Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

A good idea to have a defensive kitbot -- it certainly would eliminate a lot of the scoring confusions, and would be just plain cool! But then, no team is encouraged to write autonomous code at all. I'd originally planned to have two autonomous robots (because the score doubling and final alliance pairings get a bit confusing) -- but for that I'd have needed a six-pointed star, and that would be offensive (desecration of a religious symbol). I wanted also to get away from the rectangular field, since I'm getting kind of bored with it. Any other shape of field that was used, was before my time with FIRST. Considering that this year's high school seniors were freshmen when I started with FIRST, it's time for a change.

My reasoning for making autonomous/regular modes simultaneous was that I think 15 seconds isn't really enough time to do things. (I saw one team alllllllmoooooossssst cap with the vision tetra during autonomous mode ONCE.) Also, with that, you don't have to make any special "autonomous only" tasks (like the magnetic hanging tetra).

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

It would be nice if the field was more square than rectangle.

Most audience-located cameras have to zoom out too far to get the entire playing field in view. A zoomed out shot means it is harder to see clearly what the robots are doing; harder to see the team numbers on the robot; harder to see the flashing LEDs; and there are more distracting things happening above and below the playing field (e.g. people walking around) which are not worth encoding.

Now, if the production crew could move towards HD (wide-screen format) cameras....hmmm...

p.s. In many of the webcasts in 2004 and 2005 it was not easy to see the flashing blue/red LEDs. The "police lights" from previous years were much more visible on the video streams.

KA-108 :cool:

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

Also, assuming the flashing LEDs stay in 2006, could we require one to be mounted pointing towards the sky so that an overhead (above the playing field) camera would easily see it? (Same requirement for an Underlined team number. Underlined so that we can better distinguish teams 108 and 801 from each other)

Thanks,
KA-108 :cool:

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

I like your idea for an overhead LED, but also why not an Overhead number? Hopefully the game could go with an overhead camera(s) above the field, it would be great for spectators

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

that would be brilliant if you had a game similar to Triple Play again... if i recall, last year there was a minature field at the bottom of the screen that would show which alliance owned which goal.. but it often times wasnt too accurate. but if there were two views that you could switch back and forth between, like one to get the big picture and another to get all the details and the action, that would be neat.

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

I'd really love to see an overhead camera view. It would remind me of an RTS game :)

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

I believe that an overhead camera view would really depend on the venue the specific regional was held at. I know that Manchester already has an overhead view of the field that they switch from so spectators have a good overview of the field. The camera is not placed directly above the field, but a little off to the side, and team LEDs are reasonably visible.

It would be great for all places to adopt the overhead view, but I am sure some places would not have the resources or space available to them.

just my .02

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

Just having a camera focused soley on a broad view of the field would be nice. It's not quite as exciting as the closeups, but it makes it a lot easier to tell what's going on. I didn't have a clue what was happening at championships because all I could see on the screens was some robots capping. Perhaps having a "cutaway" screen that would switch beteen the two angles, but always keep one or the other in a box in the corner. I don't know, I know this isn't exactly game related, but it's been driving me nuts.

And wow, Stary Sortie, as if 05 wasn't crazy enough :) It's definently thinking outside the box though. Goodluck with the game Dave!

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

While it is beyond me to design an entire game, I would like to provide one essential suggestion.

Dave said, in his opening post, that there is a "preference, but not a requirement, for a human player."

I would request that the role of a human player become a requirement. I realize that Dean, in his opening speeches, often downplays--if not insults--the importance of physical adeptness in the context of society. This is very sad.

As a webmaster, FIRST subcaptain, and ex baseball and football player, it seems to me that it is essential that FIRST does not forget that the well formed person is deficient in neither mind nor body. But that is a largely theoretical argument (and certainly it is inaccurate to suppose that all FIRST gurus share Dean's view, since Dave himself is a notorious outdoorsman--and, I might add, an inspiration for many of my 1073 teammates, who do FIRST in the winter and lead expeditions in the summer).

More practically, I propose that it is necessary to include a strong human player role because it is important to remember that much of the importance in science and technology lies in the interfacing of man and machine. While both can operate in a vacumn (in the metaphorical sense--but, in the case of machine, in the literal sense as well), it is usually much better if they act in cahoots.

That's why I feel that the best FIRST game I ever participated in was the 2004 challenge. The interaction between the bots (bar hanging, ball corralling) and humans (ball scoring) added a certain spark to the air absent in, say, the 2003 game. It really drove home that message of man and machine working together.

So please, FIRST...no matter what Dean thinks of athletics, strive to keep human players actively involved. It doesn't mean that FIRST will be overtaken by jocks (one of the best shooters I saw in 2004 was bespectacled and wheelchair bound). It just means that the game will be more diverse and interesting.

Thank you for all the great years.

--Petey

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

hypno-bots

this year the human player must stand at the edge of the playfield, keeping his eyes open and facing the center of the field

the first robot to successfully hyponotize the opponents human player, and get them to do the chicken dance, wins :^)

extra points if you can also hyponotize the opponents driver, controller, and coach within the 120 seconds

and a 3X multiplyer if you can hypnotize any member of the opposite team in auton mode !

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

My game is called Load n' Lock on the FIRST Shipping Dock.

The game features of allince of two robots each whio start out on a pair of docks with a ramp in the center. On the field there are three racks. One colored red located next to the red alliance. One colored white in the center and one colored blue located by the blue alliance. The are also two three slot racks located over the driver stations.
The objects to be used are 44 gallon tubs similair to the ones used in Stack Attack and can only be recived from the human player.
At the beginning of a match the robot has 15 seconds to seek out on their allince rack a vison tub, pick it up and place it on the overhanging allince rack.An alliance scores 25 bonus points for placing the vision box in the overhanging alliance station rack during autonomous mode. Whether the vison box is dealt with during Autonomous mode they are still required to move the vison tub from thier allinace rack to the overhead driver rack if no t they will suffer a one point deduction for failure to place the vision tub in the overhanging alliance station rack during a match.
After the 15 second autonmous period the robot can retireve tubs and place them in the racks. Once a tub is placed in a rack that spot on the rack it's locked. There are nine loading areas on a rack and if an alliance gets more tubs on the rack they win the rack or as it is called in this game they lock the rack and get the bonus.
Scoring goes as follows:
An alliance scores 1 point for each tub placed in their own overhanging alliance station rack.
An alliance scores 3 points for each tub placed in their own alliance rack.
An alliance scores 5 points for each tub placed in the neutral rack.
An alliance scores 10 points for each tub placed in the opposing alliances rack.
An alliance scores 15 points for each tub placed in the opposing alliances overhanging alliance station rack.
An alliance scores 5 bonus points for locking their own rack.
An alliance scores 10 bonus points for locking the neutral rack.
An alliance scores 15 bonus points for locking the opposing alliances rack.
An alliance scores 20 bonus points for locking the opposing alliance's overhanging alliance station rack.

When there is 30 seconds left in a match a chime sounds and the opposing robot can seek to park themselves in the opposing allinces dock.An alliance scores 25 bonus points for parking both robots in the opposing alliance's loading dock. The referee cna at his discretion calll off interaction between the human player and robot if it is being loaded or call off an opposing robot from removing the opposing robot from trying to claim the dock.

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

663.keith--Interesting tagline--"tangling with pasta"...Since this was posted on 10-23-05, Is there something you know that the rest of us don't? TELL US!! (please?) I'll e-mail you a fruitcake!!

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

It's a setting in your user control panel that can be changed at any time and is retroactive and is applied to all your previous posts.

Just like your signature.

Sorry Mr. V, no advance info there I'm afraid.

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

yeah, i just changed it when I heard the clue for the first time :D
(but I will gladly accept a fruitcake)

or maybe I possess a telepathic relationship with Dave :eek:

Re: [Official 2006 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2006 game...
 

WOW! Looking at this game design thread in hindsight now that the game has been revealed it's clear that the game design team really payed attention to the people who took the time to post their ideas. I mean I counted a dozen aspects of this year's game that were suggested on this thread. While who inspired what is questionable, it is clear that the game committee is really listining to what we say.

That's awesome! Mr. Lavery, PLEASE do this next year! This year's game design is awesome and I'm already looking foward to 07! Wait a sec, isn't that the water game?