Re: Next Year's Game?
 

But couldn't the same argument have been made against the low traction environment in Lunacy? Lunacy turned out fine despite the chance of all of the aforementioned worries being potential issues. Why would low visibility be more problem prone than low traction?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Lunacy had low traction, a curtain would be no visibility. You can drive on an icy road, but not when your windshield is covered in snow.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

However, if the robot is fitted with a camera and the drive team were able to view the camera's field of view from the laptop included in the KOP wouldn't that mean that effectively give the drive team low visibility, while still giving them enough to feasibly compete?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

To continue with the snow/ice/car comparison, driving with just a camera for visibility would be like driving with a windshield covered in snow, but with a little gap in the snow for you to see through. If a robot started malfunctioning, the drivers wouldn't be able to see what was wrong with it. In the case of entanglement (not really a problem in 2009, but it was a big issue in 2008), drivers wouldn't be able to de-tangle their bots, or know when to e-stop.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Cameras are severely limited in how much they can help your vision. First, they only see straight ahead of them. This prevents you from knowing where the rest of the teams are. Also, would you have to have a separate camera for scoring purposes? Then there would have to be another screen for each team to look at so they can tell where the scoring device is. If not, vision for scoring would be poor and scoring would be limited in general. Another limitation is that of defense. If you can't see the other robots, there is no way to stop them from scoring. In my opinion, using only a camera for vision would take some of the excitement of the game and is not worth the added challenge that it presents.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Cameras have the advantage of being able to have a perspective the drivers do not; the camera can see your robot when it is buried behind several others. Moving from FTC to FRC this year, not seeing the entire field at once was a really big change I didn't even think about preseason that really affects the match. Some way, be it a camera or a remote driver station (walkie talkie communication), to change perspectives and get more information would be cool (oftentimes the opposite side of the field was LITTERED with balls that we couldn't see..)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Tell you what: find an R/C flight simulator. Fly a bit in the various view modes. You'll quickly find that you can't get enough information--the plane's too small, you can't see the ground, etc. Now see if you can fly an R/C aircraft in the real world. It'll be much easier, at least in terms of vision.

You can also do this with a computer-based flight simulator, but it's not as good a demonstration.

Cameras are limited in what they can/can't do. Their angle is limited by the lens, they can't give you very good depth perception (when I'm flying my simulator, I tell when I can land on the runway by whether the shadow is on the runway, and that's the only way to do it reliably), and looking at something else that's important means either changing the angle or zooming out, both of can which affect your vision negatively.

If it happens at all, it will be limited in duration, and hopefully teams get 2 cameras to do it with.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

(Sorry if this is a repost of another idea)

I think it's gonna be space themed again. Just like the IR receiver in 2007-2008 and the Lunacy game in 2008-2009, i think it'll have something to do with enviroment, moon landing, and even less control over your robot. I just hope there aren't anymore required parts like the wheels from last year, our flooring tore up the wheels pretty badly.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

We can program in Java ohh so much fun.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Heard that Dave Lavery got a new pair of swim fins recently...

Water game?:rolleyes:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i don't know, that was already uber discussed last year about what lunacy might be..

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Yeah...apparently fish=water game :rolleyes: As much as we would all love a water game, I think it's been proved a million times over that it won't happen* (pressure on the floor, teams unable to practice, electrical issues, etc).

HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that the word "water" will not be used...for all we know, the playing field could be called "the ocean" this year; I wouldn't put THAT past Dave :rolleyes: Fake fish for game pieces, different stations to "skin" (or whatever you do with fish; I'm a clueless vegetarian) them, cook them, and do something else to them...you have to get through them all before time is up...bonus if you get five or more fish through...

I"ll just shut up now before I start designing the game myself >.<

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

You know, despite that, a water game is always suggested (or at least joked about) every pre-season. Oddly we never suggest a game with flying robots. That would be awesome, though would never happen (probably).

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I'm hoping for larger robot dimensions actually....It'd be fun to build even larger robots.:D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

...that don't fit through standard doors. :confused: