Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Or have like 5 very experienced mentors given the rules about 2 hours before kick off locked in a room with no technology, then have a special segment during kickoff called ," We're lazy and want to cut the Q&A forum feedback in half, so here are people to ask question that we will answer!"

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

What if they threw a couple of track balls on the field that had no scoring opportunity but instead they were just barriers? i would really like to see some sort of nonscoring piece that added to the complexity of the game, they are a kind of monkey wrench, intangible barrier. Or like ringers in Rack and Roll, they become useless barriers after autonomous.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i dont know what its going to be but i hope FIRST makes up for lunacy and has the best game yet.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I understand people not wanting bumpers. They can be a hassle to make, put on, and take off. But are they really a limitation in a design aspect? such as our team wanted to do X but because of bumpers we had to do the not as good Y.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

One big thing this year was that many teams wanted to make a narrow robot, with a wide harvester at the front, and the bumpers made that impossible.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

This bothered me as well. I wish they had put the low end of the bumper range an inch or two above the moon rock. This way you could have a fully bumpered bot, but potentially have rock entrance for the full 360.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

This is fantastic thinking. Not only would robots have had the potential to be more creative, the protection offered by the bumper zone might actually be more effective if it were higher up. This would help prevent robots from tilting towards each other and "butting heads" from fast collisions.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would just like to quote from Bills Blog

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would just like to remind you that the water game is the oldest rumor in FRC, and there is actually another competition for that. Not only is the water game the oldest rumor, it's the oldest one shown to not be practical.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

fixed

:)

(still time to sign up for NURC)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

A really cool game would be a rough terrain field, and a "capture the flag" type objective. that wold be AMAZING!

seriously, drop the water game idea, its getting REALLY old.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

We're actually thinking about competing in that during the summer, because registration + kit is only $600, but it's going to be really tough.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Two things that I hope will be implemented in any game, together or alone.

1) Water (sucks for electrical! :p)
2) Randomization of field components such as walls, etc. (on a larger scale than what was instituted in '08)

I am entirely sure that #2 will be completely possible in the future with the possibilities of gps and other advanced sensors combined with the CRio.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

yea i would definatly like more of a challenge for the programmers next year.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

While the controller may be capable of doing it, the competition would need to move outside to get a good GPS link. Even then, the GPS accuracy with all of that EM and RF interference created by the robots and field equipment would be horrendous.

In a previous game, there were two beacons on the side of the field that you could lock onto with the intention of giving yourself an absolute position on the field for navigation. I don't think anyone used it at that time.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

#2 would be awesome and I would love to do it. Only problem is, most GPS receivers are not accurate enough for use on an FRC field. Oh and there is also that pesky thing about being indoors. (Don't suggest out door competitions, us northerners might be able to take the cold but I think that the CRio might have problems :cool: )

Jake, the beacons were not so much for absolute positioning, they were more for "Are we there yet" positioning. It is also impossible to determine position using two points, you need at least 3.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

It wouldn't be impossible since the playing field tends to be a flat surface. All one would need to do is put both beacons on the same side of the field (separated by a fair distance) so there would be no confusion as to which side of the beacons the robots were on. It would simple triangulation.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Oh yeah, two knowns two unknowns... I swear, my brain works sometimes.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

All I'm saying is to bring back the pull-up bar and the tetras lol

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

The tetras were a pain because they kept breaking, however I agree with the pull-up bar.

The pull-up bar was a great success because it was something that always got the crowd cheering.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

OK, I'm going to swim upstream a bit here. (No, this is not a bid for a water game.) So if you don't agree with my opinion, then we are agreed to disagree.


1) I hope bumpers do stay.

They offer really good protection. No, they are not prefect, but when they are implemented properly, they add considerable durability.
I feel it is an utter shame to see a team spend more than $6000 and hundreds of hours building a robot only to see it ruined in seconds because of a lack of protection. I prefer ::safety:: to ::ouch::
Like the water game, if you want to see a Robot demolition type of competition, there already is a one for that.

My main point is:
2) Bumpers are just another design criteria that needs to be met.

When the Jaguars were introduced, I read literally dozens of complaints about their size. Yet, practically every team found a way to use them. Yes I know, some teams chose to use all Victors. That was a valid design option this year, but it may not be in the future.
If you don't read the rules completely and design a robot and bumper scheme that doesn't comply, don't blame the rules. Every year there a multiple design challenges, bumpers just happens to be one of then.

Now food for thought. How about allowing bumpers to be movable so they could be incorporated into a game piece gathering system?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

1) You make a good point, if we want to see robots get destroyed there are competitions for that. My issue is not that I want to see robots get destroyed but that I don't like seeing students not exposed to designing a robust system.

2) Yes bumpers are just another design criteria but would more not be learned by allowing them to be optional? If you use bumpers you may lose some flexibility in design but you gain an additional weight advantage perhaps. Allow teams to decide if the additional weight is beneficial.

Im saying that mandatory bumpers are like mandatory wheels, or mandating that we all have to use 6 wheel drop center with the kitbot frame and a Cim on each side. You know, it is JUST a design requirement, there is nothing wrong with that right? Give teams some flexibility, if we decide that bumpers are beneficial to our play style and our design we can use them, if not then we should have the option of taking a beating.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I'd also like to see bumper's as optional or done away with. Were robots really that badly damaged all of the time before bumpers? Teams just need to build robust robots.

Something I'd like to see in the future, though maybe not next year, is a game involving two robots for each team. One is the normal sized bot we currently build, and another is a smaller vex-sized bot. The big bot deploys the little bot to a sub-field (such either located on a platform above the field or off to the side) and the little bot performs some function to facilitate more scoring for the big bot.

I'd also like to see a unique end game brought back, even if it is just ramps again. Though having to climb a ladder, climb a rope, get on top of a box, or fit into a confined space would be cool.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

The worst damage that I can remember 330 taking was in 2004. It wasn't from falling off the bar, either. It was the next match, when we drove our own lift down when it was already down all the way. Broken cable and bent lift resulted. We got it fixed in time for our next match. And yes, we did get into it with other robots a bit.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Yes, some where, I don't have any pictures but if we consider a 120 lb (54 kg) mass moving at 12-15 fps (3.6-4.6 mps) we can find how much energy a single robot has (1/2 *m *v ^2) The numbers aren't small. I recall a couple years ago 68 had their auton reversed and they moved the whole field... These things have a lot of power behind them and can be dangerous.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Team 365 in 2002. 'Nuf said.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/14423

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

The first thing that I thought of as well.

In 2002 and 2003, robots routinely got absolutely demolished. Teams like 365 and 71 (2002) and 312 (2003) really paid a price for their dominant machines.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

It's hard to tell in that picture, but it looks like their arm/manipulator got bent up. If all of the robots involved in that match had bumpers, would this have turned out differently?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

If contact had been limited to the bumper zones and all robots had bumpers, damage like this could have been avoided. Even last year (Overdrive) damage was limited a lot from previous years with the emphasis being that robot-to-robot contact was to take place only in the bumper zone. It was enforced through penalties and lots of people complained.

I feel that the restriction placed on teams this year was less about an interesting design challenge and more about protecting robots. <R08> had some sections that were directed at making a sturdy robot - I'm thinking the one that required the bumper to be fully supported on the back side was a nudge towards making a REALLY sturdy chassis.

While I agree that teams should start out from a strong chassis on their own, there are some that feel that aggressive defense to the point of damaging another robot shouldn't be part of the game. Until there is some sort of agreement between teams, FIRST is handling the dispute by implementing rules that protect everyone as best as possible. This means that rookies build sturdy frames from the start and veterans that need some additional challenges need to accomplish whatever task they are aiming to hit with the additional design burden of the bumper zone.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I seem to recall in the past few years there have been rules about ramming other robots, but this year not. Would you rather have mandatory bumpers, or refs deciding whether or not your driving was acceptable?

Also there was plenty of robot damage this year...the frame piece above the front ball harvester on many robots got bent repeatedly. Our plywood one suffered a crack at a regional, but the oak reinforcement added at champs held up fine.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Yeah, our harvester was also damaged in one of our matches, though it managed to keep working. To be honest I'd rather have restrictions on driving. Allowing teams to build how they want at bumper zone level could lead to some interesting designs (like harvesting from all sides of the bot) and ramming isn't all the amusing to me at least.

That said, I think the worst part about the bumper rules this year was their strictness and inflexibility. The fact that there was the trailer hitch and the non-bumper covered areas surrounding it meant that, no matter what your design was, you lost some area on the front of the bot to bumpers as well. Last year we had no bumpers on the front of the bot and the sides were also somewhat short as we only had to have part of the robot covered.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

This is a great point. With the bumper rules we have now, robot to robot contact is measured objectively. This is great because it takes a lot of the refereeing out of the game that we had in the past with regards to pinning, ramming, and entanglement.

The games in the past that involved reaching and extending were awesome (2000, 2002, 2004) and I hope the GDC considers an environment close to that for 2010.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

How about the game piece being a tetra made out of aircraft aluminum? The teams could make practice ones from PVC pipe.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Next year's game should have things that won't be discontinued. Maybe even bring back a few parts and the IFI for lightness and no more digital sidecard malfunctions. Maybe even the van door motor could come back.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i'd like to see the game back to the robot limitations on size like the 2008 season of just starting size rules. the height limitations are what made it hard for teams to "think outside the box" when they had to fit inside of one.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I really want to see a "capture the flag" type thing to happen. I'm not sure how it would all work out, i have a few ideas though.

also, towards this game. I want to see a game as fun to play as this years (coming from a driver), but with less human player influence (maybe FIRST didn't think people would be quite this accurate?).

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would like to see bumpers again because that was a big part of what held our bot together, because we were mainly defense. as for gameplay something like death race where you have to drive over icons to aquire things. like a battery to give power to a certin part of your robot so it can do something special. say giving power to extra wheels to go faster and give it more power.
Also have no starting autonomous because that caused a lot of problems at some of the regionals i went to, but have on at the end. lets say its has to go up a ramp by itself so you will have to postion it before time runs out.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I've heard this complaint a lot, but not many ideas as to waht teams would do if this rule were put back into place.

The rules this year were made to minimize robot penalties. Instead of calling ramming / pinning / intentional damage / entanglement / entrapment and preventing lots of robot manipulator damage, FIRST chose to instead simply have bumpers and no expansion. I think this was to make the rules simpler; I guarantee you that the rulebook would be 10 pages longer and matches would be that harder to judge if the rules weren't there.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

A capture the flag sort of game would be very interesting. I am curious about how that would work out.

Also, I would like a game where we did not depend so much on the human player. The human players seemed to have a lot of pressure on them regarding bonus point (aka super cells). Sometimes, the matter of a loss or win was up to the human player. And the human player has the possibility of accidentally scoring on his own trailer (when he fills up the hopper).

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Auton should be worth major points, mabye double/triple score during auto? Make autonomous longer or have bonus for auto during teleop period.

ALOT less human involvment, (mabye like only humans loading robots, OR only robots loading humans).

Not a sphere game element, mabye a football, or a cube structure (like tetras but a cube). Possibly another verion of a stacking game or capture the flag/tug-of-war.

A large view impeding wall across the middle (a curtain OR have smaller holes in it for robots to slip through), as to make it hard to controll robots on the opponents half of the feild (makes for a fun capture the flag game or end game on opponents half of field). That would make a good programming challenge (possibly auton during teleop?).

Last but deffinetly not least, a really exciting end game (like the bar / ramp). Hows about a large game peice or two that can be controlled by an alliance somehow?

Edit: For end game have a bar that is about 6" off the ground, and robots need to be comptely supported by this bar to earn bonus points.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I'll guarantee you that the rulebook would be about 10 lines longer and matches would be harder to ref. And yes, I'm from the "Bumpers? What are those?" era, when everyone knew the rules...

...except for some of the refs, but that's another whole discussion. (And the specific incident(s) I'm thinking of were when the bumpers were optional.)

The ten lines would be:
The pinning rule, added to the contact rule.
No high-speed, long-distance ramming, added to the contact rule.

Entanglement already has its rule, as does intentional damage/disable/tipping.

The harder to ref part comes from enforcing said pinning rule and more importantly, the definition of high-speed long-distance ramming.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Game pieces worth considering (meet price/availability criteria, durable enough and/or replaceable enough for a season's worth of use, and something we haven't really used before):

-Footballs
-Frisbees
-Hacky Sacks
-Empty 20 oz soda bottles
-Slinkies
-2x4s
-Rubber duckies

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

ooooh....using robot parts as game pieces! (yeah we had some 2x4 on our bot this year)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I think it would be amazing if we had pieces (circles, squares, tetras etc) and each alliance had to make a "shape" (Like a square on a tetra or something) that would be randomly chosen at the start of the match. It would even be cool if each alliance had to sort each shape (like squares in one area, circles in another). Also, if each shape was a different color it would be able to let the robots have a bonus during the autonomous. The other alliance could try and prevent the robots from "scoring" or score themselves.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

One really cool idea would be to have an "alliance" of an FTC robot and an FRC robot (or two of each) competing in the same game. The FTC robot would have to do some task that enables the FRC robot and vice versa.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Theme: Blast from the Past.
Aim High Part II!


Change the rules a bit and make it even more exciting. Easily one of the best games ever.

How about 3 targets on top instead of one, with a random flashing light identifying one of the goals. If that goal lights up, its worth more.
Thus, instead of a stationary target, have a stationary target at different locations at different times.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Glenn -

Aim High was definitely one of the best games in FRC's history, and I would LOVE to revisit it at some point. Of course major aspects would need to be tweaked, else you'd see a lot of Evil Machine clones running around :yikes: If there was a way to do high-goal shooting with static scoring I would absolutely love it. And maybe an obstacle in the middle of the otherwise empty field?

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that Aim High would have been one heck of a different game if it were played on Regolith...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Try climbing up those ramps with rover wheels...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I seem to be the only person who didn't enjoy Aim High. I've always found ball games to be pretty boring. I much prefer having strange and unique game pieces. Some suggestions I've heard before, and some new ones I've come up with.

PVC pipe with steel bearings inside to shift their weight around.
Pool Noodles
Rope(score points by hanging lengths of rope, and I could see some teams designing a robot to actually tie knots so other teams can't descore)
Frisbees
2 liter bottles
rocks, yes, real rocks of all shapes and sizes, score is based on weight (Rubble Rumble?)
flashlights (if they are turned on it is a scoring piece, if it is turned off it is used to "descore" the opponents)
sheets of thin lexan

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I think that something hard to pick up would be more fun, like the thin sheets of lexan mentioned above. How about a game where you have normal pieces and supersized bonus pieces larger than the bot, like something it would take two bots to move?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would like to see a game where the drivers can't see their robots, so they have to rely on the cameras. I don't know what type of game it would be.
They would have to have some screen at the driver's station.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

In Lunacy, I liked how the scoring locations were the robots. Something cool would be to make the scoring locations the game pieces themselves. For example, you might have to hang a game piece on an already scored game piece.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Maybe something with a lot of very small game pieces, like rubber super bounce balls, ping pong balls, or something small that's a cube, like dice.

Maybe something that changes shape like this:

http://www.toysrus.com/product/index...ductId=3499683

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

OCCRA did something like this this year (VEX robots but the concept is the same) Can anyone who competed comment on how that worked out?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

My hope would be optional bumpers and also to have the only rules that govern the robot geometry to fit in the size box in starting configuration

fit inside the box at the start, only requirement

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I liked the strategy involved this year, but I didn't like all the rules governing the robot. I'd personally like to see the return of carpet and no bumpers. I'd also like to see the same sort of scoring on other robots, or something else to encourage more robot-to-robot interaction.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I think that if bumpers are optional then there should be some incentive to use bumpers on your robot, like if you have bumpers they won't count weight wise or size wise. I'd hate to see a competition with hundreds of dinged, dented, and damaged robots.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

2006 and 2007, you got the weight and volume free, just like this year. You just didn't have to use the bumpers. Probably about half the teams used them; maybe more.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

If that is the case for the bumpers then you would have to limit them to prevent them to be used for some offensive purpose, i.e. wedged bumpers to funnel scoring objects into the robot. you would gain an advantage of going outside of the starting configuration at the beginning of the match.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

-Return of wedges
-no bumper requirements
(I wish)
-less human player
-a raised platform
-square or rectangular playing objects
-less destructible playing objects
-larger playing objects
-fewer playing objects
-robot oriented endgame
-little or no pushing required
(possibly the return of restricted wheels)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I was acualy thinking of something like that, Just to throw something new in...:yikes:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i think
-less human players
-no trailers or something like that
-no round objects
-no punishment on doing good
-giant ramp
:)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I've been saying it since 2006 - the return of the rectangle. That last time it was used was 2003.

Also predict there will be something in the middle of the field that is a different material than the rest of the field so it is harder to get to the otherside. A gravel pit would be awesome

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

ummmmm.... it actually would've made grabbing goals next to impossible if contact was limited to what you propose.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I'm not entirely clear on what you are getting at, but I believe you are trying to say that in the 2002 game with a restriction on robot-to-robot interaction limited to the bumper zone would make grabbing the mobile goals difficult.

With that assumption in mind, I'll say that last year (Overdrive) was the first year to introduce the restriction on robot-to-robot interaction to the bumper zone with robot penalties linked to contact outside of the bumper zone. Last year's game also had an aspect of the game where teams reached outside of their bumper zone to accomplish a game task. I propose that grabbing the 2002 mobile goals wouldn't be any different in that regard, but that some of the robots in 2002 would be designed differently with the robot contact restrictions in place at the beginning of the season... just as the robots would have to change to include bumpers.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I'd like to see a game with a more 3-D field, similar to the FTC game this year. Something involving ramps or hills, but maybe the drivers would have a hard time seeing their robot. Just a thought.
=]

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

- Monkey bars (second level of play)
- multiple terrains
- flat sides
- grated center
- banked corners
- simple scoring (on ground)
- advanced scoring (elevated)
- king of the mountain/zone/object (end bonus)
- simple task available to aide advanced tasks
- no defense that can completely shut down scoring (was good this year)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i think a challenge would be having to "think outside the box" while fitting inside one and floating in it too. the idea of this year's game made people think of a water-invloved game. so why not give them one next year? its an idea, not unlike robots on the moon's surface, never tried on a FIRST playing field. it would introduce a greater difference in ideas and designs that would better differenciate one team's robot from another. there are a lot of ways to make a person float. so how hard would it be to make a 120lb robot float?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I guess you've never read the hundred and one discussions on why it can't be done in a FIRST competition. Possible? Yes. Practical? Not on your life.

Note that there is an underwater robotics competition. I don't remember the website offhand, so some of the others who do will have to help me out.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

How about live ball sorting? It sounds rather lame at first (ha!) but hear me out:

Take the game piece (spheres, cubes, nerf footballs or whatever it may be) and color e.g. half white and half black. The one alliance wants white pieces in goal A, black in goal B; the other alliance wants the opposite. Put the goals on opposite ends.

This does a few things:
Adds a weird twist, could be fun.
Makes the difficulty of vision tasks more intrinsic and less dependent on lighting.
Lots of interesting sort options: presort+hoppers, "turret sort" (change target as pieces line up in the turret), "cerberus sort" (two heads that each remain locked on a target), "belch sort" (change turret speed based on whether or not you want the ball to go in), "driver sort" (only pick up the "correct" color), etc.


A third and fourth unsorted goal may be added with decreased points, to give teams a low-bar achievable target.


EDIT:
PS: Do we really have to debunk water games every time they are brought up? Lets just ignore it or answer it in PM.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

There are several competitions

The one run by a FIRST Team (842) is http://www.h2orobots.org/
Other include:
http://www.marinetech.org/rov_competition/
http://www.auvsi.org/competitions/water.cfm

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

the low friction surface was interesting, but it made it boring to watch becuase the game was in slow motion. also, i hated seeing a match decided by the scoring of a human player! this is a robotics competition, not basketball. another big thing was pinning! how frustrating do you think it was for us teams who spant long, hard hours building a great robot, only to see it being pinned and essentially taken out of the game by a robot nothing more than a drive base!

overall, i would like to see a more exciting competition, requiring more exciting robots(rather than just robots composed of a bunch of rollers).

if the people really want FIRST to expand, they need to make a "WOW!" competition, instead of just a "oh, cool, i guess." competition.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I personally would like to see
1. no required wheels or supplier
2. move autonomous to the last 15 seconds of the round
3. no exotic type surfaces
4. no burdensome penalty system
5. continuation of challenging fun
6. Multi-level field

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

They're not going to make the game have the same variables every year. This is basically "undo everthing they did this year and make it back to the way I'm comfortable with", which FIRST isn't in the interest of doing. They want no one to be comfortable in this competition, that's where people learn the most.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

underwater, yes. But what about floating on top of the water? Boats anyone?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

It may have a triangular or rectangular shaped game piece because it seems to has alternated between spheres in even years (generally [notably 2004, 2006, 2008]) with either a square of some sort (2003 stacking boxes) and tetrahedrons (2005)

Water sounds fun, but wouldn't that technically be an electrical hazard of some sort because of all of the electronics and cRIO on the robots?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Well, I kinda pushed the camera towards the start of this year's, maybe I can try it again...


How about something that REALLY pushes the envelope on getting (A) more dependency on the whole alliance working together instead of the "strongest robot", and (B) more focus on the higher-end manipulator devices?

How about robots lifting other robots? I remember the one year with the innertubes (2-3 years ago), when there was a bonus awarded to an alliance that could stack their alliance's robots, ie. by lifting them up, driving up on top of them, etc. Why not make that a part of the challenge? Requiring robots to lift or shift each other vertically to reach or manipulate the game pieces (Think Overdrive's overpass, hehe) would make for an interesting challenge.

Also, we should keep the camera systems, now that NI and Sun are on board for technical support (and supportive techniques) and some of the first-year bugs with camera synchronization are worked out. I think that the cRIO and all of its capabilities may finally have the chance of really being put to the test (Can anyone say linear accelerometers?) and that yes, this truly is like a whole new (*cough* season) beginning for the FIRST Robotics Competition. With the bugs fixed.

Oh, that might be another interesting thing... Bugs... ...oops, I better stop before this post goes denim. :D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Well, if you can come up with a reasonably cheap, readily portable by a semi, easily cleaned, watertight, easy for a crew of half a dozen to a dozen or so to assemble, quick-filling, quick-draining, easily accessible by people with robots in hand, grounded field, put the schematic in the Game Design threads/forum here on CD. Or a way to waterproof the current field would work. Oh, and you probably want to make sure it's relatively easy to build a low-cost version. Either route you take, I'd like to see it. Just to show that a water game is, in fact, practical beyond soaking the carpet or playing outside in the rain.

I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying that it's going to take some thinking and doing. And if you want to see one, you may wish to relieve the GDC of some of the stress of designing the field...

My ideal game would be to have a game object that isn't so easy to manipulate, like a traffic cone or a traffic barrel. PVC batons or hula hoops would also work. Throw in a common objective that only 4 or 5 robots can do (or only one alliance), and have it at the end of the game. Also a good autonomous objective. Add some terrain that has to be dealt with, like in 2003 and 2004. Bring back the varying box sizes/weight classes from 2007, too. That was really an interesting size/weight year.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Actually, I am not thinking of things "I'm comfortable with". I was thinking more in terms of keeping down cost for building practice field and such for those of us that have limited resources, both manufacturing wise and monetarily.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

This idea has a lot of potential.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would hardly say this is undoing everything they did last year.

The required wheels or suppliers is a concern of a couple people I know, plus, some wheels/parts are better suited to play styles, it is just letting us choose. I mean, what if, because Google is a supporter of FIRST we were required to use Sketchup to design our robot. Would you have a problem with that? Same concept with the wheels (Not saying AndyMark had anything to do with the decision)

Autonomous to end of match, hasnt been done before. I think it would be cool to have to figure out where you are and get to another point (randomly chosen at the start of auton of course)

No Exotic Surfaces does not mean "Go back to carpet" it means that we need to have a surface that is readily available to teams and cheap. Plywood, Cement etc. I would prefer NOT to see another game where the flooring for a field costs more than we spend on our robot. (397 builds robots from raw materials and the KOP so we don't incur huge costs in the robot)

4, and 5 were done this year*

A multi-level playing field has not been done since 2006 had its pair of ramps. The ramps were not really integral playing field components like 2003's ramp.


*5 could be argued by some people but let us not get into that debate there are other threads for that.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Thanks Jared!

An idea with less potential: Controlled recycling of game pieces. Imagine the "goal" is a hopper of sorts with a "release valve". A team could send a special packet over wifi to release/fire the pieces.



Also, I wouldn't mind the limited return of regolith, if it is more limited. For example, a central contested region. Or, imagine Overdrive with regolith on the ends of the field. I'd just like to see mixed-mode.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I think this is a fantastic concept as a high level idea to build a competition around. I think This is probably the best game idea I have heard described in a long time. Add in some sort of auton mode to release game pieces and some spectacular endgame action and this is pretty cool!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

exactly. why not make a boat-like robot that has to accomplish a certain goal? like, while having the body, float on the water, why not have the objective to retrieve something from the game floor, which is under water?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

that would be cool! then you'd end up with some neat teather bots like in '02..just mini subs

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Would that be virtual water?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i am hoping for a game with a cubed object this year and have like stairs or a ramp that you need to go up and over a bridge and drop the cube on something or in something. This year was a good game, in this years game, the idea was KISS, which I think is in almost every game. This is my first year but from what team mates have been talking about they are just hoping for nothing to do with a ball this coming season

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

no. real, what humans are 70% make of, H20
the real challenge would be to accomplish the goal, without sinking your robot's brains, because water and electricity do not mix. you'd have to encase the brains and make sure that you could keep it dry. it be sort of a "recover the shipwreck" idea. like how some sunken ships are brought out of the water, or examined in the water because the ship was too big, like... hmm i dont know... the titanic? just an idea.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

how bout a game with like random objects? like junk yard style

i mean, for example, lets say the game is simple and scoring into your goal at the other end of feild. the game peices that need to be put into the goals? different peices of oversized plastic fruit! like a big round orange, a bunch of grapes, a banana, they have differen't shapes and stuff so whatever kinda arm/thingy you use to pick up has to be very versitile.

you never know what your team would have to collect, like on role of dice you get a random fruit that gets you the bonus points for the round, and the rest just regular like one point or something.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I think I played that game back in the 80's. There was a little Yellow Robot whose goal was to navigate a maze and gobble up a simple scoring piece for a stock number of points, and then big bonuses were given for gobbling up fruits. What was the name of it????
:rolleyes:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

NURC http://www.h2orobots.org/

which by the way some members of our team have wanted to compete in for sometime, however Arizona where the comp is held does not look to be in our future anytime soon. Who knows anything could happen.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Hmm.. Pacman? No, that cant be it!!
but you have to admit, it would be an interesting idea.... :D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would play a Pacman based game as long as we get to keep our Killer bee Yellow.

Personally I think it would be fun to process bed pillows. I know they had the floppies that one year, but I think it would be fun to just try to process and score standard pillows with a Robot Proof pillow case.

Insert some sort of clue about falling asleep on the job.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Hehe, sounds like a robot scavenger hunt!

It combines different object shapes, and the playing field could be split up into room like segments. That means that you would have to use a camera to find the objects. The alliance with the most items wins.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

People on this thread have mentioned no bumpers and such, and while the discussion has faded, I would just like to add something that I think is important. People on this thread were constantly saying that bumpers matter because of damage to robots/don't matter because damage to robots doesn't happen. I would like to say that they are also there for human safety reasons. Having a 120lb robot smash it's metal frame into your shins or something else around the room is not a pleasant experience.

Autonomous mode at the end sounds interesting. I like pool noodles and safety cones, but you can't get neither of them very easily...(pool noodles in January?? and where could you ever by safety cones?)

I also like the idea of a big wall in the middle that you can't see around. Teams could go around using their cameras, or teams that want to go simple can stay on their side and get points. They could especially do defence agains the other alliance's robots that come around the wall.

How about if FIRST builds these little movable platforms which are basically flat moving dollys (not the ones with handles that you tip) with strong boards on top of them. If at the end of the game your robot is on top of this platform, bonus points! That seems like a really interesting challenge.

And maybe a game where you don't have to drive around with wheels (stationary robots). It's kind of hard to think of a game where you could do this and make it fun for the crowd, but it's thinking outside of the box.

I agree that a water game is totaly unpractical. But I thought once that the game pieces could be large water-tight boxes partially filled with water. The robots would have to transport these by picking them up (maybe they could push them...). The big deal is that they are heavy, awkward, and if a robot stops, the water has a lot of momentum and sloshes around in the box, making it hard to manuver and actually stop. Oh, and tinted water that you could sense with the cameras. :)

I like the pillow idea. Maybe large bags/beanbags with hard-to-break fabric/netting? Or balloons! Decrease points if you break them!

Have a big rectangular box that is just barely bigger than the robot size limits. If a robot manuvers itself into this box through an open face on one side at the end of the match, bonus points!

NO BALLS FOR GAME PIECES!!! GIVE US SOMETHING UNIQUE!!! :eek: :mad: :)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

As many have said above, I would like to see less dependence on human players and more on the robot itself. I think some stairs/hills would make the game a great deal more interesting. I would still enjoy a water challenge, but I really do not think it is practical.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Have the robot take a flag or pole out of a vertical tube (or even horizontal!) and place it in another upright tube in the center of the field, like a flag.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I've seen pool noodles used for vertical placement/removal in a robotics competition called BEST. It was a mite difficult. Anytime you place an object in a slot or narrow container (or remove it), it creates a challenge for the robot working against time.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

yeah, i said the same thing earlier, but a CTF game would be awesome!
have a game piece being stolen from the opponent's side and brought back to your side would be awesome. don't forget the rough terrain!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I think the neatest idea I've seen for a game piece comes from this post: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...30&postcount=9

Having robots build bridges across the field would be awesome to watch.