Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

I see a clear trend in the number of robots per alliance each year. I think that this clearly indicates that 2017 will be the year we finally see 3.63 robots per alliance.

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Oh its been pointed out :D

LOL^^

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

http://agmanager.info/marketing/outl...tters/Corn.asp

Clearly, FIRST is increasing their corn stocks in advance of 2017 competition season.

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

This. Why isn't logomotion U? That is the defining "unusual game piece"-type game for me.

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Logo motion had game pieces that were similar to the tubes in 2007. As has been said previously in the thread, most frc games have game pieces that are completely different from past games but have some similarities. For example, nearly every single ball type of game uses a different type of ball. The similarities though are the mechanisms designed for the tasks. I think U or unusual games are categorized by the fact that students have to design unique mechanisms to interact with game pieces without past experience in doing so with a similar object.

Thanks for positing this- 100% will use at offseason meetings! (Also maybe to bet on next years game with some fellow students- outside school of course!)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

So this pre-season we will be discussing ways in which our robot can manipulate unusually shaped ball things while crossing carpet that is not corn water colored. All the while remembering that we will likely need to score in a fashion that will not include said ball or carpet to maximize points.

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

This year should be an unusual object game. You know what an unusual object is? Water.

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Last year I managed to have a discussion with Frank about game design and goals. He stated that "there is no cycle" --- but --- also said that they do try to have 3 years of different game experiences since the average FRC student spends 3 years in the program. This kind of opens the door to reusing game elements/aspects every 3 years, or more.

With that in mind, and given how much field there was in 2016, I predict open/minimal structures on the field.

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

:yikes:

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Quite often, a few basic rules lead to emergent behavior patterns that repeat with specific frequency or expand in patterns that are not at all obvious on inspection of the rules. Are you familiar with Conway's Game of Life?

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Okay, So I've gone and made what I think is some pretty decent predictions on what next years game will contain, I'm not positive on the exacts, but we can make some clear guesses. So we can look at the past games (As we already have been):

So we can obviously assume that there are going to be balls, (although we can't completely rule it out) not only because next year's cycle position is the "unusual game piece", but because each year goes on and off ball based gameplay, the only outlier being Lunacy, which had balls, but also had the hex-based trailer targets.
However, there is a game piece I suspect we will be using in the game: inflatables, there were three years in between Rack and Roll and LogoMotion, and it's been five years since logo, I would say chances are decent for a Inflatable based game.
We can also guess that the field will be either open or have much less obstacles than the last two years. In the past, rarely was there more than a single year in between games with anymore than games with nothing more than a single large obstacle in the center of the field. In fact, the last two years have been surprising in how many obstacles have been in their games, Recycle Rush is the only game in the last 14 years to have a divider that neither team could pass (which I would argue made the game what it was: more of a puzzle than action, but that's a discussion for another thread), and after such a strange outlier in the series of games, one would expect a much more open game with stronghold, but yet again, FIRST turned the tables on us, however the defenses are not as unique as Recycle Rush's impassable divider, they're still very much more complicated than FRC's typical fare. I would say that there's a fair chance that there might be nothing on the feild this year.
Also, endgame, we can always expect endgame, but it seems to simultaneously be the easiest and hardest to predict, I would give a 75% percent chance that the endgame will have something to do with rising off the floor, whether by using a bar or lifting allied robots. It's the 25% however, that makes this fun, there have been 3 out of 12 games with endgames that weren't using rising as a main mechanic:Overdrive, Lunacy, and Rebound Rumble. They didn't come in a pattern, so trying to guess from that is useless, and all three of them use fundamentally different ideas for their endgames, I find Lunacy's the most interesting and the one I want to see replicated.

TL,DR: What we can guess is:
1. No Balls
1a. Inflatables?
2. Open field/Few obstacles
3. 75% chance of a lifting based endgame
3a. Other 25% chance unpredictable

If you notice something missing or wrong with my analysis of past years, please tell me, I plan on updating and expanding to find more exact assumptions and more subjects to observe about each game

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Only 4 out of the past 9 games have involved a "lifting" endgame. Because so many before 2008 have involved "lifting" while less do now, and considering the fact there has also only been an endgame one out of the past three years, I would have trouble believing there is anything more than a 50% chance of a "lifting endgame". I would also argue that lifting endgame vs non-lifting endgame is not a good way to categorize endgames. I would say "scale/climb" "Get on a platform" "other" or "none" might be a better way.

"Get on a platform" includes any game where you score points by finishing in a resting position on any elevated surface. This includes any game ranging from stronghold to rebound rumble or harder in difficulty. I would consider stronghold a two endgame game (scale/climb and get on a platform)

The more significant pattern I see in the more recent years is a 3-year climb/scale cycle. Starting in 2010 (Breakaway), 2013 (Ultimate accent), and 2016 (Stronghold). Even if this ends up not being an exact pattern, in my mind it indicates there is a very low chance that the endgame will all of the sudden involve climbing/scaling two years in a row.

I more or less agree with the rest of your predictions and think this was overall very well thought out. I am just hoping there is as much strategic depth next year as there was this year. Also some more rough defense would be nice. (Football anyone?)

Re: FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory
 

Got a few chart details for ya.

'04 was NOT a shooting game, for the robots. Herding, yes. But not shooting--for the robots. (Humans did all the scoring of small balls.) Not sure I'd class it as "many" obstacles, as the mobile goals got out of the way pretty quickly--more of a center obstacle game.

'05 endgame was not a rise-off-floor, but a "get into this zone" endgame. That particular variety of endgame also featured in '01 and '02, but hasn't been seen since as an endgame; it's an automode these days. Also, what you're calling a "Center Obstacle" happens to be a scoring position, one of 9 on the field. Probably best classed as a "many obstacle" game, because any one of the 9 could snag unwary robots.

'07 is debatable as to whether the endgame is "rise off floor" or "climb ramp". In theory, the former worked; in practice, it was the latter (with partner help).

'10 endgame was a "rise off floor" class.

Just to fill in the aforementioned '02 and '01...

'02: Zone Zeal. "Shooting" position--FYI, anything in this slot before '06 needs to be "Shooting/Dumping" due to the rules restricting shooting ('06 was the first pure shooting game). Endgame, "Get In The Zone". Field setup, OPEN; game pieces, soccer balls and mobile goals. (Yes, the goals were points in this one, as I recall.)

'01: Diabolical Dynamics. This should be in "Unusual Piece", but it doesn't fit that category as the game pieces were balls, shot and dumped and placed (depending on size--there were two sizes). "Endgame" was "Get in the Zone". Field was open with a center divider and a ramp. Now, that "endgame" is very loosely defined because the entire game was the endgame--get your robots in one zone, your goals onto the central tipping ramp, and get as many balls in or on the goals as you could, then E-stop for points multipliers. Oh, and I forgot. 4v0. You thought '15 was bad.

I could do a couple more but I've already taken enough space...



Just as a prediction, the game piece will be either traffic cones or footballs. Those two have been "on the list" for at least as long as frisbees (by "on the list" I mean "speculated as game objects").