Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Dear FIRST,

When you released the game this year, I was a little disappointed, but if my time in FRC has taught me anything, watch the game before you judge it. Watch 254 and 148 play the game. Watch the rookies play the game. And then, you may judge.

I have seen both, and FIRST, nerf co-op and litter in qualifications.

Nerfing the co-op points and unprocessed litter points would not only help balance out the rankings a little bit, but it would also greatly improve the quality of the game.

Currently, if your team can manage a co-op stack and you have a Noddle Jesus on your team, you can manage in the neighborhood of 60-80 points every match.

Now, co-op will normally shake up the rankings, but in week 1, this was particularly bad. Your robot can can stack two totes and your human player has the great divine on his side, and all of a sudden you can break into the top 8.

But to me, that's not even the worst part. The quality of the game drastically improves when you remove these components.

I recall in one qualifications match where the alliances messed up the co-op stack early and do you know what we saw? A close match with multiple stacks on the scoring zone. The match was insane and intense. And you know what? The crowd loved it; so much so that one person ran up to me yelling "This is how it's supposed to be played."

In the playoffs, the co-op totes are completely removed, and alliances can focus their strategic efforts towards getting the most points with totes and RCs, and what did we see? Everyone was getting in the game. The weakest alliances were posting some of the best scores, teams were daring to stack higher than ever, and the game really came into its own.

The crowd loved it. The teams loved it. I loved it.

- Sunny G.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I'm going to disagree with you here.

From early on (right at kickoff) we noticed that the game was actually 3 different games (the seeding rounds, the elims, and the finals) and that each 'game' had different requirements. Because of that, a robot (or team) that will do well in one 'game' may not do well in the next.

Because of this those that are designing for the seeding rounds must also scout for the other 2 game types. and those designing for the elime or finals need to sell themselves as viable partners to those designed for the seeding rounds.

The nuances of this year are far deeper than most years, and I believe that that is a good thing.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Play the game as is and see how you do.

I agree the noodles can effect the game so be it. That means our team has to have that capability if employed against our alliance...not my favorite part but it is what it is. I do see it as "cheap" HP points but they still count and you have a choice of 6 in RC -or- 4 thrown or 1 pushed to LF...we plan to use some for 6 throwing would waste 2 points per N.

As for Co-OP again its part of the game...so live with it. Your choice whether to co-op or not. Your pain or gain.

It would be different if at launch they did not tell us the rules but alas THEY DID! Only major change was eliminating the loophole "Noodle Agreement".

So either you designed a robot as a team to compete effectively in 2015 or you did not.

Its like life , not perfect. You do your best with what you have as a team.

Perhaps feedback will help after RR or this could be the best game ever... guess we'll see.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I don't see this as whining at all. He is pointing out his observations of the game, and how it could be improved. I agree with him, there was a team at our event that could really only coop and had a very good human player. It is very dissapointing to see a robot that is better seed worse just because they couldn't throw noodles as wel . Human players having too much effect was a legitimate complaint in 2009, and I think it is just as legitimate here.
Edit* Another problem with the noodles is that they can be off putting to outside people. Over the weekend, I had several team parents ask me why teams whose robots were playing much better were scoring lower than people who were throwing noodles. To outside people, the noodles take away some of the legitimacy of this being a " robotics" competition. Just something to think about

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I was personally a bit concerned about the value of litter when I first saw the game at kickoff. I thought it was worth way too many points. Though, after getting some hands on experience with the noodles, I was fairly certain most human player would be unable to throw the noodles far enough, diminishing my concerns of human players scoring way too many points.

As build season moved along, our human player (as well as other human players) were starting to show signs that they could consistently throw litter onto the opponents field. After watching week 1 events, it's clear most human players can throw litter and it's a very good strategy. Why? Two main reasons, one, it's worth four points if it's unprocessed, and two, it clogs up your opponent's field, creating annoying obstacles.

The problem I have with litter is that human players can directly score many points, a lot of times more than the robot themselves, this can swing matches. What I don't have a problem with is pool noodles getting in the way of robots. It's part of the engineering challenge. How are you going to be able to push pool noodles and still get over the scoring platform? There are several simple solutions, but I hope you get my point.

I think the penalty of pool noodles getting in the way of opponent robots is reason alone to throw them. My suggestion to FIRST, make unprocessed litter worth 1 or 2 points, preferably 1.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I'm going to say no, there wasn't a team that could only do coop. Any team that can coop can place a bin or two at a time on the scoring platform.

The litter throwing is also a good thing because you could design a robot to deal with litter if you wanted, people didn't so they want the litter removed.

What's unbalanced in this game is probably the recycling containers. They are worth too much because they are the item that is the most difficult to place. They should be worth more points than the totes because they are harder to manipulate, but their value of 2 times the stack height is out of line.

The game would be better if the scoring were 2 points per bin and 4 points per recycling container with a bonus of 1 point per level.

With that, a capped stack would be 12 points plus 10 for the container instead of 36. That would give high stacking/capping teams a competitive advantage without being the overwhelming advantage it currently is.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

* Coopertition: I like it. I like it a lot. It adds a dynamic in the preliminary rounds that is *almost* required in order to make it into the eliminations - at least as a captain. We specifically chose to address this in our designs from day one, spent a lot of time on it and how have now problem doing 75% of the work for a coopertition stack. To eliminate such an integral part of the game at this point in time would be... very unfair to teams who chose to dedicate time and energy to accomplishing this.

* Noodle Points: I do think they are a little too heavily weighed as a part of the game and, though I was pleased that they made a change to address the infamous "Noodle Agreement," the adding of the tape significantly altered the way they fly through the air and further increased their utility - both for scoring points and for potential "defense." I would rather that "unprocessed litter" be worth 3 points and sticking them into a stacked RC be worth 8... Perhaps even letting the noodle points count if the RC is on a scoring platform, but not stacked. (i.e. score the noodle, but not the RC). But, hey, I know that everybody has a different opinion and that I don't get to decide on rules. We'll enjoy playing the game as is...

* As for your statement that "weaker alliances were scoring the most points," it sounds to me like the "top" teams needed to scout better. Yes, coopertition skews the standings in terms of being a predictor for elimination success, but good scouting can see right through that.

* Can low-resource teams compete? Yes - if they have some engineering expertise. This *is* an engineering challenge so to ask for a game where strong engineering skills are not required is, well, self-defeating.

Tasks that can be done with little more than a kitbot: Sweep pool noodles into landfill; push totes onto scoring platform (not stacked);

Task that can be done easily by adding something to the kitbot:
Stacking totes; stacking RC's on short stacks of totes; sticking pool noodles into RC's at HP station; Snatching RC's from center during auto; pushing multiple RC's and totes into autozone during autonomous.

Yes, money and access to a machine shop can make a huge difference and reaching Einstein without such access is very, very difficult. However, you can compete very well at the district and regional level with very little money, mediocre tools and some ingenuity.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Actually, they can change rules of the game, referenced by the team update that addressed the "noodle agreement". There is also a clause in the rule book stating that point values may be changed for championships.

Quite frankly, it's not even the fact that noodles can score so much being thrown, it's the fact that the game wants these noodles to have more of a role than being bonus points on top of a stack. I care more about noodles being thrown, getting into robots, and getting into drivetrains. We got a noodle stuck in our drivetrain in one of our finals matches. We essentially had to saw the noodle in half with our chains to free ourself. I feel like teams will start to take advantage of this, and play "defense" on landfill bots by throwing noodles to get jammed into other robots' drivetrains.

Also, the point values are also pretty high. 40 points on noodles. That's a 6 tote stack with an RC and noodle on top, something you don't see often in quals.... or even playoffs at weaker regionals.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I think this year has by far the best implementation of co-opertition that we've ever had. A match with or against a really good team is good for everyone now and there's no disadvantage to doing it. Perfect!

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

We explicitly designed our robot to be good at scoring on the co-op step, at the expense of the rest of our stacking game. We decided to forego any chassis cutout to make placing on the co-op step as easy as we could manage. As a robot that primarily stacks totes and has a fairly weak recycle container game, we designed around auton and co-op knowing that these two tasks would make it drastically more likely for us to seed first and win the bin race at alliance selection.

While I completely agree from a scoring balance perspective that these changes would make the game more exciting, it would be quite disappointing that our major design compromise was for nothing. If that's truly what it takes to make the game better, so be it, but just know what the consequences of such a choice are.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I'm the kind of guy who no longer plays video games that are fun. I play the really frustrating ones so I don't mind the noodles from a gameplay standpoint. But when designing a robot you are given roughly the general spectrum you need to perform under. It was clear from the start that even if you didn't plan on using noodles they would end up on the field so designing around that is something that teams should have done. The noodles I saw being thrown were done on a "when I can basis." I personally love the idea of the noodles because I love how it enables a team to play defense, without throwing defense onto the role of a robot. Last year there were so many shoving matches which while fun to watch didn't really add much to the games complexity. The thrown noodles makes defense a decision, instead of a state of being. The decision is "Do I need to move this noodle" the state was last years "are these two robots locked in a shoving match for a majority of the round?" In my personal opinion decisions are much better for the flow of a game then forcing people into states of hard defense.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Hjelstrom, I think you hit the nail on the head. In week 1, it was exciting to see opposing alliances working together at the coopertition bridge communicating ever so subtly through minute movements of their machines.

Having been involved in FIRST for over a decade, this is the first year where I looked at the qualification pairings through a completely new perspective. For the first time, I was excited to see excellent robots on the opposing alliance. Co-op points are the highest reward per effort that I've seen in recent years, so it heavily encourages participation. Further, the importance of Co-op points has discouraged throwing litter early in qualification matches.

With respect to the three different stages of the game, my hat is off to the game design committee. I believe this was done in an effort to create parity between alliances. The criteria for being successful in qualifications is different than the criteria for being successful in elims and finals.

There is a noticeable increase in the importance of scouting this year because one cannot heavily rely on high scores as a barometer for a team's capabilities. The capability to deliver stacks of two yellow totes to the co-op bridge is of great value in qualifications, but has reduced importance in later stages. The importance of being able to throw noodles consistently goes up in elims and up further in the finals. The capability to cap stacks with cans and litter goes up in elims and finals.

Also, remember that this is week 1. During week 1, coopertition points were a high percentage of top teams' total scores. If memory serves correctly (since online results are still not available), the top 8 teams at the Georgia Southern Classis were awarded somewhere around 30-35% of their points from co-op points. Scores tend to increase week-over-week, more so this year because of the lack of proportional increase in defensive activities. In later weeks, I expect that Co-op will still be the easiest 40 points alliances achieve, but there will be a reduction in how much those points skew qualification standings.

In closing, human players will continue to be an important part of this year's game, but their impact (outside of offensively scored litter) is limited to 40 points. The disparity between the best and worst human player throwers will shrink over time to the point where a "noodle jesus" may only have a 10-20 point positive impact on their alliance's total score. As non-litter scores improve at later regionals, district championships, and the world championships, I expect this impact to reduce to around 5% of an alliance's points.

Great game... I wouldn't change a thing!

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

In terms of co-op as a game mechanic, I think it's purpose is to allow teams without the ability to score containers to seed highly.

With a tote stack auto and co-op every match, a robot without RC manipulation skills can still seed highly. Some teams noticed this from day 1 and built to it. 1519 at GSD was not skilled with Recycling containers, but by co-op stacking and autonomous tote stacking nearly every match they ended up the first seed, picked the best RC manipulator at the event (95), and won the event.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Although I agree with you that the containers boost the score too much I think the multiplication values need to be easy. Something like 2 points per level versus 4. You have to keep the scoring simple because the audience already has a hard time following this complex scoring system.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Does anyone see it that allowing points for thrown litters is disadvantaging girl players? Same with Frisbies in 2013.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Both litter and frisbees require significantly more finesse than physical ability to throw effectively.
I see no difference between male or female human players at either task.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I'm pretty sure the weakest person on our team(which is pretty weak btw) could throw the litter the length of the field. As stated above, it's a lot more about finess and technique than power. In fact too much power usually has bad results. I would argue that height is more of an advantage than anything else. Short people can do it yes but will take more practice and effort on average than a tall person probably.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

That maybe true. But from the matches I've watched, I haven't seen a girl player in that role. I wonder if what you said is also FIRST's rationale.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I suspect the point is less "girls can't throw" and more "girls tend to be shorter". There is a common argument for taller being better when throwing over the alliance wall. Anecdotally this past weekend (at Horsham), this observation appeared to have some merit for noodles. That said, I'm not arguing to change the practice(s) at all. Heck, my Einstein HP in 2013 was like 5'4"? (I don't know how tall he is, but he's not tall.) Granted, 2015 is a lot closer to 2009 than 2013 in this regard. As for not seeing girls as HPs; given our ratio on most Drive Teams and teams in general, it's not so surprising regardless of the HP task.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

With a sister who regularly throws for her track and field events and is hoping to be the human player... no, I don't see it as a disadvantage at all ;)

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

OK, good point, I was thinking in terms of the ref pads rather than in terms of explaining it to the stands.

If the Containers were 2 pts/level instead of 4, the Northern Lights top 12 qualifying averages would have been:

Rank - Team - Qual Avg - New Rank - New Qual - Delta

1 3130 95.66 1 77.66 -18.00
2 525 92.22 2 70.66 -21.56
3 5172 77.66 4 65.22 -12.44
4 4623 75.22 3 65.22 -10.00
5 4859 63.22 5 63.22 -7.33
6 4624 68.55 7 60.33 -8.22
7 2512 67.55 6 61.55 -6.00
8 5638 67.11 8 59.11 -8.00
9 27 64.33 9 53.44 -10.89
10 2501 62.77 10 53.21 -9.56
11 876 60.44 12 49.55 -10.89
12 5232 59.88 11 50.77 -9.11


That change wouldn't affect the order of the standings much, but it would make them much tighter. Which I think would be a good thing as it makes the gap between the number 1 seed and the number 3 seed more surmountable.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

525's human player was so short that he had to jump to make 6-tote stacks behind the wall, but he was one of the best throwers I have seen. I don't think hardly any HPs in FRC are at the point where physical limitations are the reason why they can't throw well, I think insufficient practice is almost exclusively the limiting factor.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

As long as all teams can score both noodle and co-op points, the field stays leveled, especially with the average-score system this year. I agree co-op is worth too much, but it just makes the little guys closer to the top teams this year. Scouts are going to need to be good.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Except that at Inland Empire, one of the best HPs in the game for throwing was also one of the shortest. I strongly suspect (opinion, nothing to back it up) that one of the reasons his team was picked was his ability to rack up the 4s, match after match after match.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

While the whole "humans scoring points in a robotics competition" is a debate worthy of its own thread (which I'm sure already exists circa 2009), the co-op points are a completely different matter.

You mention that lowering the co-op points currently "shake up the rankings" and lowering them would "balance out the rankings". My confusion comes from how something that was in the game from day one of build season could somehow cause a game to have rankings that were not as they were intended to be. FIRST intended to have working with the other alliance during the Quals be a sizable chunk of ranking well for the Playoffs, otherwise they wouldn't have made a stack of six with a can and a noodle worth nearly the same amount as possibly just putting a single tote on the step.

Whether or not a team chose to design for this is simply a matter of priorities. Do you want to possibly place more emphasis on ranking well or playing well in the playoffs? It's probably not that hard to choose both, but regardless, the co-op was something that simply just had to be considered from the get-go, just like the bridge in 2012.

It's always been there. Removing it would just hurt the teams who recognized it from the beginning in their strategic game analysis, which is probably something most teams should strive to do.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Indeed, the funny thing 3476's human player trained a fair number of the best human players at IE, even though he never has time to throw litter himself because of all the tote loading he has to do. 3250's human player was nervous cause she never thrown litter in competition but we never doubted her. she practiced with our human player in the hallways between the matches, and she is really good at it.

No one on our alliance at IE liked the litter throwing, but once the throws started going, we felt compelled to throw too to keep up with the pace of scores. I think canning litter was much harder (3250 was good at that too). I kinda wish the game got stopped throwing until the last 20 seconds. You don't need more than 20 seconds to empty the litter bin.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Yeah, I think this would be the least disruptive and least controversial way to address the "noodle minefield" situation.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Totally agree. Changing it from "up to 20 seconds" to "only till 20 seconds" would immensely improve gameplay.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I think you mean "after" instead of "till".

This would also add some much needed drama to the endgame.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

So you're taking any noodle manipulators that exist and making them essentially useless, how is that "non-disruptive"?

Have you seen a noodle manipulator because I for sure haven't yet.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Why use a noodle manipulator when you can get a human player to load a noodle into a container? It's also illegal to launch noodles to the other side of the field via a robot.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Till sounds right to me; but so does after. Either way, we are saying/wanting the same thing.

FIRST said Recycle Rush would be a game without defense. What they meant to say, was no robot-robot defense. HP are the most powerful part of every alliance. They have the ability to both score points and play defense.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Just wait.......

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

They're talking about robots processing litter into its landfill, not launching it across the field.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I am going to use my team, 237, as an example of how both of these topics can aid a team.

1. The co-op stacks were important in our ranking at the Waterbury Event in the NE district. Even though we never did any ourselves, our partners and other alliance did and helped us out a lot, and we ranked 5th, and ended up being the 4th alliance captain.

2. The litter also helped out a lot in both ways it could be used. Our alliance made multiple smaller stacks with RC's filled with litter and made it to the finals of the event. The litter also forced a third match in the final after the second match was decided by unprocessed litter.

Although this is just on instance, I personally think that if used correctly, both aspects can make an event that much more exciting. You can see the 5-8 alliance move forward if they use the litter right, and they may be the best teams if they just got unlucky with the co-op stack. I think this makes this year's game a little more unpredictable compared to some of the other games FIRST has put out.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I don't think most people are upset about litter in containers at all, and I don't think anyone wants to remove that part of the game. It's litter being thrown (unprocessed) that is the source of headaches for everyone.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Exactly.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Unprocessed litter has been part of the game since day 1. Teams should have known that litter would be an issue this year. Being unable to drive over or throw litter effectively isn't a flaw within the game, it's problem with the teams that didn't adequately prepare for it.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Yes, everyone knew it would be an absolutely terrible game mechanic that adds nothing but frustration to the game.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

When something doesn't work on the robot, I don't put my hands in my pockets and go "aw shucks, too bad I can't change it."

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

You don't have to keep your opinions so close to the vest Tom, let us know what you really think about this years FRC Game: Noodle Nuisance!

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I wonder if you would have a different opinion if your stat line below was a little different.



To give you credit, your human player was crazy good.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Seems crazy to me that a robotics competition would be set up in such a way that the contribution from the human player would be so close to that of the robot.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I feel like I might be shunned a bit for this opinion on the noodles
I find the noodles to be a mixed bag. It is a smart use for a game piece and ties into the game well. So it does add (some) depth to the game.
Unfortunately the amount of work put into dealing with noodles on the field =/= the sense of "accomplishment" from doing so.
Its like when you wad up a paper and throw it into the recycling from across the office, feels good didn't take much effort. The exact opposite is true this year you put a bunch of time and effort into doing something that isn't fun.
The noodles were great on paper they add a lot of depth to the game but it didn't make the game more fun.
I would have liked to see the noodles used as a bit of end game. At the end of the match whoever had less unprocessed litter gets bonus points. At the same time open it up so that noodles can be tossed between the two sides by robots. In addition to that adding more options on how you can score the litter would make litter relevant in this game and worth thinking about aside from have a flat surface on the side of your robot that can push litter around.
Dunno...
Either way I want the GDC to take lessons from this and adapt to new games, not have new games adapt in ways to mimic this years game.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Remember the last time that human players played the game more than robots? Pepperidge farm remembers... 2009

They did, hence why they are now voicing concerns.

As much as I hate to say it, we don't have to stick with what we have, FIRST needs to have a fun and enjoyable program to keep teams around. If they keep making poor choices in game design teams will start leaving because they realize they don't have to deal with what they get.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

This game is very reminiscent of that year that we shall never repeat... It could be changed, but will it?

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Guys, please don't be so disrespectful.

Noddle Jesus died for our wins.

- Sunny G.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Praise be to Noodle Jesus, his score endures forever (or at least until the playoffs).

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

So... instead you complain and try to get the rules changed? I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

I will confess that I'm biased in favor of noodle-throwing because my team's human player is extremely skilled. That being said, he didn't start off that way. Our team recognized the importance of litter points early in the season and Noodle Jesus practiced hard for six weeks. Whether or not litter is a good game mechanic, it can be scored in other ways, and every other team had the opportunity to develop a great human player just like we did.

I don't complain that coopertition is a broken game mechanic just because the #1 seed at our regional beat us in coop points. Instead, I admit that they addressed the challenge better than my team did.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Right.

Let me make something clear here. We've ALL known from Day 1 that noodles would be thrown, not just stuffed into recycling containers. We've ALL known the characteristics of the noodles, and had the opportunity to run over/through/around them. We've ALL had the chance to develop an HP into an ace noodle thrower.

And we've all had the opportunity to understand all this, particularly after Week 0 events. And the same opportunity to respond to the game!

Now what I'm seeing/hearing/reading (after Week 1) is:
"We don't like the game we've been given. We really hate this aspect that we've known about since Day 1 and haven't complained about yet. The GDC should do something to discourage this aspect or change it so that it isn't used."

Do you guys realize what you sound like? You don't sound like professionals, folks. You sound like... well, let's just say that I wouldn't expect that kind of reaction out of adults (or even most high schoolers!).

Do I particularly like the litter element? Not really. It just kind of... I don't know, just doesn't quite seem to fit in. Am I going to ask for it to be changed? NO!!!! Why should Week 1 teams have to play a different game than Week 2, Week 3, Week 4, Week 5, and Week 6 teams? Or, to put it another way: Why should later weeks "get to" play a "better" game than Week 1 teams? Can you answer me that?

If you don't like the litter element, you can do your best to convince your partners not to play it--your opponents too, for that matter. I saw several matches at IE where one side or the other didn't send anything over the wall, a couple where neither side launched a single piece. Same for Coopertition, at that--talk to your opponent and let them know you won't be going for it. (Or don't talk to them, and don't respond if they put a couple up for you.)

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Give him some credit... His 40 point perfect game was in the playoffs.

Re: Nerf Co-op and Litter
 

Our robot didn't have any real issue with it. This might seem crazy but in addition to mentoring I am a stakeholder in FIRST and more specifically FRC. As someone who looks at FRC as both a program and a product, I think Recycle Rush with the current litter element makes this game a bad product.

I've never gone on record that it is a broken game mechanic or one that needs to be nerfed or otherwise fixed. I do recognize that it is a bad game mechanic and one the game design committee has allowed itself to adjust. These ideas are not always mutually exclusive, but in my case they are.