Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Read the thread.
Been discussed.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Ow....

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

In regards to the height of the field barrier looking higher than normal:
It is a result of a weird camera angle.
I did an approximation of the the height of the barrier based on the length of the vertical section and the width of the tubing as seen in the video. I think that the tubing in previous years is 2" in diameter (someone can correct me on that).
With that assumption, the height of what is shown is 20.8". There is a little bit cut off by the edge of the screen, but this demonstrates that there won't be much deviation from the 20" that we are familiar with.
Frankly, I'm saddened that someone else didn't already figure this out. Simple math.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

This was a little rude... netiquette is nice. Some people do celebrate Christmas Eve and don't have time to read 400+ posts to see what's already been said, but still want their opinion out there... :(

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Merry Christmas, from post 354

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Happy Holidays....

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

If someone could so kindly write a summary post I will quote it and link it back on the 1st or 2nd post of this thread so that people can get a quick summary without having to read 400+ posts. Netiquette is good, but not everyone has free time on Christmas Eve.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

SUMMARY:

Many people believe that a 2v2v2 is possible, or some change in alliance number. Or change in how the Championships operate. "Eliminations matches" are now in the Admin manual as "Playoff matches."

"1999 footage" was not 1999 footage after all. It was from 1997, same match, different angle. When someone commented about it on the FRC blog, Frank commented "Whoops." Most people seem to think it was sarcastic- FIRST couldn't make that big of mistake in people's minds.

Another many people believe that the emphasis on the recycle bin means many past FRC games may be combined to create a new one. A question on this one was about veterans having too much of an advantage.

"Switching sides"- half-way through match you score on the opposite side of the field OR more coopertition and after the half the other alliance tries to finish what the other has started and vice versa.

The hint may simply be hinting at the name of the game, game names often include rhyming and alliteration.

Lots of speculation about the triangle paperclip and recycle symbol representing a Delta symbol- Meaning triangular game pieces. Also, LOTS about hockey. Another idea- two different shapes of game pieces (never been done before, so it would be a big change) Yet another idea, football related.

See Post #347 for results of past game hints.

People thought they could see white floor below Frank, meaning a new floor material- This was proved to not be true.

Andymark says the normal field "has the fit and function for the 2015 game"

Field barrier looks higher- see post #403 (and a couple others) explaining it is a camera angle trick.

Long boxes in KOP could be light bars or (foam) hockey pucks.

Change in size in robots- For example, same base, less weight.

Autonomous at end of match? Longer or maybe shorter game matches?

Maybe less reasons for penalties or less intricate specifications about gameplay to make refs' job easier


Gotta run- Christmas Eve and so much to do with so little time. Hope this is adequate, somebody feel free to copy and add if you find it necesary. Merry Christmas!

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

A little play on words just popped into my head: Frank recycled the 2014 manual. The goal of the 2014 game was to complete as many and as high-scoring cycles as you can. I think FIRST might be trying to say something about the cycling aspect of last years game.

To re-cycle (as two words) is to cycle again. It makes sense with a hockey game (which is what seems to be the prominent theory here) that you'd only have one puck in play at a time. Will we be playing in cycles again this year? If it's hockey, I'd vote yes. But that goes against the multiple allusions to this year's game being completely new, so I'm kinda torn. Maybe someone else can go further with this than I can.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I am still looking for five team alliances. Two levels of drivers, three on the floor behind the glass, two on a raised platform behind and in between the three. That would also mean smaller robots on the field so that there would be enough room to maneuver. ::safety::

No defense?
 

Ok, here's a radical 'change' idea-- no more defense. There are two ways I can see this happening: 6v0 or two simultaneous 3v0 on a segregated field (i.e barrier midfield that can't be crossed.) Teams cooperate to score as much as possible, and the same ranking points are awarded to all six teams. (or each of the three teams on an alliance if it is 2 x 3v0.)

Such a big change would have to be justified, but I see several shortcomings that many in the FRC community complain about being solved by this.

1) Bumpers. No need to change bumper colors (even in 2x3v0 field marking can indicate alliance colors). This means teams can build one set of bumpers, permanently attach them (even if it takes two hours to do so) and never take them off. Inspection process would change to weigh with bumpers (maybe a higher max weight) and perimeter check would include bumpers. This speeds up inspection, no dragging bumper covers. or human error in changing bumpers and not fully attaching them resulting in lost or half attached bumpers on the field.

2) Refs - No pinning calls, no high speed ramming calls, and maybe no perimeter incursion calls. Refs could be limited to things like possession limits and such. Fewer subjective calls and less work for them to do.

3) Better modeling of 'real world' robotics technology. Lots of recent robotics R&D are for cooperating bots (swarms, amazon inventory picking, etc.) and the only real world applications for competing robots is in military and police contexts, which are not in keeping with solving the worlds problems.

4) Less bot breakage -- Less robustly built robots won't break down as much, and there will be fewer box bots on the field due to broken appendages.

5) More scoring. Defense is usually just blocking bots movement, and that's not very public spectator friendly compared to scoring. The crowd cheers when a score happens, but not so much when a great defensive move happens.

6) Highlights cooperation -- FIRST has tried various ways to put the cooperation part of coopertition onto the field and with the exception of 2014, most have had at best mixed results in terms of acceptance.

7) Playoff rounds -- Alliances would be 6 teams or more likely 7 or 8 with six playing) for the 6v0 model or 3-4 teams for the 2 x 3v0 model. Playoffs can be multiple rounds with two or three plays per round, and alliance's best round (or sum of rounds) determines subset of teams that advance to next round. Final round is two alliances.

8) Board games (and to a lesser extent video games) have an increasing number of cooperative gaming models.

Downsides:

1) People like head to head offense+defense competition. With the 2 x 3v0 model, you would still get head to head, just no defense.

2) Less opportunity for epic 'fix it' in limited time and other teams helping you fix it scenarios. But things will still break and need fixing with incidental collisions and field wall/element collisions.

Even if this isn't the 2015 game, I think the 2 x 3v0 model is well worth considering for the future.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

You are correct. Me = hypocrite.
Please accept my apology.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Just to go completely off the deep end...

I suspect that FIRST has completely changed their game design process. The game is now designed in 2 weeks or less, from the reactions to a randomly-chosen hint upon release. Boy are you guys in for it...

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

that deep end is long gone....

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I would venture the following, based on the official hint and the other tidbits of real info we have:

1) 95% that the clue is the name of the game. Expect "______ Delta" or "Delta _______" to be our game this year.

2) Better than 50% that we will play with a triangular game piece.

3) 50% that there was a major streamlining of rules and game design.

4) 25% that whatever we play, it is high up.

5) Slightly better than 0%: hockey or football.

6) 0%: that the field will be reconfigured, or that we will have more robots on the field, or a 6v0 game. Ain't gonna happen.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I really don't understand the obsession with triangles. Just because Delta is the symbol for change doesn't mean it is 95% possible the clue.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

'Game is coming'...

"Game of Drones".
This is what the game will be called.

This HAS to be it.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Just some more food for thought here. And sorry if I'm restating something here, I read the vast majority of this thread at 3 in the morning so I may not remember everything. I've seen a lot of stuff talking about recycling a game or two in order to create a new one. However, what I'm thinking is what if they recycle elements from 3 games to make a new one? This could make the recycle theory and the triangle theory work with one another. Like it has already been said (many many many times), the recycling bin did have a triangle on it, so maybe that means that the triangle and recycling are related?

Of course, the recycling bin could also be a red herring. When I originally saw the video and starting reading this thread, I didn't think the recycling bin was that important. FIRST is a rather forward-thinking organization, so maybe they simply have someone recycling a paper instead of throwing it away because it is better for the environment. They do produce energy efficient light bulbs for all the teams to sell, so it might not be a stretch to think that the recycling bin is just to encourage people to recycle and actually has nothing to do with the game.

Like I said, just some food for thought.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays everyone!

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

;)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Just playing around with a game name using the word "Change"

Change Up
Change Challenge
Lane Change
Change Over
Maze Change or Change Maze
Change Chase

And for some reason i keep playing David Bowie's "Changes" in my head.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Some have stated that they think next year's game could be a 6v0 game, saying that this would be a big change in FIRST Robotics, since it has never been done and teams would be so surprised about it.

2001: Diabolical Dynamics.
Straight from USFIRST's History Document:
"Four teams work together as one alliance..."

http://www.usfirst.org/sites/default...ies_Photos.pdf

It has been done before. Take this how you like, but I see that as negating the idea. I think it would be fun and a different way for us to play, but I think in this case, the "Change" we are looking for might be different than this, since it has been done.

What I implore you all to consider is what hasn't been changed, not what we have done that could be "recycled". I agree it could very easily be a red herring.

That's my two cents for now, I have seen some great ideas in these posts though.

Happy Holidays FIRST Robotics members! :)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Read this and it reminded me that at River Rage , an offseason event in NH, the elimination matches where played as double eliminations. This would be a large change if introduced to districts and change point system for district championships. Thought that this might explain the change from elimination to playoff.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Circular field maybe? https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/...52&oe=54FC8DF3

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

If you look at the FRC Field on AndyMark, it says "FIRST® has determined that this Field Perimeter has the ‘fit and function’ necessary for use in the 2015 FRC." Link: http://www.andymark.com/Field-p/am-2800.htm

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Baseball?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I was wondering if anyone read all of Frank's blog. Pizza- you're putting FRUIT on PIZZA. It's madness.

Are these some clues ?

Dave

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

This reminds me of a game I used to play in school that would make for an interesting FRC game. There are bean bags all over the floor (they'd probably use a different gamepeice), and the goal is to toss all the pieces to the other side of the field, and whatever team had the fewest bean bags on their side at the end won. It would certainly be an interesting change if the bots couldn't actually contact the opposing team (assuming there's a barrier).

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

That isn't part of the official game hint. Although it could mean that teams are getting Hawaiian pizzas in the KOP.

probably not :(

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Final thoughts.

Possible Hints:

1. 1:00 video exactly

2. Change is Coming

3. 1997 being shown twice

4. 1999 not being shown

5. Recycle bin

Since 1999's change was adding alliances I think the fact it was not shown leans to a change to the alliance system, or elimination of the alliance system.
A possible way this could happen is teams of two or three could be constantly changing based on time. Example being 1:00 with a certain group then all of a sudden at the next minute your team changes. I understand this complicates playoffs and regional finals, but it is a big change. The coopertition is high with this style without alliances existing. The recycle bin in this idea is just a re herring or a way to symbolize 2014s alliance reliant game is in the trash and a new alliance system will replace.

Any feedback? Even possible?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

So much discussion about the illuminati makes me think that the GDC is actually a section of the illuminati dedicated to keeping young adults occupied instead of trying to find them.

Well, not really. That much should be obvious.

(illuminati game confirmed!!!11)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

So kind of like VEX EDR Swept Away? (The classroom competition)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

What if the change is a gamepiece that takes more than one robot to lift/move/manipulate? I personally think it's more likely to be more than one type of object on the field that can be scored. I don't know, I think everyone is overreacting to the hint this year. There's change with every game. GDC is getting to our minds a little early this year.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I think they should bring back de-scoring. That'd be cool.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

That would be cool.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

The video is exactly 60 seconds long.
Split 60 up and divide 6 by 2, that gives you 3.
You use 3 lines to make an "H"
The zero (from the 60) looks like an "O"
Put them all together and you get "H2O"
Water game confirmed.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

This is definitely a cool idea for a big change, but there are some serious issues.

Such as:
How will audience members (and drive teams for that matter) keep track of the alliances?
How will the world champion(s) be determined? Or the winners of regionals for that matter?
What color will the bumpers be?

Fun food for thought before build season starts though! :)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I don't consider de-scoring to be in the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, but that's just me.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

How about a version of 2007 de-scoring. Taking on and off the spoilers.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

It was legal, within limits, off-and-on up until the 2008 season. After that, the games (other than 2011) have not been conducive to descoring.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Descoring was a thing back in 2007, right? I feel it would add another strategic element to the game.

Although I don't consider it to be un-GP in any way, I do feel it could possibly be detrimental to the flow of the game - it could just end up in a tug of war of scoring and descoring the game object. (to take 2007 as an example, you may just be back and forth replacing the black tube, though I wasn't around then, so please correct me if this wasn't an issue at all).

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I've been thinking about things that have not yet been done in FIRST, and things that are ALWAYS in the game manual, which can be changed or thrown out. Think about things that we usually think about as a FIRST game, that have been prevalent throughout all or most of the past games. Do not be surprised to see if the very idea of the FRC game is changed.. If things that we usually expect from year to year are not there anymore. They already changed the size of the field and got rid of the endgame last year, so what can be changed or deleted from this year that has not yet been changed?

Just some "stream-of-consciousness" thoughts that come to mind.

We have never (at least to my knowledge) had a game in which just one or two game pieces were shared like a traditional sporting event. We've had games in which the pieces were not segregated, but there were many. And we've had games (2008, 2014) where there were only a couple game pieces, but they WERE segregated between alliances. What about a game in which there is one large game piece (oversized hockey puck, for example?) or maybe even two that are shared between alliances. This will make the game easier to follow for audience members.

Also, think back to FIRST Frenzy. It was a "recycling" of sorts of the previous games. We are going into the 25th FRC season, maybe they want to combine some elements from multiple previous games?

I wouldn't mind having the white plastic (it's not acutally regolith, as I've discussed in previous threads), as long as we are allowed to use other wheels. While the challenge in Lunacy was an interesting one, it severely impeded gameplay and made the matches more boring at many events (well, that and all of the other gameplay issues).

As far as things that are usually in the rule manual are things like: robot size, weight, etc. The field size. The "safe zones" and other markings on the field.

A back-and-forth motion kind of game is kind of like recycling the game piece, isn't it? I wouldn't mind that kind of game, i.e. volleyball, hockey, etc.

Essentially, I would not be surprised by anything at this point. Usually when I discount an idea saying "FIRST will never do that" or "it will be impossible to make an FRC game that way," I usually get surprised. I never thought that they would do assists, the "regolith floor," the frisbees, among others were things that I was skeptical of at first. But especially after this game hint, I would not be surprised by ANYTHING they throw at us. As I told my team, brace yourselves for some drastic changes from what we think of as an FRC game. Things that we can usually expect from year to year may be completely different now.

One thing that does seem clear to me is that we need to read into the game hint at least a little. Taken solely at face value, ignoring any little details, and if the title wasn't "this is a game hint," the video is essentially exactly the same as Frank's previous blog post about drastic, unexpected changes. I think there has to be something in the video beyond that, because why would they say the same thing twice?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I would disagree with it being against the spirit of Gracious Professionalism if its part of the rule book I wouldn't argue with it.
Either way the biggest issue with de-scoring is while it can be a fantastic game mechanic without proper balancing most games end up in tug of war and most games I see de-scoring be a really cool mechanic are games with more then two teams.

Looking over at the emphasis on change I am completely befuddled on any catchy names for games with the word "Change">

Does anyone have copies of past rule books and have they thumbed through it?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I was thinking more along the lines of vex sack attack de-scoring. I think if done right in FRC it could make the matches really intense, more so than they already are.. Just an idea though.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

There are three characters in "H2O"
There is a "2" in "H2O"
2^3 = 8
There are 8 days left until kickoff
This year's game hint is change
The number of days between now and kickoff is constantly changing
Water game confirmed

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Aerial Assist already involved a lot of pushing and shoving; a single game token would raise this another level or two. If this happens, look for plenty of LOW gear ratios and probably nearly-round robot plan views.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

If you want see to FRC with Sack Attack like de-scoring, you need to take a look back the 2000 season.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FJFbvHRyco

This is the match that was shown in the game hint video, and is arguably one of the most historic matches in FRC history. Team 47 had been dominant that regional season, and came into Champs as the overwhelming favourites, just as they had in 1998. Unfortunately for them, things didn't work out and they ran into an amazing alliance of 126 and 131. 47 ended up snapping a weld in this match which derailed their dream season, as there was no way they were going to beat the 126-131 combo at less than full strength. The crowd was entirely stunned when they realized what had happened. Definitely one of the most memorable matches I've ever witnessed.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Does anyone know if there's any video footage of the Chief Delphi 2000 machine other than this match? I have heard nearly everyone who was around at this time rave about this robot as among the most dominant and revolutionary in FRC history, and yet the only widely available video is of the match in which they broke down. I'd love to see video of this machine at the top of its game.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

In the pre-release interview, Frank stated something like "don't read too much into this hint, because we didn't put much effort into coming up with it".

What that means is that there's no weird hidden stuff, it's just a statement that change is coming, and the 2014 rule book is tossed away.

(It can be argued whether recycling is important to the hint or just the right way to get rid of a pile of paper. I vote the former, elements of past games will be recycled into this new one, but not in a way that gives veteran teams a significant advantage.)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Maybe they will change the corny playdough action figures in the kickoff video. I am excited for January 3 but dread watching the corny video. How about a Hollywood production. It is 2015.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I think they stick with the simpler animation because they don't want to hire somebody outside of FIRST to do it. As far as I know, the people who make the animation are already FIRST volunteers or employees. I'm okay with that because it means that our registration fees go toward our events instead of toward an overview of the game video that doesn't provide official rules.

Personally, I'm impressed with the quality of the animation, especially when compared to some of the team animation submissions.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I think the primary purpose is that they represent a clear and visual way of quickly explaining the game and how it works. They do a great job of accomplishing that task. And honestly, the animation is pretty good, with a bit of humorous robots.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Lavery had a picture of Plowie with the circle and cross through it, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a different animation. That will make me sad though.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Where'd you see that?

I will be so sad if the game animation isn't Dave's typical awesomeness. Sure, the game animations are similar "Welcome to the 20xx FIRST robotics competition, and this year's game...., .... is played on a 27 by 54 foot field with alliances of three teams each operating their robots...", but that's why I love them.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

2015 is the year Back to the Future 2 takes place. Maybe the change is that all drivers and human players have to wear self-tying shoelaceless shoes.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I want to make a point for all of the speculation going on here about some pretty far-fetched ideas of what this game could have in store for us.

Yes, I know "change is coming." But please keep recent history in mind.

I think, and I think most people would agree, that the last three games have been three of the most exciting, and--at times--most well-crafted games in FRC history (especially Rebound Rumble, my personal favorite). I know a lot of people get down on the rules that really bound up Aerial Assist and caused more penalties than any of us would have liked, but take that complaint for what it is--a minor element to a game that was, at its height, spectacular to say the least. Last year's Einstein matches absolutely represented the pinnacle of everything FIRST has been trying to reach in game design for 23 seasons. Spectator-friendliness has never been better, and I think that's reflected in the recent growth of the programs and the overall perceived happiness among the FIRST community.

It seems like the GDC has been working towards more sport-like games in recent years, dating back to perhaps Breakaway, and now I think they're really hitting their stride. It's two teams (who really have to work together, by the way) duking it out together on a rectangular field playing a game with a straightforward objective yet strategically complex composition that can provide the suspense and drama that even an armchair quarterback can appreciate. The GDC is refining its craft and getting to be pretty good.

Why on Earth, then, would they want to throw all that away and go to something radically different like three alliances or one alliance or anything else that would be, at least in my mind, a huge step backwards--a regression from what has gotten them here?

I think the hint is really, honestly as low-key as Frank tried to make it sound when he said
It's about reexamining and streamlining the rules, it's about a new element of the game that hasn't existed before, or it's about updating the match structure to accommodate one of the other two. But it won't be about FIRST deciding to jump out of their wheelhouse for something untested or previously ill-received instead.

TL;DR Now that the GDC has struck gold, don't expect them to leave for greener pastures any time soon.

Happy holidays

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

It was on Facebook--my dad showed me.

What my dad and I were thinking was that either Dozer was doing something he shouldn't have been (no background, so no way to tell) and got caught, OR Dozer will once again get beaned by X field element/game object/partner robot, OR both. That's a CLASSIC Dave hint.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Maybe the GDC has created a "bulldozing" foul? :confused:

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I still think it's two game-pieces.....call me far-fetched if you want to....

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Just FYI as this discussion continues, his name is officially Dozer. :)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Keeping my take on the hint at a very basic or low level...the height of the goal is approximately the same as the lip of a blue recycling bin...

Is their any reason it couldn't be 1v1v1v1v1v1 ?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

See 1v1v1, and "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

What'll realistically happen is that the top team will end up playing 1v5, or maybe it's 2v4 or 1v2 and 1v2, with no coordination at all.

I was thinking what if say there were 100 objects on the field, and 6 scoring bins. You each get a point for each object in your bin. It wouldn't make since to play d with the time lost and others scoring while you do it. Would it?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

It would. It's a lot easier to win if you can shut down 1114 or 254. With there being 5 robots all thinking the same thing, chances are HUGE that you'll get a de facto 5v1, where 2-3 are playing D and the rest are scoring, swapping roles every now and again.

And then there's the ranking problem--I'll just leave that to Andy Grady's explanation of the last year that was used.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

The video said that change is coming, so I doubt they're going to recycle much from the previous years, doesn't really connect with the hint.

The throwing away of the game rules probably means they're changing something big, which could mean anything. Number of alliances, number of teams in the alliance, large change in field size or shape, large change in robot size or shape, or something else. The hint actually tells us less about the game then before, because before at least we could kind of count on most of the general rules being the same.

Also, I doubt it'll be a projectile game, they wouldn't say change is coming and then give us the fourth projectile/shooting game in a row. Probably better for newer teams so that they're not going up against teams that have been working on some sort of shooting mechanism for the past 3 years.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Also, on a more practical note - I'd guess that most game pieces that are small enough and cheap enough to be produced upwards of 100 per event would probably be so small and easy to manipulate that a good team might actually be able to score a significant portion of that - enough to start to crowd out other teams, which would violate the whole "effectively individual matches" idea. If you did actually individual matches (one robot on the field at a time) then it would work (with fewer qualification rounds, I'd hope!) and you could add some sort of team challenge for elims with two or three on an alliance. However, that's not what FIRST ordered with the fields. I like the concept, though.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Havent put too much thought into this, but just want to throw it out there for bragging rights on the off-chance I am right.

This year we will se a complete reworking of the penalty system and how rules are written. That is why Frank is recycling the game manual.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I wouldn't be surprised if this happened actually, with the huge increase in penalties last year

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Maybe Dave is trying to give us a hint that Dozer and bots of that type are ineffective in this years game. I would find it odd for FIRST to switch animation styles when the community enjoys them and they are efficient at explaining the game.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I would find it EXTREMELY out of FIRST's character for robots of Dozer's class to have no role at all.

Dozer is generally regarded as the BLT/BoxBot class of robots. These are your very low-resource* teams who have a tough time building a basic robot--FIRST always attempts to have something that they can do to be a positive contribution to an alliance. Always.

If that has changed, then there is probably going to be a sudden shrinkage in FRC next year...



*I'm counting organization as a resource, along with funding and mentorship and parts.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

If this is the case, I sure hope there's some other easy task for rookie teams to handle. I think it's actually rather important that there be some tasks that a box-on-wheel can do to contribute in some way to an alliance.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Maybe they are just changing the format of the manual. Font, size, spacing, but they want to recycle cause you know environment or whatever...
Although a big change from last years game they could throw out there is heavy-only safety zones, it'd be a shame though if that happened.
Although for this not to be a joke the change that does come needs to be at least comparable to what the videos show, otherwise its kinda tame.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I think the GDC has shifted towards spectator/sport orientated games that aren't hard to understand. In games like logomotion, it wouldn't really be as interesting to someone who doesn't understand the scoring system, where as in Ultimate Ascent, its easy to tell. The more frisbees you shoot in the goal the more points, and the higher you climb on the pyramid the more points. I think they want to capture the kind of hype that sports get, and the edge of the seat matches that are the result of real time scoring and well matched alliances.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Just out of curiosity, do any of the other robot characters from the game animations have names?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Not that I know about. That being said, those are all significantly different from year to year; Dozer mainly gets bumpers and "finish" items (for example, an engine and spoiler in '08), or a change in the number of wheels if he's lucky, between years.

I can say that there is almost no chance dozer like robots will not be able to contribute next year. Growth and including rookie teams is something first always puts as one of their first priorities.

I can also say there is a very strong chance that first will either minimize arbitrary penalties, or at least make large changes to the rule book.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

People are probably reading way too far into the Dozer image (which hasn't been linked to this thread??). It's probably something in the animation that tells about a penalty in game.

I would go through all the things that I definitely don't think will change and why, but it's already been done several times.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

This would be a real tease to the FIRST community, but truthfully, it is possible. They very well could change how the manual itself is organized- this would explain why the manual was thrown in the recycle bin. However, it does not explain the rest of the video and why they only chose to highlight some of the big changes instead of all/most of them. So, while this may be a change, I doubt it will be the biggest change.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

This is a really good point, but not all sports require some sort of projectile motion into a goal, although a lot of them do. After all the projectile games, I think FIRST may be trying to find a balance between interesting everyone and having a non-projectile based competition.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I have no where near the time or patience to catch up with this year's runaway speculation train, so I'm just throwing this out without checking to see if anyone else has argued it.

I think the suggestion that they're recycling 2014 is a pretty persuasive one. My intuition on this is mainly driven by the very obvious recycling of the manual, and the combination of the history lesson in game changes and Frank boldly declaring that change is coming.

Think about it. The one absolute constant through the years is that each game is radically different from the previous year's. It's the ONE thing we all take for granted. Even the water game jokes that assume nearly everything about robot design will change are assuming the game is going to be different.

There's really only two ways to take Frank's statement. Option B (for boring) is that the game/robot/field is going to be radically different this year. This is not news. If I time traveled back here from two weeks in the future and declared that the 2015 game was totally new and different, I would be met with a resounding chorus of "and?"

Option M (for meta) is that Frank's statement means a change is coming to the fundamental nature of how things are done in FRC. Which really is news and surprising, as evidenced by the controversy of a recycled game.

Given that the game hints actually do have informational content and option B is completely lacking in information, I'm kind leaning towards option M...

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

It will be interesting to figure out exactly what the hint means. I think "big changes" (like changing the field design or number of robots on an alliance) would be drastic and unlikely, since I think FRC's format works fine. Still, we're innovators, soooo maybe there's going to be an emphasis on change and improving something.

If not, I have another theory... (for laughs, of course :D ) https://twitter.com/Team5412/status/547804129536782336

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I think that my earlier text is causing confusion in what I meant in my last post. I don't mean by any means that FIRST might be getting rid of low-resource bots that rookie teams can easily manage. I mean that maybe the game is leaving the ground level. For example (not an actual assumption of what the game might be but it would be something different) if the game was played with game pieces that were suspended above the field on strings. A rookie team could jut as easily build a chassis and simply put long poles on top to push around the pieces.

I agree that an elimination of these kit bots plus one or two parts would severely cut the number of new teams for FIRST and hope that this clears up my earlier statement.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Well, that's really the point, isn't it? Last year's clue basically led to the single word "Assist", which was just part of the name of the game. The "assists" in the game were not quite what any of the three sports call assists, in particular in that:
1) they counted the scoring "athlete" as being an assist
2) two other "athletes" could assist a single score
3) "assists" actually increased the value of the score

What "change" means in terms of game dynamics is obviously a great source of speculation. One of the big things mentioned is that alliance assignments will shift mid-match. I find that intriguing, but dubious. "Change" could be something as simple as last year's "hot goals" or something like a "forced" endgame - where the scoring for the first portion of the game and the second portion of the game are fundamentally different. Heck, it could be about counting the value of a pile of coins. My virtual money is on "change" referring to nothing mentioned in any CD post, including this one.

I can definitely see what you mean, that the hint could simply be change. "Change is coming" could mean less that there is a fundamental change in the rules, and more that there will be a change in something in every match, or even both. I like the idea some people have proposed that there will be two game pieces. To take it another step, what if there was one game piece at the start of the match, then halfway through, as pieces are scored, instead of those pieces being returned to the field, new, different ones are put on in their place? That would make for both a major fundamental change, and change within each match.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I think something that hasn't gotten a lot of attention in this thread is one possible explanation of the significance of the repeated footage. The year for which the game is not shown is '99 which is also Wayne Gretzky's hockey number. To quote the Wikipedia page on him, "The NHL retired his jersey number 99 league-wide, making him the only player to receive this honour". Does this point to a hockey game? I think it might. This game could be played by allowing teams to interact with, but not possess the pucks making the game a lot more like actual hockey than a shooting game.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Let's see... Rookies could theoretically manage any one of the following:
2010: push a soccer ball into a goal
2011: launch a minibot
2012: balance a bridge
2013: low goal points, at 1 point each, OR FCS blocker
2014: low goal/assist

How many of those require adding something to the chassis?

Let's make it easier. How many do NOT require adding something to the chassis?

*crickets*

Right. A box on wheels, with no further improvements, has typically been extremely non-competitive. Something has to be added--something simple, as simple as a bar between the wheels (2010), or an armchair (2014)--in order to be more than a nuisance to all who partner with or play against you. This means adding something, usually quite simple, and yet many teams are unable--or unwilling--to do that, or lack the means (or desire) to do it effectively.

Most teams go the opposite way, and this is where I think they run into trouble: They aim too high. They'll go high goal only, without considering that a quickly-dropped low goal can be better. That's all fine and dandy, mind you, but often those newer/lower-resource teams just can't figure out that maybe the top area isn't quite in range yet... so they should aim just a smidgen lower, but still strive for more. But those teams that aim too high end up being about as much competitive use as a box on wheels (which, don't get me wrong, can still be pretty effective--but it has to be used right).



On another note...
I think you're on to something with that game idea. There's that 5' long box in the KOP... What if it's some attachment that must be used in some way to manipulate the game pieces?

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Whoops looked at the wrong page!

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I like where this is going. It doesn't feel like rampant wild guesses that feel like the are being forced into the hint. Maybe the hint was '99 AND "Change is coming". We should refocus on collecting all the data we can from the hint video then we can analyze that data. You know, the scientific way. Just my 2 cents. (Pun intended)

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

+1

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Just remember that not all the "data" are useful data.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Change is coming.

We should expect that anyways. Right now the possibilities of that change keeps me up at night.

Change is coming.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

The other thing to be considered is that in 1999, you had robots fighting for control on... a puck.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

and that Gretzky retired in 1999...

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

And remember that the 2014 hint included professional players in the sports of Soccer, Basketball, and Hockey. And the hockey player with the most assists in last year's hint was also Wayne Gretzky!

Last year I totally thought the game would be a hockey game because we already had a basketball and soccer game. Since the GDC has games made several years in advance do you think last year's hint could partially point to this year's game?

Also beware if it is a hockey game they might try to bring back the lunacy surface to simulate ice :yikes:

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

Last year's game took elements of hockey (and soccer, and basketball, and volleyball) and transformed it into something that could be called Robot Ball. It had elements of sport, transformed. With more development and time, it could become a great thing. I don't think the GDC is looking for shadows of human games anymore.

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I don't think that a slippery driving surface is necessary. If you look at hockey players they aren't slipping and sliding around, they have pretty good control. In fact, the way they skate is pretty similar to how a typical FRC robot moves on carpet (forward and backward, sweeping turns, and pivots).

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

I also agree that a hockey game does not automatically mean the use of white plastic.
Roller Hockey anyone???:D

Re: 2015 HINT DISCUSSION
 

where were the elements of hockey? yeah I guess catching something over a raised bar (like the 2014 truss) is like volleyball and there's some soccer since you are shooting into a goal, and maybe basketball with the 1 point goal, but when I think of hockey I think of shooting something into a goal on the ground by sliding a game object across the surface of the field and no FRC game has done that. Breakaway was the closest to that but the bumps in the field made it so that robots were often kicking balls above the field surface, not sliding them across it