351838)
This seems absolutely crazy to me that almost 20% of all scores were made up of penalties. I believe that this is not the way the game was meant to be played.

12.4% of winning alliances would not have won without penalty points? That's insanely high. If I am reading this correct and that is only the qualification matches being taken into account, I would be interested in seeing that same statistic for the eliminations.

ThomasClark 02-03-2014 13:01
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sodizzle (Post 1351843)
This seems absolutely crazy to me that almost 20% of all scores were made up of penalties. I believe that this is not the way the game was meant to be played.
Agreed. I haven't watched any streams, but it sounds like penalties are huge in a lot of places.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sodizzle (Post 1351843)
12.4% of winning alliances would not have won without penalty points? That's insanely high. If I am reading this correct and that is only the qualification matches being taken into account, I would be interested in seeing that same statistic for the eliminations.
Not all eliminations matches have taken place yet, but it's currently around 9.8% of matches that were won by penalties.

For comparison, it was 3.9% of (all) matches last year.

Rohawk1 02-03-2014 13:05
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickTosta (Post 1351827)
I'm more amazed by the poor defense being played than anything else. The blue alliance was certainly efficient, and certainly had two extremely capable robots, but it should have been trivial for a red robot(s) to shove one or both of the blue robots out of alignment.
You're right, defense is most of the time pretty easy for stopping the catch, but we were paired with a large bot with a great shooter and 1772 had a strong drive train; it was pretty difficult to move around. Nevertheless, still the highest score in the world right now without penalties I believe.

NickTosta 02-03-2014 13:25
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohawk1 (Post 1351875)
You're right, defense is most of the time pretty easy for stopping the catch, but we were paired with a large bot with a great shooter and 1772 had a strong drive train; it was pretty difficult to move around. Nevertheless, still the highest score in the world right now without penalties I believe.
Yeah, I'm reasonably sure it's the high-high score no questions asked.

At any rate, I point it out not to take anything away from you guys' win (based on that video it's difficult to imagine a world in which you didn't win, defense or not), but mostly just because it's another important conclusion to be drawn.

There's a big reason why this game is so physical, and that match proves it.

Ian Curtis 02-03-2014 13:36
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasClark (Post 1351871)
Agreed. I haven't watched any streams, but it sounds like penalties are huge in a lot of places.



Not all eliminations matches have taken place yet, but it's currently around 9.8% of matches that were won by penalties.

For comparison, it was 3.9% of (all) matches last year.
10% isn't ridiculous compared to some older games though. This was back when they penalties and subtracted from your score, instead of added to your opponents score.

Rohawk1 02-03-2014 13:38
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickTosta (Post 1351881)
Yeah, I'm reasonably sure it's the high-high score no questions asked.

At any rate, I point it out not to take anything away from you guys' win (based on that video it's difficult to imagine a world in which you didn't win, defense or not), but mostly just because it's another important conclusion to be drawn.

There's a big reason why this game is so physical, and that match proves it.
You're completely right! This match is incredibly physical. Our executive captain pointed it out to me that it's an open field, and a you can do a lot on an open field to damage other robots; ramming at full speed, pickup arms and shooters will be hit from the side, and huge balls falling from the sky are all parts of this game. That may be another reason they increased the weight limit of spare parts. At Palmetto, I saw some serious aggressive driving, and I fear that this type of driving may become integrated into the game.

Justin Shelley 02-03-2014 13:38
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
What continues to baffle me is when human players throw the ball onto the field without even attempting to get the ball into one of their robots. The next 15 or more seconds are spent trying to recover the ball which should have never been lost in the first place.

Things for teams to learn from Week 1

1) If you can't do scoring in auto 90% of time or better then don't shoot!!

2) Teach your human players how to put a ball into a robot fast and reliably without crossing into the field and occurring a penalty.

3) Be humble- This is a role playing game just like sports. Somebody needs to play 1st base and somebody needs to be in the outfield, the outfield is just as important. If you can't do something, just realize that and make out of what you have!!

4) Know the rules!!!!

Jared Russell 02-03-2014 13:50
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
At the MAR events it looks like refs are pausing matches in the middle of teleop to discuss and assess penalties and assists...?

Qbot2640 02-03-2014 14:06
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by abeD (Post 1351046)
A match at palmetto they just scored 290. Several cycles with catches. 1772 was catching and scoring and another team I forget the number was getting the inbound and throwing over the truss.
Someone may have already linked this...haven't read through all 16 pages. Here's the video:

http://youtu.be/iUi8ZEie7uw

Quick cycles are the key. The third team on this alliance was dead...imagine what would have been possible with an auto contribution and some defensive play from 346. They were a capable bot - played into semi finals if memory serves.

Zornan 02-03-2014 14:08
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Carnage. Who's going to want to do a 3rd event before states?

Abhishek R 02-03-2014 14:11
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qbot2640 (Post 1351903)
Someone may have already linked this...haven't read through all 16 pages. Here's the video:

http://youtu.be/iUi8ZEie7uw

Quick cycles are the key. The third team on this alliance was dead...imagine what would have been possible with an auto contribution and some defensive play from 346. They were a capable bot - played into semi finals if memory serves.
Those were definitely quick cycles.

However, there wasn't any actual defense being played on the inbounding robot or the catcher; I doubt you would ever be able to easily line up like that.

tStano 02-03-2014 14:29
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanShoff (Post 1351708)
We are going to have to replace our frame at Wisconsin. Practically everything is bend. It is shot. We are going to have to pull the swerve modules, shooter, and electronics board, and transfer everything to a new frame. But don't worry, we'll be back for more fun.
Wow, I knew this game was gonna be physical but I didn't know it was gonna be THAT physical. If you need help, let me know.

sdcantrell56 02-03-2014 15:05
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qbot2640 (Post 1351903)
Someone may have already linked this...haven't read through all 16 pages. Here's the video:

http://youtu.be/iUi8ZEie7uw

Quick cycles are the key. The third team on this alliance was dead...imagine what would have been possible with an auto contribution and some defensive play from 346. They were a capable bot - played into semi finals if memory serves.
Is 3824 using suction?

Rohawk1 02-03-2014 15:13
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdcantrell56 (Post 1351934)
Is 3824 using suction?
Yes we are! It is a great way to solidify the seal on the ball quickly, plus it adds power to our shot.

Tom Line 02-03-2014 15:21
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Ian, I'd LOVE to see this data run on the Centerline eliminations. I can't say for 100% certainty, but I'm not sure if the winning alliance beat their opponents on straight score even once. Can someone point me in the direction of the centerline elim data with penalties showing?

sdcantrell56 02-03-2014 15:28
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohawk1 (Post 1351941)
Yes we are! It is a great way to solidify the seal on the ball quickly, plus it adds power to our shot.
Are there any pictures of your robot anywhere?

Rohawk1 02-03-2014 15:35
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdcantrell56 (Post 1351953)
Are there any pictures of your robot anywhere?
I don't think there are pictures online yet, but you can watch us play at palmetto! Youtube channel: FIRST3824

I'll talk to our business team and we should be getting pictures up soon on our website!

Basel A 02-03-2014 15:49
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line (Post 1351948)
Ian, I'd LOVE to see this data run on the Centerline eliminations. I can't say for 100% certainty, but I'm not sure if the winning alliance beat their opponents on straight score even once. Can someone point me in the direction of the centerline elim data with penalties showing?
The winning alliance won 3 of their 6 matches on "straight score" (both SF matches and one finals match).

Here's the data you're looking for: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/fr...p?events=MICEN

Ether 02-03-2014 16:32
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line (Post 1351948)
Ian, I'd LOVE to see this data run on the Centerline eliminations.
Here's the Twitter data. As usual though, it's incomplete.

PayneTrain 02-03-2014 16:39
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToddF (Post 1351765)
From the wiki on 6061 aluminum:
"6061 is highly weldable, for example using tungsten inert gas welding (TIG) or metal inert gas welding (MIG). Typically, after welding, the properties near the weld are those of 6061-O, a loss of strength of around 80%. The material can be re-heat-treated to restore -T4 or -T6 temper for the whole piece. After welding, the material can naturally age and restore some of its strength as well. Nevertheless, the Alcoa Structural Handbook recommends the design strength of the material adjacent to the weld to be taken as 11,000 psi without proper heat treatment after the weld."

That compares to 35ksi yield strength of properly heat treated 6061-T6.

Teams that use welded aluminum construction need to realize that your welded joints are now incredibly weak. And that's if the welding has been done with perfect technique (certified welder with years of experience). High school grade workmanship will be way worse.
I believe the welds were on 6063 aluminum alloy which I believe gives us a loss of around 30%. Regardless, that's the least of our worries on drive base. No worries though, we'll be back in Virginia.

Tom Line 02-03-2014 16:39
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ether (Post 1352019)
Here's the Twitter data. As usual though, it's incomplete.
Thank you ether. Am I reading this correctly? Are rfpts and bfpts foul points, rhpts and bhpts hybrid (auto), and rtpts and btpts teleop?

If so, 25% of the points scored in the elims were fouls.

Brandon_L 02-03-2014 16:43
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared Russell (Post 1351893)
At the MAR events it looks like refs are pausing matches in the middle of teleop to discuss and assess penalties and assists...?
Yes, that is the case. Its a mix of that, and balls rolling out of the field and volunteers not knowing what to do with them, wasting valuable match time asking a ref what to do/just standing there.

At least at Hatboro, matches were being paused quite a bit. With a game like this, I think its a good thing to get it right instead of just letting the alliance go, unable to score.

Again though, Why can't we just insert the balls where they left the field?? Its much simpler then having to track down the nearest HP and run halfway across the field.

Quote:
BALLS that are ejected from gameplay during a MATCH will be delivered to the closest HUMAN PLAYER of that BALL’S ALLIANCE by event staff at the next safe opportunity. This includes BALLS that go in GOALS but don’t meet the criteria to be considered SCORED.
This is silly and wastes time leaving an entire alliance with no way of advancing their score.

jlmcmchl 02-03-2014 16:48
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line (Post 1352023)
Thank you ether. Am I reading this correctly? Are rfpts and bfpts foul points, rhpts and bhpts hybrid (auto), and rtpts and btpts teleop?

If so, 25% of the points scored in the elims were fouls.
Also according to the data, only 3 match outcomes were decided by foul points.

#1, 7, 8. So, QF 1-1, 3-2 and 4-2.

Another note: .25 of red alliance's points were penalties (260 pts), while .29 of blue alliance's points were penalties (370 pts), almost 50% more penalty points than red recieved.

Additionally, the proportion of blue's penalty points to red's teleop/hybrid points is .47, and for the other alliance is .29. Higher-numbered alliances seem to have played much cleaner this week.

bduddy 02-03-2014 16:50
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon_L (Post 1352026)
Yes, that is the case. Its a mix of that, and balls rolling out of the field and volunteers not knowing what to do with them, wasting valuable match time asking a ref what to do/just standing there.

At least at Hatboro, matches were being paused quite a bit. With a game like this, I think its a good thing to get it right instead of just letting the alliance go, unable to score.

Again though, Why can't we just insert the balls where they left the field?? Its much simpler then having to track down the nearest HP and run halfway across the field.



This is silly and wastes time leaving an entire alliance with no way of advancing their score.
It is possible that some robots may not be able to pick balls off the floor; the rules as written make that an entirely viable strategy.

bitty 02-03-2014 17:00
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlmcmchl (Post 1352029)
Also according to the data, only 3 match outcomes were decided by foul points.

#1, 7, 8. So, QF 1-1, 3-2 and 4-2.

Another note: .25 of red alliance's points were penalties (260 pts), while .29 of blue alliance's points were penalties (370 pts), almost 50% more penalty points than red. I'll let you all make your own judgement from that.
Qf1-1 qf 1-2 qf 3-2 qf 4-2 and finals match 2 were won by penalities.

Ether 02-03-2014 17:06
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlmcmchl (Post 1352029)
Also according to the data, only 3 match outcomes were decided by foul points.
According to the Twitter data as of today at 3:54pmET, foul points affected the outcome of 87 of 693 Qual matches, and 13 of 127 Elim matches so far for all Events in Week1.

PayneTrain 02-03-2014 17:11
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bduddy (Post 1352031)
It is possible that some robots may not be able to pick balls off the floor; the rules as written make that an entirely viable strategy.
Other entirely viable strategies may include:

-Assists being attributed within the same century they occur
-The pedestals lighting up prior to the heat death of the universe
-Dead Ball cards being enforced better than county ordinances in the Old West
-Real time scoring functioning better than square wheels

At what point would FIRST decide to make changes to rules that may affect strategies of a very select few in order to better administer the game they designed? I can't answer that question.

Brandon_L 02-03-2014 17:15
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bduddy (Post 1352031)
It is possible that some robots may not be able to pick balls off the floor; the rules as written make that an entirely viable strategy.
What are the chances of having 3/3 robots that can't pick up from the floor?

And even then, you can still push it into the 1pt goal.

JohnFogarty 02-03-2014 17:45
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
I'm actually somewhat confused about all these HP fouls....that never happened in the matches that 4901 played in at Palmetto.

apples000 02-03-2014 17:52
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1352050)
Other entirely viable strategies may include:

-Assists being attributed within the same century they occur
-The pedestals lighting up prior to the heat death of the universe
-Dead Ball cards being enforced better than an anti-robbery police unit in the Old West
-Real time scoring functioning better than square wheels

At what point would FIRST decide to make changes to rules that may affect strategies of a very select few in order to better administer the game they designed? I can't answer that question.
This is the best post I've read all week.

The game is, IMO, broken because of the overused penalties, delayed scoring, incorrect scoring, lack of rule knowledge by referees, 2003-style defense gameplay and obscure field issues. Anything they can do to make the game "less broken" is good.

There's weird field stuff happening too. I've watched goofy timing display stuff on the webcasts, as well as delays between when a ball is scored and the assist lights go off and pedestal lights go on. Also, I've seen a few more timing issues with the hot goals (8 seconds left, 2 seconds right). Does anybody know how they're scoring these?

turkbot 02-03-2014 17:57
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by XaulZan11 (Post 1351201)
At Central Illinois, the refs are not calling G3 when teams lose their bumpers. Considering it should be a foul and disabling the robot, this is a pretty big deal.
Losing a bumper falls under the following.

G20
ROBOTS must be in compliance with Section 4.6: BUMPER Rules throughout the MATCH.

Violation: DISABLED


Hopefully FIRST fixes the bug that does not allow the head ref to disable from his scoring tablet as currently he has to run to the driver station to e-stop (disable) the robot.

piersklein 02-03-2014 17:59
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
All this hype over aggressive defense this year is astounding. How did so many teams not anticipate this aspect of the game? This is especially important when some teams build weighted chassis battering rams as robots. I know my team wont have a problem, our entire robot is double extrusion and welded steel ::ouch:: ;)

orangemoore 02-03-2014 18:03
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by piersklein (Post 1352077)
All this hype over aggressive defense this year is astounding. How did so many teams not anticipate this aspect of the game? This is especially important when some teams build weighted chassis battering rams as robots. I know my team wont have a problem, our entire robot is double extrusion and welded steel ::ouch:: ;)
I know that my team took a look at the game and saw that defense was going to be important but, the amount of defense and harshness was completely unexpected. I did not foresee many robot running almost full speed at each other as the main form of defense that there would be.

Abhishek R 02-03-2014 18:22
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1352050)
Other entirely viable strategies may include:

-Assists being attributed within the same century they occur
-The pedestals lighting up prior to the heat death of the universe
-Dead Ball cards being enforced better than an anti-robbery police unit in the Old West
-Real time scoring functioning better than square wheels
Pretty accurate summary. I would add autonomous hot goals.

Also, I've heard the referee data input stations are time consuming to navigate thereby causing massive delays in attributing assist, fouls, and scores.

Steven Donow 02-03-2014 18:23
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared Russell (Post 1351893)
At the MAR events it looks like refs are pausing matches in the middle of teleop to discuss and assess penalties and assists...?
Jared-

Assuming you're talking about Mt. Olive, the incident involved a match stopped out of safety concerns (I'm almost certain based off the timestamp of a picture I have of why-it'll be posted to CD-media soon). For a short period of time, the match was going to be resumed, hence why the fouls that would be incurred were being discussed. Assists were never a question in the event I believe you're talking of. Eventually, it was determined the match would be reset.


Overall, it was a hectic game for week one. Being that the last 4 games have had some form of a protected zone, teams did not expect the defense that happened.

The biggest issue to me is that field crew/reset is a position this year that doesn't require any sort of game knowledge or training. I have more of an issue with that than Refs having to keep track of posessions* and usual ref stuff; it's just too much to add on ensuring field reset does the right thing.

*I'm differentiating posessions from assists.

Canon reeves 02-03-2014 18:30
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
I didn't attend a week 1 regional, and I have read quite a bit about the damage caused and rough defense, but with this in mind, how did this years kitbot hold up? The frame is definitely weaker than last years so I wasn't sure how it would do.

pfreivald 02-03-2014 18:30
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by orangemoore (Post 1352078)
I know that my team took a look at the game and saw that defense was going to be important but, the amount of defense and harshness was completely unexpected.
Not by anybody I talked to. Maybe this is a matter of experience, but wide open field + no safe zones = insane collisions.

bduddy 02-03-2014 18:32
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek R (Post 1352090)
Pretty accurate summary. I would add autonomous hot goals.

Also, I've heard the referee data input stations are time consuming to navigate thereby causing massive delays in attributing assist, fouls, and scores.
Although I haven't actually used one, they have different modes for scorekeeping and penalties, which could certainly cause some delays.

Caleb Sykes 02-03-2014 18:35
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
I think that an appreciable portion (but certainly not all) of the "missed assists" that teams are complaining about is due to the very definition of ASSIST. In the heat of the match, it is easy to forget that robots must be in unique zones to get the ASSIST. This distinction never has an effect on single assists and rarely (if ever) has any effect on double assists. However, it takes a conscious effort by the alliance to achieve the triple assist.

Remember everyone POSSESSION =/= ASSIST.

Sparky3D 02-03-2014 18:41
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by piersklein (Post 1352077)
All this hype over aggressive defense this year is astounding. How did so many teams not anticipate this aspect of the game? This is especially important when some teams build weighted chassis battering rams as robots. I know my team wont have a problem, our entire robot is double extrusion and welded steel ::ouch:: ;)
I was expecting a ton of defense, but I was expecting "typical" FRC defense: getting rammed by an opponent's bumpers, an opponent getting in the way/pushing you around, opponents using arms to block/deflect shots. What I wasn't expecting was teams using their intakes as battering rams and hitting an opponent at high speed with them to try to dislodge a ball (without fouls being called), or 5 robots being tipped over during 3 finals matches. There is a difference between rough and violent, and some of the matches are really starting to push that line.

Racer26 02-03-2014 18:49
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
I didn't see any robots tipped at GTRW, despite 1310 coming close a couple of times. I would guess that this is an artifact of the game generating mostly low-CG designs.

Keiko 02-03-2014 18:54
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
I don't have a problem with whats being called a foul or a tech foul, but I do a have a problem when refs are calling such a small amount of them.

I feel as though there should be a ref watching each individual robot for fouls.

JohnSchneider 02-03-2014 18:58
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keiko (Post 1352118)
I don't have a problem with whats being called a foul or a tech foul, but I do a have a problem when refs are calling such a small amount of them.

I feel as though there should be a ref watching each individual robot for fouls.
How would you avoid mutual cause fouls being double called?
Where would you get the volunteers?

jeremylee 02-03-2014 19:03
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canon reeves (Post 1352093)
I didn't attend a week 1 regional, and I have read quite a bit about the damage caused and rough defense, but with this in mind, how did this years kitbot hold up? The frame is definitely weaker than last years so I wasn't sure how it would do.
Ours appears to have held up really well in the first regional with light re-reinforcements such as L plates connecting the inner/outer rails similar to am-2794 and some diagonal supports in the inner 4 corners. We have a 6 cim 2 speed installed and played a lot of defense, no major issues seen so far. Our biggest struggle with kit bot has been mounting bumpers. I'd keep some spare parts around just in case though.

Keiko 02-03-2014 19:05
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by animenerdjohn (Post 1352124)
How would you avoid mutual cause fouls being double called?
Where would you get the volunteers?
I realize that that getting volunteers is an issue. The refs right now are trying their best to stay on top of all the fouls along with other aspects of the game.

But with that said, I would rather a foul be double called and cleared up by a coach who was keeping track of fouls, than the foul never getting called.

PayneTrain 02-03-2014 19:23
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keiko (Post 1352130)
I realize that that getting volunteers is an issue. The refs right now are trying their best to stay on top of all the fouls along with other aspects of the game.

But with that said, I would rather a foul be double called and cleared up by a coach who was keeping track of fouls, than the foul never getting called.
As a coach, I have probably 3,000,000 more things to do than look out for multiple simultaneous flag waving while managing my team and alliance. I don't have 7 sets of eyes to watch all of the referees you want to add. There hasn't been a problem with foul tracking in the 5 referee system. When you add in score management to penalty oversight, it's been getting hairy.

Abhishek R 02-03-2014 19:24
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
This has already been said, but I'll say it again from first-hand experience: scoring in autonomous is of extremely high importance. Especially if you face a good/heavy defensive team, if you miss your auto shots it will take you half the match to get the auto balls in the goals before you can start cycling.

Also...make sure your autonomous balls don't collide midair...

Akash Shah 02-03-2014 19:32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky3D (Post 1352108)
I was expecting a ton of defense, but I was expecting "typical" FRC defense: getting rammed by an opponent's bumpers, an opponent getting in the way/pushing you around, opponents using arms to block/deflect shots. What I wasn't expecting was teams using their intakes as battering rams and hitting an opponent at high speed with them to try to dislodge a ball (without fouls being called), or 5 robots being tipped over during 3 finals matches. There is a difference between rough and violent, and some of the matches are really starting to push that line.
I was thinking the same way. I did not expect it to be like battle bots. Even though we did make it to the semi finals at Hatboro-Horsham District Event, we had a terrible experience with violent defense with our Robot breaking every match and fowls not being called when it should be. The qualification matches were all just ramming but the eliminations did calm down.

Akash Shah 02-03-2014 19:35
During our time at our first competition, we broke several things such as very expensive pneumatic cylinders, pickup system, and bearings from other robots ramming into us and using there pickup as an attack

mrnoble 02-03-2014 19:49
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Shah (Post 1352155)
During our time at our first competition, we broke several things such as very expensive pneumatic cylinders, pickup system, and bearings from other robots ramming into us and using there pickup as an attack
Watched you carrying your bot, like a Greek Hero fallen on the field of battle. It was inspiring. Congrats on your awards today, by the way!

We made a weird choice this year, and decided that minimal weight, rather than the 120 lbs, was ideal. We not only felt like moving quickly (to get away from defense and collisions) was the way to go, but that having more mass would make it more likely that we would absorb collisions, rather than bounce away from them.

Even so, we might be replacing some of our frame tubing with thicker stuff, depending on how early rounds go in Utah. Here's hoping that things smooth out before then...

Racer26 02-03-2014 19:53
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
I can't be the only one that hearkens from the olden days of FRC (my rookie year was 2003). I like this return to the violent defense of yesteryear. Intentionally breaking robots should still be a no-no.

I took one look at this years game and immediately knew violent defense was going to be a thing, and consequently ROBOTs (and especially MECHANISMs that extend beyond the FRAME PERIMETER) would need to be built to withstand a beating. With BUMPERs nowadays though, you don't see nearly as much in the way of bent frames like you used to back in 03/04.

4343 ran an AM14U kit chassis with some added stiffening measures through 14 matches of rough play this weekend at GTRW and it seems to have held up just fine.

I suspect many of the elites tested the robustness of their intakes by crashing their Ultimate Ascent bot (or another past robot) into it at full speed. I haven't seen any of the stronger teams have an intake I would consider 'fragile'.

pfreivald 02-03-2014 20:01
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer26 (Post 1352167)
With BUMPERs nowadays though, you don't see nearly as much in the way of bent frames like you used to back in 03/04.
In 2001/2002, we (now-defunct 827) had a welded box steel frame, because you'd have been crazy not to!

Blackphantom91 02-03-2014 20:11
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Week 1 analysis from a CSA

1. This game is the roughest game I have ever been apart of. (The carnage that is imposed on robots is quite different than recent years of FRC).

2. Lots and lots of CRIO reboots due to impact. (check all your connections on Thursday and make sure they have slack,slack and are tightly in.) Tons of teams lost comms after a hit by one, two, or even three robots. Flakey connections will not cut it this year. It can be the difference between a loss or win quite literally because you are rebooting for at least 30 secs of the match.

3. If you get into a pushing match with 6 cims behind you may trip a breaker so be weary of that.

Robot/Game analysis.
1. Penalties need to be lessened and rules hopefully should be uniform from tournament to tournament.(Matches decided by penalties always taste bad.) The amount of discrepancy between tournaments is staggering this year, but fixable in the long run of weeks.

2. The refs have the hardest job in FRC this year. They have to take care of at least three different actions while trying to make sure that robots are not committing fouls. This is just too much on them this year. I hope to see this changed so that they can make the right calls. (aka more personnel to help)

3. I for the first time do not envy anyone playing in districts or 3 regionals this year. The amount of punishment I thought the robots took last year was incredible. At this point in the game the amount of hard hits and robots falling apart is way more than I would have ever imaged for only the first week of competition. Many teams play at least 2 or more events before championships I saw great teams fall apart in the final rounds of eliminations due to the nature of the game. If this state of play keeps up they may not have much left by State or even world championships.

4. The game forces even the best scorers to actively play defence between each transfer of the ball. This allows for an almost seamless transfer of control and play. That being said, this is where the majority of the problems start between congestion, guarding, penalties, and just straight up hard defence. After watching the shut down D that was played when 188 had a chance to to win by 610 was smart. It's easy to get stuck in the mode of score, score, score.

Something I love about this game when teams work together to pull a plan off. That takes a ton of moxie and coordination.

Question: how do your think they fix the pedistool problem? That one makes me the most uneasy.

TL:DR
All in all teams be safe out there. Do what you can to ensure your robot will survive this current game.

Racer26 02-03-2014 20:48
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfreivald (Post 1352170)
In 2001/2002, we (now-defunct 827) had a welded box steel frame, because you'd have been crazy not to!
In 03, 1075s frame was 1.5" 80/20 type extrusion. We had 4" pool noodles covering 3 sides.

In 04, it was a TIG welded 1" box tube with 1/8" walls. In 04 at the Wonderland invitational, which we won (thanks 1241, 1114), we took a full speed frame to frame collision in auto that bent the frame by about 2" until it touched our wheel. A few minutes with a sawzall to remove the offending piece of frame (it happened to be part of our ball herder and not a necessary structural piece) and we were back in business.

Zuelu562 02-03-2014 20:54
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
As a queuer, I didn't get to see ALL of the carnage and craziness that was going on, but boy did I sure hear about it. Talking to the GSDE refs at Lunch on Saturday, even they were saying they NEED 8 Refs (there are 6 including Head Ref), the additional 2 refs solely watching for penalties or scores, with the current team handling the other.

This game has so much potential when played at high levels if some things are just cleared up, like G40, the bar (whether fixed or left as is), among others.

Wenbin Li 02-03-2014 20:57
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Week One competitions was fun but I have a couple questions on rule?
Are G28 and G29 going to be enforce better at Week two competitions?
Is there anyway to challenge any calls right after a match?
Are refs going to step up their fouls?
Battle-bots?

Comments; FRC 4954 have broke 2 pistons, a pick up system, and multiple barring. We were a shooter and multiple Week One robots that had fast drivetrains and the uncompleted scorers play very physical defense on us. This feels like battle-bots.

MisterJ 02-03-2014 21:15
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Shah (Post 1352155)
During our time at our first competition, we broke several things such as very expensive pneumatic cylinders, pickup system, and bearings from other robots ramming into us and using there pickup as an attack
Thanks for choosing us as part of your alliance today. Our threesome put up a great fight and we were lucky to not suffer the kind of damages you guys did. Did it seem like our alliance was playing in the most physical elimination matches of the day? The semi-finals against 341 and 2590 were rough!

I know our team's not located too close to yours, but next time we're at a competition together and you need a hand, definitely let us know! I hope you can get that stuff repaired in the next few weeks. Your team and 5113 are going to have great rookie seasons! Best of luck at Clifton!

Rohawk1 02-03-2014 21:18
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wenbin Li (Post 1352225)
Week One competitions was fun but I have a couple questions on rule?
Is there anyway to challenge any calls right after a match?
There is a question box for any calls that coaches only can contest. The coach usually has to go there right after a match though. Knowing the rules is incredibly important.

Wenbin Li 02-03-2014 21:32
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Doing our competitions at Hatboro-Horsham, all defensive robots violated rules G28 and G29. Are the refs going to call that during the next competition. G29 says that robot alliances can not pin any robots for more than 5 seconds and "a robot is considered pinned until the ROBOTS have separated by at lest six feet". Also the pinning robot has to wait 3 seconds to pin again. A lot of scorers was pinned over 5 seconds and the pinner did not get out of the 6 six radius. G28 explains even though there is a part that a robot can bring out to 20 inches but that "thing" cannot damage a robot part that is inside the frame.

Richard Wallace 02-03-2014 21:33
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohawk1 (Post 1352237)
There is a question box for any calls that coaches only can contest. The coach usually has to go there right after a match though. Knowing the rules is incredibly important.
Knowing rule T13 is important. The person in the question box must be a pre-college student, wearing a drive team badge -- not necessarily the coach. Definitely not the coach, if that person is not a pre-college student.

PayneTrain 02-03-2014 21:34
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohawk1 (Post 1352237)
There is a question box for any calls that coaches only can contest. The coach usually has to go there right after a match though. Knowing the rules is incredibly important.
Just to be clear, it has to be a pre-college student member of the team, not just any coach. However, the question box is there for a reason: referees want to make sure everyone has an understanding on the rules. I know the community is hoping for a sweeping update this week, but regardless, remember to work with game officials this season even moreso than in the past to make sure the game is being administered as cleanly and effectively as possible.

Steven Donow 02-03-2014 21:40
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohawk1 (Post 1352237)
There is a question box for any calls that coaches only can contest. The coach usually has to go there right after a match though. Knowing the rules is incredibly important.
This is incorrect. It does not have to be the coach, but it can be any PRE-COLLEGE/STUDENT team member, as long as they have a coach or driver badge

team222badbrad 02-03-2014 21:48
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared Russell (Post 1351893)
At the MAR events it looks like refs are pausing matches in the middle of teleop to discuss and assess penalties and assists...?
I can't speak to the specifics of how it happened since I didn't see it happen, but 1403 (our alliance partner) became entangled with 1676 and 1279 (our opponents) about halfway into the match.

The match was stopped mysteriously and the ref's grouped together for quite some time near the entangled robots.

Once the discussion was over it was decided that the match would resume.
I have never once heard or seen a match being stopped for any reason the refs decide or resumed. If it was a safety issue a G3 probably should have been called on all participating robots.

We then proceeded to question the resuming of the stopped match.

It was then debated for sometime of what should be done and it was eventually decided that it would be restarted and not resumed...



Another interesting item was that on Saturday drivers were told at the drivers meeting that gloves were required and fouls would be given for NOT using them during field robot loading/unloading. I still haven't found that rule. I do not know if any were assessed, but we didn't attempt to find out. We normally use them anyway.

Lil' Lavery 02-03-2014 21:52
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
The head ref at Hatboro would frequently pause matches to fix podium issues, then resume them. It happened about every two or three matches.

Christopher149 02-03-2014 21:54
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by team222badbrad (Post 1352264)
Another interesting item was that on Saturday drivers were told at the drivers meeting that gloves were required and fouls would be given for NOT using them during field robot loading/unloading. I still haven't found that rule. I do not know if any were assessed, but we didn't attempt to find out. We normally use them anyway.
Looking at the manual, the only instance of "glove" is in the Admin section:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4.2.1 Safety Recommendations
At events, the pure anticipation and excitement can sometimes overshadow common sense and safety fundamentals. One safety area teams sometimes overlook is the need to wear appropriate clothing when working or being around the robots. In addition to the ANSI-approved, UL-listed, or CSA rated safety glasses required for eye protection, FIRST highly recommends that team members and mentors:
  • Refrain from wearing dangling jewelry or loose, baggy clothing near the robots;
  • Tie back long hair so that it will not get caught in the robot or other machinery; and
  • Wear gloves to protect hands and fingers when handling the robot or the robot crate; finger injuries are one of the most common injuries at events!
Noting that "recommends" =/= "requires"

Craig Roys 02-03-2014 21:55
Re: Week 1 Analysis
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by piersklein (Post 1352077)
All this hype over aggressive defense this year is astounding. How did so many teams not anticipate this aspect of the game? This is especially important when some teams build weighted chassis battering rams as robots. I know my team wont have a problem, our entire robot is double extrusion and welded steel ::ouch:: ;)
It's not the defense that's the problem. We built our intake arms to be flexible to withstand being hit and we brought lots of spares and built them so they are a relatively easy swap. The problem is the way the game is being called. We expected to get hit and have our intake broken...we did not expect that if we were sitting still to shoot a ball and another team rams into us and breaks our intake (they initiated and caused the contact) that WE would be assessed a 50 pt technical foul for contact in the bumper zone. That's only one of a number of examples of fouls being called on the team being hit (not just our team). I'm not sure why G14 is not being enforced...many penalties I saw were the result of a defending team forcing the offensive team into a penalty.

Just to be clear...I'm not blaming the refs. I agree with the sentiments of many others in that they have WAY too much to try to do to possibly watch everything that's happening. I appreciate the job the refs have to do and I know that they are trying the best they can in a very difficult job this year. Separate scorers would help which would allow the refs to focus more on what the robots are doing. I do think that technical fouls are much too large for the amount they are being called.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53.
Page 3 of 5 < 12 3 45 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

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