Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

Im kind of confused, they said the higher the robot, the bigger the bonus, with a few designs I came up with, our robot would be able to lift robots a few feet into the air, doesn't safety come into factor here? Also, will we be allowed to touch the spiders intentionally, also, can we just have a robot drive to the other side, expand, and drop a big black curtain down so the other team cant see?!:ahh:

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

I'd rather not remember anything from 2003.

On topic: I guess the game has warmed up to me because of the possible game play, but I still don't like the design. Something seems missing to make me feel wow-ed.

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

We had that idea Stack Attack year, we even called it the Iron Curtain. But when we contacted FIRST about it, they said it was against Gracious Professionalism and strongly suggested we didn't make it.

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

This years challenge will be really intresting to watch. especialy the robot stacking. you have only 15 seconds to do it in. you can earn penelties really easly. why does the structure have to move???

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

to make us mad :)

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

So it is a bit more challenging and you have to use your brains and think outside of the box. Otherwise FIRST would be no fun :p !

Pavan.

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

It is absolutely mind blowing how dynamically the strategies are going to change.

If you have a 6 ringer row worth 64 points and the opponent puts a spoiler, then you immediately will drop everything you are doing and try to remove it. Otherwise, you lose 32 points!

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

This competition should be great, and the autonomous should be really interesting to watch with the random starting position of the center goal. :D

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

Please understand I have a great deal of respect for how difficult it must be to make a new and challenging game every year and that I know no game will please everybody.

With that said I will also say I think this game did an absolutely terrible job considering several importaint needs (mainly those of rookie and low-budget teams.)

Many previous games have had real time scoring systems which for whatever reason do not have a great history of working. I think that a game like this (where human drivers and players won't be able to even clearly see nearly half the scoring zone and there is so much counting) simply isn't reasonable without an absolutely bulletproof real-time scoring system. Teams often miscounted last year when all they were doing was counting balls through a hoop...how are we going to keep track of rows in two dimensions...plus spoilers? What a mess.

I think the tubes will pop and people will get spider legs in the face.

I think we will see a decent-sized population of rookie teams and low-budget teams get to competition only to realize the model they were practicing scoring on is not an realistic representation of the one on the field. Teams are going to need to build the entire scoring structure to simulate the balance and momentum of the swinging parts. That is no small structure and many teams do not have the storage space to keep such an object together. If they had made the object smaller and put more of them on the field it would have been more reasonable.

I can't believe we are still using that green light. I think that is simply inviting old teams to dust off their code for tracking and make a new autonomous mode. At least vary the sensor...autonomous is hard enough for rookie teams without having all the older teams already know the sensor.

I am worried that some hard feelings may occur when headstrong drivers cause uninvited robots attempt to climb on other robots and things break. I suppose that is not FIRST's concern but it is still a potential problem.

I think this is not a crowd friendly game. Yes it is "shiny" but the general crowd of people who watch competitive robotics are either generally the sort of people who like to know what is going on or friends/family of people competing. Both groups care about the score and I do not think this will be an easy game for an audience to score in real-time.

With all that said this is still the game we are playing and I wish you all the best of luck.

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

SO?
Again; Pavan, I'm going to have to interject once more. In the REAL-WORLD when you're involved with a project (similar to FIRST) you'll QUICKLY come to the realization of design iteration and how much easier (to a degree) to improve a design rather than start from scratch. 254, 60, and 968 are some of the teams that I can put my finger on who've used that chassis desgin for the past 2 seasons (all while being legal). Is this wrong? Absolutley not, it's merely a smart way to manage you're resources; resources I.E.- money, time, and labor.

Why spend 200+ hours desiging a new frame, one thats untested and unproven. When all that needs to be done is to double-click a few times on the computer and bam-bam a print comes out. It's such a smart way to run effiecently, I'm suprised more teams don't lean on this idea more often (I understand it may start to get "boring" after a while, but hey, boredom=cheap).

This is no way anti-GP or against FIRST's code of ethics, it's merely a smart business strategy that happens everyday in the world. Please I don't really see your point in the arguement (if you're even trying to insinuate an arguement, it's got no credibility), are you trying to make us all believe that it's not FAIR to reuse ideas or designs? Or are you just trying to create attention, whatever the case may be, I'm done arguing about it. I don't know 'bout the rest of us, but this is pretty well beaten down...move on allready.

~Greg

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

Oh may!!! This year is going to be amazing!

Is everyone as excited about this game as I am?

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

Another concern with the rack is that it's expensive to build. Somewhere on chiefdelphi someone said that the wooden version of it costs around $500 to build, and it's still not going to be the same as the competition model. Even if you have the money and space for a rack, your next problem is time, especially on smaller teams. Rookies are going to have a pretty hard time this year I feel...

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

It's still better than last year, when the scoring system went down (and even often when it was up) there was little indicator of the exact score as the game pieces were recycled back into play. After seeing pictures taken from the alliance stations in New Hampshire, it isn't quite as hard to see the other side as one might imagine.

I people got shot with poof balls, tetras broke, balls popped, and just about all that stuff before too...


How would rookies learn to program better if older teams had to learn a new sensor? That makes no sense to me. If anything, it's easier on the rookies, because mentoring teams can help them with far more expertise than if they were learning new technology as well.
It's no worse than defense in a game like last years (especially considering the autonomous interaction last year). Also consider, for "climbing" on other robots, it is most likely going to be essential they have some device to help you get atop of them, so it is going to have to be consentual.

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

I think you underestimate what rookie teams and low budget teams can produce. Rookie teams can be powerful for the reason they don't have background knowledge and can work with a greater number of possibilities than teams who know what works and what doesn't.

My team I'm mentoring is a low budget team. It's different from 174 which had money to spend as needed. I actually found it slightly easier to design with simple materials and cheap design than get into lots of mechanisms.

Re: RACK & ROLL Reaction
 

Correct me if I'm wrong...but I've read and reread Section 7 of the game manual and I haven't found where it sayd you only have 15 seconds to stack robots. It says that for the final 15 seconds a robot can't be in an opposing home zone.

No where does it say, that I can find, that teams may only stack robots during the final 15 seconds.

If someone can clarify this I'd appreciate it.

The rule I'm referencing is:

"<G56> ROBOTS score bonus points at the end of the match if they are entirely in their HOME ZONE, not in contact with any element of the field (carpet, allaince station, goal etc.) and the lowest point of the ROBOT is higher than 4 inches and/or 10 (although I think that's a typo) inches above the carpeted field surface. The number of bonus points an ALLAINCE recieves is bases on the total number of ROBOTS satisfying these conditions. Each ALLAINCE ROBOT entirely in their HOME ZONE at the end of the match is eligible to recieve the following bonus points."