Human Player Strategies
 

With all the rule updates, it seems to me the GDC wants the HPs to load one Tote into the Tote Chute, open the door, repeat. This seems like it would take a fairly long time, 5ish seconds per tote. Has anyone thought of any good ideas to speed up this process? The only idea I can think of is to line 2 the totes up and push 2 through without letting the door close in between Totes.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Can the two totes balance on the chute at the same time?

We are also concerned about the speed with which we can release the totes... Once we have a fully functional robot, we are going to play with some ideas...

*It might be best to just send a big pile of totes into the field so that the robots can pick them up at will. (Though I picture a disorganized mess of a pile of totes...)

* We are going to explore ways to use a two-person loading system. It would be a bit of a dance as only one can be in hte human player station at a time, but, at the least, each alliance will have an extra human player at all times, so it will be worth exploring.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Generally I would discourage throwing pool noodles, but I'm sure you already figured that one out.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Why not throw the noodles? There are only a max of 7 you could score in containers.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Results are mixed, but it seems like it has a low chance of success and a high chance of introducing another obstacle for your own alliance.
Even if it isn't a hindrance to a machine, it can be an annoyance and potentially be a source for fouls (throwing them in at the wrong time or robot accidentally ripping one).
I hope that teams use practice day to figure out if they can do it and play accordingly.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

With practice it is very possible to throw LITTER over the step at a high percentage. I'm sure my team is not the only one to do tryouts. Have your human player practice throwing for a few hours a week for the next month. You'll be very surprised at how good a skilled human player will be this year. Unfortunately, many of the teams will not do this and will barely make it to their own landfill on a good toss. Hopefully those teams will realize this and give their LITTER to a better player. If you're underestimating the value of scoring 3-5 pieces of LITTER for 4 points a piece which is very possible, you should re-think that. The value could be the same as 10 scored totes, and it will absolutely have an impact on seeding.

With practice you should not worry about causing obstacles for your alliance, as they should all at least reach the landfill. If you take the human player position just as serious as other positions on the drive team (you should) you shouldn't worry about them causing fouls. It is not a foul for a robot to accidentally rip a noodle either.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

From my understanding, there are no rules prohibiting Human Players moving game objects during autonomous, so long as the human player doesn't cross the starting line.

This means that the Human Player can start moving totes into the zone in autonomous by throwing them into the HP Zone, lowering the distance between cycles.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

I do not think their concern is with moving totes around the zones but the length of input through the feeding station. It will require some coordination becuase of the length of a single feed cycle. They previously stated and I will quote, " 5 seconds per tote" with only one tote entering and exiting at a time leads to only some 25 totes entering through one side and there may be teams who say that will never be good enough.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

I know that some teams will be successful at it, which is why I said that results are mixed. I was a HP for 2 years, so I am happy to see them shine: a HP that contributes 40 points a match would be shiny indeed.
I was just trying to summarize why some teams would take that position - I think that the best strategy is what you describe: make a great HP and get those points. If your Alliance doesn't have a HP that can do it, then have them be another set of eyes on the field to coordinate the teams.
As far as fouls go, unfortunately "accidentally" is a matter of Ref judgement, so that will vary from regional to regional.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Not only do you have to clear the Step, but you also have to clear the other Alliance's Land Fill (otherwise, they get a point for being in their landfill). You really want to get it behind a stack of totes to make it even more difficult for the other Alliance to quickly move the Litter into their landfill.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

In a robotics competition, with emphasis on STEM, why does FIRST even have an option for human players to score points? Seems dumb to work so hard for six weeks only to have lose a match because the other alliance could accurately throw a basketball. Pool noodles and qualifying based on average score make it a little more palatable, but it's still crazy.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Yes, the goal is to get it across the opponents landfill zone, but the risk/reward is worth trying even if you're only marginally successful. The fact that there are no winners or losers of each match only magnifies that. If you land it completely in the opposing alliance landfill you give 3/60 teams at the regional 1 point (raising the Qualification Average at the regional by .05 points each match you do this). If you have even 1 inch of that litter extending past their landfill, you give your own alliance 4 qualification points.


Hey, at least it's not like 2009 Lunacy, where the essentially the ONLY way to score points was by having your human player do it.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

The Human Player Zone is still defined as an "area", thus not an "infinitely tall volume" similar to the Landfill and AutoZones.

Thus, is it not technically possible for one Human Player (and/or Driver) to operate the chute door while standing OUTSIDE (yet reaching over into) of the taped area near the operator consoles, while the second Human Player loads totes into the chute.

As long as they are not simultaneously touching a tote (which is in contact with the chute) and the chute door, it appears at first glance this would be legal.

This would satisfy the following rules, as well as significantly speed up the loading process I would imagine.

Thoughts? ::rtm::

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

I mentioned this in my thread last week, that I'd like there to be some clarification on it. (And that I'd send in a Q&A on it if I had access to that.) I suspect that most refs would call a person standing outside the human player zone loading a tote into the chute while another player was in that zone as a G5 violation, or perhaps even just give a card for violating the spirit of the game/rules. (And really the chute system is there for safety reasons, so you can probably ban just about any odd shenanigans on those grounds anyway.)

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

My feeling is that the reason the human player zone is still an area and not a volume is such that other human players can pass totes to the human player in the human player zones, and similar tactics involving the other human players.

The intent is almost certainly not to allow for cooperative chute-loading between human players, where one holds the door and the other is loading it, as that defeats the purpose of the entire chute and chute door system.

I hope teams don't abuse this, because I could see the GDC re-defining this as a volume, thus rendering some other cooperative human player strategies illegal.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

If you could explain, based on the language written, how is G5 being violated with the strategy proposed. As this is what I would ask a referee and expect an answer in-line with what is written, not an opinion.

Teams were more than willing to "reach over" into the Landfill or AutoZone's until it was clarified to be a volume. May I ask how is this different?

Thanks for the thoughts, both of you.

However, as long as the two people are not simultaneously touching a tote, and the chute door, per G6:

I do not see how any intent is broken and the safety aspect is still adhered to. The first human player is simply turning around, grabbing the next tote as the second human player/driver is operating the door.

Unless a rule or GDC clarification is found to invalidate it, it is simply a way to maximize efficiency while playing the game.

I encourage more discussion and it would be great to see a Q&A question to get a final confirmation.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Our team did some pool noodle throwing tests...in the end we decided it wouldn't be necessary.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

1. What techniques are you using to throw the noodle
2. Can you load and feed the totes in upside down?

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Are you implying that both of them are in the human player zone at the same time?
That would be a violation of G5: Only one ALLIANCE member may be in each HUMAN PLAYER ZONE at a time.

If you mean that the second human player is handing totes off to the first human player, who operates the whole loading process, then sure, that seems fine. That seems like a perfectly acceptable strategy IMO.

However if the second human player is somehow loading the chute while the first is holding the door open, that does defeat the purpose of the subsystem and the safety rules.

If you could clarify which of the above scenarios it is you're attempting to describe, that would be helpful. Or if you have something completely different in mind...

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Team 1619 did testing last week on the amount of time it takes to load a tote onto the field from the tote chute.

To give the background information on our testing we used two human players and a tote chute with an aluminum (closely matching the friction of the smooth HDPE that I believe is specified in the manual) ramp instead of a wooden ramp. We also treated the human player zone as a volume, not an area, and watched to ensure the second human player didn't cross the plane of the human player zone.

Our loading technique involved one human player tossing totes, in the proper orientation, to a second human player who loaded the totes and opened the chute door to allow them to slide onto the field. We did start the experiment with a tote "pre-loaded" into the chute to represent a normal situation where the human player arrived at the tote chute before the robot (which could be true or false depending on individual team strategies). We found that it takes 3 seconds on average, dividing the total time to load a set of totes by the number of totes loaded, to load a single tote onto the field. Our lowest average tote loading time was 2.75 seconds per tote, but this is not something that we expect to see with regularity due to the difficult of catching a tote while simultaneously loading it into the chute.

To speak a little more to our technique for loading the totes, the back human player would toss the flat in the correct orientation to the second human player. This means that the tote would require minimal re-alignment before being slid into the end of the tote chute. The human player who manned the chute door would catch these totes, adjust their alignment slightly, then slide them into the chute. While the tote was sliding down the chute and before it hit the chute door, the human player would remove his hand from the tote and rapidly open the chute door so that the tote's motion was not stopped by it. We found it easiest to rapidly open the door when the handle was pulled slightly towards the outside of the assembly, or away from the chute door, while being opened. When the tote had nearly slid out the chute, the human player holding the chute door would call out for the first human player to toss another tote. By the time the human player at the chute door releases the chute door handle and steps to receive the incoming tote, it will be in position to be directly loaded into the chute after the catch.

This technique required good timing between the two human players and accurate throws to the second human player at the tote chute. It would be a technique best used for eliminations alliances where the human players could practice together to coordinate better. If the human player at the tote chute was merely loading the totes from a stack placed next to the chute, it took an average of 3.5 seconds to load each tote. It wasn't much slower, but it also wasn't quite as fun to do! :D

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

What if you had a small tower of totes lined up beside the Tote Chute, such that you could just load another one in the moment that it goes through, without having to bend over, pick one up and then push it through?

That could potentially save on some time, as well as removing the need for the coordination required.

All you would need is for the Alliance to decide on one main chute and to put 2 stronger robots in that position, with the third robot and their own HP working on the other side of the field.

If all 3 Human Players did that during autonomous, it's feasible to say that they could move ~25 of the 30 totes during the autonomous period alone, reducing a ton of time spent walking between the back of the Alliance Station and the Human player Zone.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

In addition to the human players, no rule prevents the drivers helping move totes and litter during the autonomous period. The only prohibition is G31, which stops the coaches from helping. I'm guessing that (especially with practice), the 9 non-coach members of the drive team can move everything to just about wherever they want in those first 15 seconds.

(And oddly enough, G32 even allows the human player to drive the robot. There really isn't a difference between the three non-coach positions as far as the rules are concerned. Your HP and driver could even swap off during a match if for some reason they wanted to.)

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

It looks like our Drive Team will be doing some physical weight training this season....

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

I've got a couple items. First, regarding the whole "one loads while the other holds the door" idea, reference Q281. It's not illegal until tomorrow, when it will be. Good call by Kevin Leonard.

The other item, regarding the use of human players: First and foremost, it gets more people involved--it's not uncommon for basketball players to be "aggressively recruited" for example. Second, it provides a means for what are known as "brave little toasters" (also known as box-bots, brick-bots, or Dozers) to have an extra edge in competition. And third... It's tradition! There's been a human player for roughly 20 years, why stop?

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Is there anything against carrying multiple totes from the stack to the Human Player station at once?

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Nope. Unless you're being unsafe about it.

Re: Human Player Strategies
 

Or doing it over the line in Auto. Or are a coach. But no, otherwise, have at it--you certainly won't be alone.