Re: Here it goes...
 

Overall, I feel this idea.

Just two things I noticed in the rules...first, I'm not too sure about that HP job. I think we'd do well in the South, since football is king down here. But some of those schools up north may have trouble. Perhaps something more Stack Attack-y?

My other thing is with the pipes in midfield. A foot and a half is pretty skinny, leading me to think that most teams would make their robot N by 18" by 12". That's pretty petite...and if there's one thing we need to keep the "civilian" (for lack of a better word) crowd interested, it's big things with lots of action (hence why I loved FIRST Frenzy). The same thing applies to the field--in 2k3, it was the stack. In 2k4, it was the bar. Every field has to have that THING. I'm not exactly sure what it could be here, though.

But overall, it's a good idea. We need more footballs in FIRST.

Re: 2005 tournament ideas
 

Just a few things

-No balls, no boxes, but a mixture of the two would be something. (example: boulders.)
-Instead of a flat playing surface with an obstacle in the middle (such as this year: a flat playing surface surrounding a platform with a hanging bar), why not a bumpy playing field that would require careful manuevering and construction of a robot's drive train.
-An autonomous mode that has many options other than one. (you can do this and this will happen or you can do this and this will happen. Not just one thing.)

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

Here's a few ideas for someone, somewhere to mull over.

1. Instead of 2x2 competition why not have 3-4 robots working in tandem to complete a number of increasingly complex tasks. If a group, selected randomly, can effectively complete a task another one comes up. Sort of similar to a game where teams have to move or place objects on a pressure sensitive switch instead of knocking it off. In this way another area would become available (via a wall or similar barrier becoming flat or a series of hanging bars placed equal distance apart for teams to grasp alternately) for another challenge. It would be a Mars Rover experience without the 7 minute delay for signals and the resultant feedback.
2. The tasks could become increasingly complex and difficult to attain and the points would then be greater. Cooperation not competition among the alliance but competition among all to get as many points as possible from each trial.
3. I like the idea that even with the auton mode that human players still have a place to participate. I'd still like to see that as a part of any new game.

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

I have one very simple suggestion for trial.

Currently, the top 8 are allowed to pick within themselves for the finals. Now, while you do want to reward the top teams for their performances in the qualifying rounds I suggest that, to mix it up:

The top 8 are "frozen"--that is, they cannot pick from within themselves.

Team 8 picks first, and then so on through 7, 6, 5...

The biggest flaw with this idea is that it leaves it so that teams that *do* deserve to qualify for nationals might not. But if that is the issue, than why do we even have finals, and not just go with who did the best during the qualifying matches.

Just something to mull over...

--Petey

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

We could also have 1, 9, 17 alliance 1
2, 10, 18 alliance 2 etc

This would ensure that the top(debatable) 24 teams are in the elimination rounds. It might also make it harder to win as you robot might not be as compatable with the team that you are alliance partners with.

I like the choosing because of strategy. I also liked the idea of after alliance captain 8 makes his pick then he picks again . thus reversing the choosing teams. Great idea, thanks to whomever origionally thought of it.

Autonomous mode to last a max time but also a minimum time with a point reward that desends after the minimum time. Must be a great enough point allowance to make teams want to try and do. Also will make teams consider when to give up and continue the game.

Hardest thing to do is come up with ideas when they could be useless depending on the main game.

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

FIRST 2005 Game Idea

Title
 Puck Pandemonium
 Donut Disorder
 Donut Discord
(as you can see, I’m still searching for a decent name)

Before I go into a detailed explanation of this game, let me establish the basics. The goal of this game is to put rings (or donuts) on vertical poles mounted on moveable pucks. In order to add some engineering challenges and some spice to the game, each robot starts on top of a octahedral puck, like those used in past FIRST games, which is 6” tall. In order to score points, robots will likely have to dismount from the pucks, manipulate the pucks, and manipulate donuts. To add yet another engineering challenge, a bonus will be given for any robot ending the match on its puck with that puck in the appropriate scoring zone. This game includes a number of ways to score points as well as ways to de-score opponents’ points. Puck Pandemonium will allow for both aggressive defensive and offensive strategies that should make it extremely fun to play as well as to watch.

The rules I have listed are meant to give you an idea of the game structure rather than provide a complete set of rules. I have provided a not-precisely-to-scale diagram of the field for this game as an attachment. If you have any questions or comments please let me know so that I can make improvements to the game.




Field
 The field will retain the dimensions of the 2004 field.
 The robot playing area will be 48 ft. long by 24 ft. wide.
 The total area of the field will be 64 ft. by 24 ft.
 The playing surface will be the same carpet used in 2004.
 On one side of the field, the carpet will be colored blue in the area between 9 ft. from the wall and 19 ft. from the end wall on that side of the field.
 On the other side of the field, the carpet will be colored red in the same fashion.
 The remainder of the carpet will be colored gray (as usual).
 In the center of the field will be a 4 and ¼ in. platform measuring 5 ft. wide by 10 ft. long.
 In the center of the platform will be mounted a pole 2 in. in diameter and 7 ft. tall (measured from the base of the platform).
 On both sides of the platform, two poles will be mounted, each 2 in. in diameter and 5 ft. tall (measured from the base of the platform). Each pole will be 20 ft. from the end wall on its own side. The two poles on either side will be located 4 ft. apart and 2 ft. from a line bisecting the field lengthwise.
 One pressure sensor (similar to those used in Stack Attack) will be located on each side of the playing field, centered between the two side walls and set against the end wall. An infrared beacon will be placed above each pressure sensor on the end wall.
 There will be four octagonal ‘pucks’ having a diameter of 4 ft. from flat side to flat side. Each puck will have 8 casters and its platform height will be 6 in. Each puck will have a single pole 2 in. in diameter and 4 ft. 6 in. high (for an overall height of 5 ft.) located on the puck at one of the puck’s eight vertices.
**Editor’s note – see diagram of field on last page.

Game Piece
 The game piece for this game will be an inner tube or tire approximately 15 in. in diameter and 4 in. in thickness; from here on out, they will be called donuts.
 The donuts will be of three different colors.
 Those donuts starting around the 7 ft. pole will be colored yellow. There will be 10 yellow donuts.
 Those donuts starting around the two 5 ft. poles in the blue carpeted area will be colored red. There will be 10 red donuts on each pole.
 Those donuts starting around the two 5 ft. poles in the red carpeted area will be colored blue. There will be 10 blue donuts on each pole.
 At each human player station there will be 5 yellow donuts. These donuts may only be used if a robot has triggered the pressure sensor on the opposite side of the field during the autonomous period.

Robots
 Robots are to begin the match having dimensions no greater than 30 in. (long) by 24 in. (wide) by 42 in (tall).
 Robots will compete, as in the 2004 game, as a red and as a blue alliance.
 Each robot will begin the match being entirely supported by one of its alliance’s pucks (colored red or blue), with no parts of that robot extending past the edges of the puck.

Autonomous
 The autonomous period will start at the beginning of the match and will continue for 20 seconds.
 In order to gain access to the 10 yellow donuts for the human players on an alliance, the pressure sensor on the opposite side of the field must be triggered during the autonomous period.
 If, during the autonomous period, a robot triggers the pressure sensor on its own side of the field, the 10 yellow donuts will become available to the human player on the opposing alliance.
 If the pressure sensors have not been triggered by the end of the autonomous period, the human players will not be allowed to use the donuts (and therefore not take part in the scoring action).

Scoring
 There are two distinct ways of scoring in this game: 1) placing donuts on the poles located on pucks and 2) being on one of your alliance’s pucks within your alliance’s scoring zone (the red or blue colored zone as defined in the field section) at the end of the match.
1) Donuts on Poles
 When placed on a pole located on a puck, each yellow donut counts 10 points for whichever alliance’s puck it is on.
 When a blue donut is placed on a pole located on a blue alliance puck, it counts 5 points for the blue alliance.
 When a red donut is placed on a pole located on a red alliance puck, it counts 5 points for the red alliance.
 When a blue donut is placed on a pole located on a red alliance puck, it descores any donuts below it for the red alliance.
 When a red donut is placed on a pole located on a blue alliance puck, it descores any donuts below it for the blue alliance.
 Once a donut is on a pole located on a puck, it may not be removed.
2) Robots on Pucks
 Any robot ending the match wholly supported by one of its alliance’s pucks that lies entirely within that alliance’s scoring zone, will receive 50 points.

 The total points possible for an alliance are:
10 yellow donuts on the center pole X 10 points each = 100 points
20 yellow donuts from human players X 10 points each = 200 points
2 X 10 red/blue donuts from poles X 5 points each = 100 points
2 robots X 50 points for being on puck in scoring zone = 100 points
= 500 maximum possible points.

**Editors note – 500 may seem like much too large a number, but please keep in mind that the 2004 game had an even higher maximum number of possible points [21 small balls X 2 sides X 5 points each X 2 (multiplier) + 4 small balls X 10 points each X 2 (multiplier) + 2 robots X 50 points for hanging on the bar] = 600 points). Despite this potential, time limitations as well as the competition between the alliances kept scores down in 2004 and will do so in this game as well.

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

Title: Canyon Crossing



Field : The field overall has the same paremeters as last years.Except no massively huge ball drop overhead, and no trigger balls. On the field in front of the player's station there is a seven foot high trough to score 13"balls in. In the middle of the field, there is a 3ft wide gap on each side there is a 1' high wall with a moderate ramp leading away. There also is a 5' high bar that starts at the begining of the red side's ramp and extends to the start of the blue side's ramp. At one end of the gap there is an opening on the red side and at the other end is the blue side's opening. The opening is wide enough for only 1 robot to pass through.


Game Piece : on each side there are about 20 13"balls which are for the other side and are worth 5 points each FOR THE OTHER SIDE. The human player has 4 10 point 13" balls which he/she places on the field for the other alliance. The alliances are 2 robots per side.

Robots :


Autonomous

Scoring

Re: Here it goes...
 

From what I'm seeing, this game is an awful lot like "Fireball", a game I used to play in gym class.

What about this:

For some reason--crossing a line, breaking a beam, or just an arbitrary zap--your robot is disabled, and to be re-enabled your human player has to get a football or something into a bin or through a hoop.

Obviously, the biggest difficulties here are:
1) Danger. You get all those footballs flying around and someone is gonna get hit.
2) Impediments. One of the things our team practiced for this year's game was throwing a thirteen inch ball over the wall, over the stationary goal, under the bar, so it would hit the middle pole in the stationary goal and uncap a 2x multiplier. We got it to work a couple times in practice, but it was always too difficult given the angle at which the ball had to be thrown due to the "alliance wall". Of course, it would be easier with a football...

Hmmm...

I definitely like the idea of making the human player's role a physically challenging one. That really promotes a more "well rounded" FIRST ideal, even if it is only coming from individuals. That could be the football and baseball player in me talking, though.

--Petey

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

* this is the completed post i had tried to post several times over*

Title: Canyon Crossing

Field : The field overall has the same paremeters as this years.Except no massively huge ball drop overhead, and no trigger balls. On the field in front of the player's station there is a seven foot high trough to score 13"balls in. In the middle of the field, there is a 3ft wide gap on each side there is a 1' high wall with a moderate ramp leading away. There also is a 5' high bar that starts at the begining of the red side's ramp and extends to the start of the blue side's ramp. At one end of the gap there is an opening on the red side and at the other end is the blue side's opening. The opening is wide enough for only 1 robot to pass through.


Game Piece : on each side there are about 20 13"balls which are for the other side and are worth 5 points each FOR THE OTHER SIDE. The human player has 4 10 point 13" balls which he/she places on the field for the other alliance. The alliances are 2 robots per side.

Robots : The robots have the same dimensions as this year. They have to cross the gap in order to retrive points though. They can cross either by traversing the Bar, crossing a "bridge" robot, be thier own bridge, or enter the gap on one side cross the gap, and exit on the other side. the robot may collect balls and score or herd to human player so that he/she may score. Human players place 4 10 point 13" balls on the field before auton begins. These balls are also for the other side. The opponents balls are worth points only after they have been scored for the opponent for five seconds, otherwise they are deducted from your final score at full value.

Autonomous : Starts after HP places their 4 10 point balls for the other side on the field. Robot may do what it does for 30 seconds.

Scoring: assuming we are RED
5 points for each 5 point red ball
2 points for each 5 point blue ball
10 points for each 10 point red ball
5 points for each 10 point blue ball
20 points for each hanging red robot in the gap.

so have 10 red 5 point balls, 3 blue 5 point balls, 2 red 10 point balls, 3 blue 10 point balls, 2 robots hanging.
We have (10*5)+(3*2)+(2*10)+(3*5)+(2*20)=131
Qualifying points are Winner get 2x loser's score and loser keeps thier as QP.
Elims. are best of three winner moves on.

( I will try to draw this field layout up and post as soon as possible :D )

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

Just a quick update on the field drawing: I'm in the last week of school and have only until THIS THURSDAY :ahh: to finish the field and post it, because on friday I graduate. I can say though I'm very close to having it complete.

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

Finally it is done, now here it is:

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

i think most of the teams have fallen in love with the '03 and '04 games and are very interested in boxes and balls. there are very interesting ideas on this thread about the '05 game, but most of them have been built on the '03 and '04 competitons. my team was a rookie in '04 and we found it extremely interesting, but if the same patterns are followed, i dont think that any new thought would have been put forth for new stratergies.

i might be wrong

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

I think it would add an interesting element if the game somehow involved those shape-sorting toys that you played with in pre-school. The one where you had the box with the different shaped holes on top, and you had to put the appropriate shaped piece into the matching hole.

http://www.babyheirlooms.com/product/shape_n_sort.cfm

The different shapes could all be worth different point values. Teams could choose to build something to handle only one of the shapes, or go all out and be able to handle all 3 (or 4 or however many there are).

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

The shapes idea has already been thought of by another, smaller robotics competion in canada(skillz robotics, i think). i also think that sorting with a human player wud be kinda easy.

Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
 

I read this somewhere on chiefdelphi along time ago (and I would give credit to whomever came up with this but alas, I cannot remember)

It was posted as a joke, "evidence" of next years game. The person had claimed to have found (at FIRST HQ) hundreds of the new game pieces; 2 liter soda bottles.

I thought this was rather hilarious, but then I began to think. Soda bottles would be REALLY good game pieces, with their labels removed of course (or should they remain on for a potential sponsor?). They are cheap, readily available, and must conform to specifications issued by the bottling industry. They are also, tough. They are take considerably more abuse then balls for example.

In addition, many strategies can be employed to handle these bottles, just examine a bottling plant, they are handled by suction manipulators, by self centering grippers that conform to the "lip" found just below the cap etc.

And, in order to get that many bottles...FREE REFRESHMENTS (just kidding), maybe contact a local bottler to see if they would be interested in selling/donating unfilled bottles(if I remember correctly, they cost only about 9 cents each and the caps are another 5)

Perhaps, these bottles could be collected and then funneled into smaller game pieces like boxes or bins with attached lids (think recycling bins) so the team could collect the bottles and put them into the larger boxes. Those boxes would be scored differently.

I really donno what would make a good game. I haven't thought about it alot, but I thought I would tell y'all about the bottles. Perhaps they can be Incorporated into another's design.

Best luck!
-Andy