Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

I really like the idea that "five 'bots tangling with pasta" could refer to five (of the six?) are limited in mobility, and unable to perform specific tasks that others who are not tangled could perform.

I think the post made by Dave about lopsided alliances could be a definite reference to the "five 'bots". Could there possibly be a team of 3 v 2? or better yet, 4v(some number over 1). where the entire team of four is "tangled up", and only one team of the smaller is limited?

that would be cool, and it would even out the lopsided alliances

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

with the 2v2v3 i think it would be random who got the 3,

the 2 , 2 robot alliances could gang up against the one 3 robot alliance. then the 2 robot alliances would have an even field to take out each other

RP could be determined like normal


also i would like to point out that the hint says the "and seeing Montana's green heights" line is also referring to the game piece

relating to the idea of being able to pick it up in autonomous

maybe the game piece will be raised up high, 10 ft (hight of a goal post in foot ball)

new idea 1 team of 5 or 4 on tether, the other team of 1 or 2 on radio

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

Tether sounds like it would suffice for the tanglemnt part but would it be a safe option?

SAFE meaning like the connection could possible come lose or come off and if that happens the bot would be imbolized right? i dont really understand the whole tether thing if the teather comes off...i dont know if it will just run wild or imbolized or what

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

five 'bots tangling with pasta
a game piece obsessed with a shovel's show
and seeing Montana's green heights

Art04 and I kicked this one around quite a bit and I agree with most of his points. What most people are missing in the game clue is that last year's clue was hinting at the GAME NAME. Montana's "Big Sky" country. So "Sky High" is right on for a game name. :cool:

"Five 'bots" I'll stick with 3v3. FIRST is always trying to get as many teams into the finals as possible. 1v1v1v1v1 would be reducing potential finalists by 1 robot possibly, and 1v1v1v1v1 games are not TV friendly. Viewers who aren't into FIRST wouldn't understand the game easily. Two teams of bots squaring off, that's easy to understand. If FIRST is to grow, they'll need to get more and more bots involved in games for the action and TV viewability. A third alliance, green? No, FIRST's colors are red white and blue, not green.

"pasta" Again, why is everyone assuming pasta is refering to spaghetti. Shells are shaped very much like footballs. Tieing in with the Joe Montana thought and JVN's gridiron vex bot. Those who look for trends in FIRST games thought this year would be a ball game again. Well what are footballs? Besides, has anyone thought about how the Human Player would interact with the bots? Noodles and pipes don't offer too many options that would be safe (javelin throw anyone?) or TV friendly. Footballs would again bring the athletic side to the HP position.

But if you really want to confuse yourself, just check out all the weird shapes of pasta. Spirals anyone (hmmm, Archemedes screws) or wagon wheels (Westward Ho..... to Montana!) :eek:

"a game piece obsessed with a shovel's show" Can you think of a better way to pick up footballs? or see below on the shovel's show = dig hole thought.

"and seeing Montana's green heights" seeing = CMU2 cam. I think its here to stay. Afterall, it is prominently displayed on the IFI page on robotics. "green heights" the vision target will be elevated. Tie this with the five bots and the new KOP high traction wheels and its a center raised platform with the target on top. Possibly five sided slope or five goal pits set into the platform (there's your holes gang). Make the ramps out of lexan and viewers can see what's in the goals :confused: . Low cost fields don't need this viewability so plywood would work. Goals being owned by which alliance has the most balls in the goal. (Similar to this year's FVC game) By having a center raised platform it keeps most of a TV camera's focus on mid-field (TV friendly viewing).

With the vision target at the top of a midfield ramp(s), the only question is what's the goal of autonomous this year and what happens when a team acheives autonomous success? :rolleyes:

More fuel for your thoughts. Anyone want to pick up this (foot)ball and run with it?

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

Not to flame anyone, but why would they use tethers? I know it fits the clue "Tangle" but be realistic. How many people are going to replace tethers every time they get cut, or damaged by the other robots? It's excellent that people are thinking outside of the box on this, but people have to take into account what is feasible and what isn't.

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

i'd like to second this...FIRST removed the tethers for safety reasons (too many entanglements) and if you think about it, there have been RULES against potential entanglement hazards in the past few years...why would they suddenly go lax on that rule and PURPOSELY put tethers on every bot?

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

i really dont think that there will be 2v2....think about it...less teams on the field at a time....more people involved in FIRST...soo there really cant be less teams on the feld..it would take too long...i think it might have to do with 2v2v2....and withthe 5 'bots tangling with pasta..maybe the alliances would have to go on a pressure pad to release some type of "pasta"...and the 'bots would get tangled in the "pasta"..and in the pasta there be a game piece but only one...and then u would have to pick it up with some kind of "shovel"...and bring it to a goal...these are just some thoughts....i just cant wait to see what the game will be...and not worry so much bout the clue...jan 7 wil be here in no time...good luck to everyone have fun trying to figure this out!!

~*~BaMBaM~*~

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

Another outthere idea; but the talk of uneven teams brought to mind a gameshow called Blockbusters. It was 2v1 and the basic premise was answering trivia questions knowing the initials of the answer ie: JM= Joe Montana. The person who was alone had to answer 4 correct questions and the 'family pair' had to answer 5.

This basically explains the game:
http://www.gameshow-galaxy.net/block1.htm

Just a thought.

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

The whole point of alliances is to make sure that weaker teams don't gang up on smaller teams like in the old 1v1v1 format. By introducing a third alliance you would end up with the same problem as before, especially if you made uneven alliances. The two weaker alliances would gang up to beat the stronger alliance, it is counter-productive.

I think one of the weaknesses of alliances is that once teams enter the finals they only have incentive to help other teams on their alliance. The soloution to this problem? Simple, make a game where teams on different alliances can work together. The could be what the '5 'bot' line is referring to, that alliances will stay 3v3, but two robots, from sperate alliances can work together to help their alliance (working together as 1). 2+2+1(two robots working together)=5...

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

Another thing about three alliances is that once again, you make the game unfriendly for broadcasting. Aside from motor sports, every other sporting activity has two teams. To add a third team (alliance) in the mix is to "mess" with the minds of sports enthusiasts. They are not accustomed to thinking of a three-way game, and will look at it as an illegitimate sport.

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

maybe it's just me, But I don't like the idea of having FIRST conform to television spectator's needs...It's a unique program, and in no way should it have to conform to the "rules" of standard sports. furthermore, common sports today weren't always popular, so why should this be any different?

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

In all Reality I don't think it would matter much if it did have 3 alliances. As for broadcasting purposes,people would get used to it. But again the 2 weak teams against 1 strong team will happen. I believe, unfortunately so, that the game will be either one of two things; One: A 5 team free for all, Two: A 5v0 game, where all five teams are working torwards one objective.

*
I also agree with Nuttyman here. I don't think the spectators should have any influence on game design at all.

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

A few ideas to bounce around:

The game objects are obsessed with seeing the green. Perhaps they have a camera (or there is a camera somewhere on the field), and the robots have to position an object somewhere to make the camera point in their direction. (i.e. points at the end if the camera faces your alliance's zone)

Five 'bots seems obvious, but I can't imagine that FIRST would eliminate alliances or have uneven teams. My guess: a 2v2 with another bot helping or hurting everyone. That bot could be a FIRST controlled, or it could be another team. Recall this year's Vex, in which there were 2 types of matches. Perhaps there will be 2 scoring sets in this game - one for being on an alliance and another for being the "middle" bot. This has more about the tournament structure in that game for those who are unfamiliar with it.

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

this is assuming that we we are taking the hint at face value and saying there are 5 bots total, though. I don't think we can discount that there may be even teams, one way or another

Re: 2006 Official Game Hint Discussion
 

Granted there are alot of other ideas. I think this is the most likely Nuttyman. But i may be wrong ~Shoulders Shrugged~

In Actuality, Im much more concerned with the design problems (or challenges) That the baton shaped game pieces will present. My Team (We have 3 or 4 people on the team involved in everything from programming to design to fundraising, they are who I'm referring to.) feels that even if the game piece isn't a Baton, we want the extra two weeks of design on the off chance that it is. So we're trying to brainstorm a system that will be able to adjust to what ever scenario First comes up with :-p. It's not going to well as of yet.

*Within weight and cost limits anyway*

~Merry Christmas Everyone and Happy Holidays to All~