Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Actually, I think I found the answer. Somewhere in the spotlights, this thread is linked: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...?postid=441106

Some relevant posts:

(OK, so FTC teams now...)

Well, we haven't had either of the '08 or '09 games as planned, now have we... I guess they might move up the timetable on the hair-cutting...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

What about a game of laser tag? Using the same 3v3 alliances, all three robots have a laser pointer but only one of them is the target. Of course for saftey reasons the laser pointer should be kept close to the ground. The target is picked at random encouraging the creation of a versitile robot. There can be various obsticles scattered around the field making a more dynamic driving experience. In autonomous, robots must navigate through the course on their own, jocking for key postions before the start of the tele-op. This game would mostly be won based on strategy than just robot design, giving teams who have less resources than others a fair chance at winning.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

If you build a game where strategy alone beats good design, then why would one desire to take the challenge of building a competitive robot? If the game could be won by any robot, you have no incentive to try and push your team forward.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

What if it was on the wall. Literally. Think Cage Match! Robots have the ability to climb the walls to get to a bonus or something....

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

That would be awesome. I've always wanted to see a game where we can finally grab on to the field elements.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Why not let teams stream video if they want to but limit the bandwidth they get. I believe 802.11G has 56Mb/s so if we only gave each team 2Mb/s then the 6 robots would only take up less than 1/4 of the bandwidth (at worst) and FMS would enjoy lots of bandwidth. Then you let teams do with their bandwidth as they choose ;)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Fully autonomous flying robots. 'Nuff said.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Not those! When I'm at college, my Aero Design team works next to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle team, which competes in the IARC. They use gas-powered helicopters that drop electric helicopters to enter the building.

And it takes a team of about 20 college students, with a budget that's a bit bigger than an FRC team's, all year to do this. Do you think you could do something like this in 6 weeks with your current level of funding?

Something simpler, I could probably see. But I highly doubt that this will be practical for another couple decades.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

One function proves that that idea is no good: I know that I, at least, would enjoy a game that focused less on human players besides strategists and controlling the robot. Lunacy's human player element threw the game off IMHO.

Something that made more use of AI would be fun...core wars (or similar) during a FRC match between 6 robots? Happy fun time!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Can't we just go old-school and use corn?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would like to see the wireless connection between the field and the robots to be better.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Thats not affected by the game. Thats something completely different.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

It would be crazy if two of the three robots on each alliance were "chained" and had to do some task together.....

Or maybe all three would be "chained" to some really heavy "thing" and had to play a game while dragging it around.....



or tied to each alliance station wall and maybe the middle of the feild by bungee's so the farther you went the harder it was to move...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

MORE CRAZY FLOORS!

Like... A GIANT BALL PIT.

Or the game is like... FIND THE NEEDLE IN THE HAYSTACK. NO MAGNETS ALLOWED! :D:D

That would be fun. :)

I really want to see a capture the flag game. I've been trying to create one, but I can never quite figure out how it would work.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Like the bungee idea, think no magnets is slightly obvious. Giant ball pit? Challenge: do not sink. You have 2:15. Fail and face erasure.

For CTF, we'd need a 2x2 field size-twice as long in each direction-for it to be really fun. Plus a small envelope...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Capture the flag would be truly awful, I think. I can just see it being about as "fun" and "exciting" as a 2002 match versus 71. Just pulling.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

How 'bout dis:

Equip all robots with NERF Vulcans or another auto/semiauto dart gun (supply one, teams can buy up one or two more?)

Each alliance has an area next to the driver's station where you drive the robot in and the HP can touch the robot to reload the Vulcans

Robots must have a standard target fixed to a sensor easily set off by the darts

HP's could also have Big Bad Bows or Recons

XD

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

me like :) except idt that they would go with it cause of the whole shooting each other factor

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

How about having IR beams emitted from the robot and shooting receivers mounted on the field to trigger event(s). Or the receivers are on opposing robots?

I also like the idea of multi tiered fields that use chin-up bars, al la 2004, to pull your self up on to the next higher platform.


What ever the game is, as long as there are more than two pieces / ways to score it will be a fun game. (imo)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i say we have a mash-up of previous FIRST games :D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Mash up? Do you mean combining elements from previous games? If so, which elements and how would you combine them?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

i'm not sure what i'd do. this is probably something for the GDC to look into for FIRST's 20th game year ;)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

they kinda recycled pieces from previous games, just check out the goals from zone zeal and raising the bar, and of course, lunacy. (check the attatchment)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

ok, I would like to start off by saying that another member of our team and I were "speculating" in December on the way back from WV FLL tournament. He said that it was not likely that the game would involve a slick floor (commenting on the "fish" clue) due to safety hazards. Boy i don't think he could've been any more wrong.

Anyway, some things I noticed about this year's game:

-spectators that were not a part of FIRST got bored and confused trying to follow LUNACY. It was simply too complicated.
-It had a human player role that was way too important to the game. Overall robot ability varied from competition to competition. For example, in pittsburgh, the overall the human players were more dominant than the robots, but in palmetto, it was opposite.
-Some strategies were completely abandoned in some competitions. ex the emptycell/supercell, driving on the edge to get more traction from carpet, the camera-track that drove the robot itself, as opposed to, like what we had, that simply guided the driver.
-However, I did like the double-score penalty this year. I do think that or something like it should be implemented in next year's game.

What I would like to see in the 2010 game:

-A simple, but not necesarily easy challenge (such as the "hurdle" in 2008) that would be a "main task," as opposed to several things going on at once druing a single match. spectators get too confused.
-Very little "human element." Not something as primary and important as LUNACY.
-More complex autonomous tasks, as opposed to simply "driving around" like in OVERDRIVE and LUNACY. Maybe like different colors on the field to score uber points, giving teams an incentive to actually have an autonomous mode. You know, like half of a match's points being scored in autonomous mode. I'm thinking the first 15 seconds should be one of the most exciting periods of the match (and of course, the last 20 secs as well, but that's a given no matter what the game is).
-I do like what a couple people have said earlier: having a mix of some previous year's games like in FIRST Frenzy. That seems like it would be a really interesting game.
-I also liked how the scoring was done on the robots themselves (or the traliers, rather) as opposed to a goal or an "overpass." I think if they had both scoring on opponents (or teammates'?) robot AND an outside scoring method like in past games.
-Okay one other thing I always thought would be cool, is to have a "blind" driver. Maybe either one team on the alliance, or all teams for a period of time in the match, or something like that. You know, have something covering the plexi in front of the drivers for the first minute or something. Teams would only have their sensors and cameras and stuff to guide them. Or have the drivers blind and another human player on the side of the field be able to see, comunicating via walkie-talkies or a remote of some kind that lights up lights on the control board, in turn guiding the drivers...idk, just a thought.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

as a retired FRC driver, i cringe at this :(

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Being outside of your comfort zone is not always a bad thing! :ahh:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

yes, but i'm sure that most, if not all, drivers would hate that after trying it once XD

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Yeah. I can't imagine blind-driving would be fun. I think it's one of those things that would be funny to watch for the first dozen matches on Friday and then it would just start getting old.

I'm still waiting for footballs to make an appearance. They are cheap, you can buy them anywhere, they don't break, and they present a very unique challenge.

It's also been 3 or 4 years since we've seen ramps (and 6 since we've seen steps).

I think it would be interesting if the endzones were inclined so that without some sort of braking mechanism, a bot would roll off after the buzzer sounds.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

which gives birth to next year's field:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I was thinking more along the lines of this:



But we could do 20 footers too... Whatever works. =)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

so we need a multi-tiered half pipe for next year :D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Yes. With footballs. :)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

as well as frisbees: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=77748

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

There you go GDC. Your welcome.

:cool:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Now I wanna throw a robot on my friend's miniramp and see what happens... see if I can pull off some 180s and whatnot.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Now we are thinking outside of the box! (or at least outside the hockey rink shape!) ;)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I look forward to videos of the whatnot.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I'd build a Vex bot to do it, but the motors would be way too slow to get any air. I also don't have access to CIM powered robots, so it looks like it'll be a pipe dream for now.

I bet I could get it to do a flair or two.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I think that all communication between the drivers station and the robot should be delayed by 15 seconds. Obviously, the communication about the robot's mode (which means that response to the e-stop button would be instant.)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

whatnot may be boring. Try for some shenanigans.

A delay could be dangerous and expensive...how about, for a much more interesting idea, humans riding the robots?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

next year all robots must hover

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

:D. As neat as these ideas are, next year's game will be something crazy. No doubt. And my ... expectations for next year's game are...

1. The carpet will make a huge return. I think FIRST will not experiement with another flooring for a while.

2. I expect the game element to NOT be a ball. We got away with round shaped objects for two years, and I don't think we'll be lucky enough for a third year.

3. I expect for the last seconds of the match to also count a lot more. This year, while the super cell did make/break some matches, I don't think it played THAT big of a role in the larger scope of the matches. So I think that the last second bonuses will also be more influential.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

if you count ringers as round in shape, it's been four years in a row ><

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I guess by round, I mainly meant "ball" shape.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

"spherical" maybe?

I think that we'll have to drive on an upside-down surface...DUN DUN DUN!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

What would be the round trip delay for a signal to Mars next January? Might the GDC build that amount of delay into the video/return signaling from the robot to the drivers station to simulate the control of the Mars Rovers? Could we be going to Mars this year instead of the moon? :D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

The GDC likes thinking outside the box, right? What about thinking outside the two minute time limit? What if there's a way to end the game before the timer runs out?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Have you looked at the 2001 rules?

The short version: 4v0 (otherwise this wouldn't have worked), multipliers for hitting the E-stop and shutting off your robot early. Catch: everyone had to do it to get the multiplier. Ever since, there has been a note in the rules about the E-stop not being reversible and not affecting scoring.

I forget what the exact multiplier was, but I think it was x1 in the last 30 seconds, x 1.5 in the last minute, x2 in the last 1.5 minutes, x3 in the first 30 seconds. Someone correct me on that, because I think there was an x4, but I don't know where and it's been a *few* years since I watched that one.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

oo i like that! i'd be so up for it... 461 has experimented with that before too, it was fun but a bit dangerous, especially if the robot came to an unexpected jerky stop...

how about something to do with squares? or cubes? maybe soft, colorful, and large cubes like the ones thaT little kids play with or that i used as chairs... some game to do with those would be fun

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Maybe PVC cubes, rather like the tetras?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

we should get a bunch of beanbag chairs and use those as game pieces!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I am sorry, but for us, the supercells made a huge difference. Without them, alot of our matches wouldv'e changed for the better, or worse...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

That would actually be interesting...
You would have the build a robot that picks up something that contantly shifts it's wheight.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

don't forget the shifting dimensions as well :D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

OHHHHHHH!!!. That is a one interesting idea. For example,

Like there are balls on the field, and a robot can hit the stop button once it has let's say 15 balls in various containers. Once the robot hits one of the stop buttons, then it's frozen. And the scoring goes opposite of the order of the robots to get stopped. So 1st robot stopped gets 50 points and the second robot stopped gets 45 points, etc.

Or it could be the other way around, but simply the idea of it is simply...sleep depriving.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

What? It goes into the 8th dimension?

That actually sounds fun (beanbag chairs I mean, not other dimensions)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

why balls? :( what about about an object non-uniform in shape, that's magnetic or something?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

This is mostly because many teams, mine included, ignored the cells when they shouldn't. Teams such as 217 show what leaving the 15 point Supercell on the table does to a match, and I don't think it was a surprise that both of the final alliances on Einstein had teams that had used robot-loaded Supercells in the past.

Teams with long range, low throughput shooters really were what the Supercell was designed for in my opinion, as throwing two of those in a trailer's the equivalent of a fairly substantial power dump.

I honestly don't know why more teams didn't make the Supercells part of their game plan and load them into their robots. It's not terribly hard to convert an Empty Cell and it's one of the best ways to beat pinners and ball starvation strategies.

(yes my team will be doing supercells at IRI, you just wait :P)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

HINT(sort of) "What do Crackerjacks have to do with anything?

from Bill's blog today -http://frcdirector.blogspot.com/2009...o-do-with.html

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Well, Crackerjack just went back to their old label design for a while and sells them in 3-packs at Walmart...

Could be a throwback and/or using 3's in a new way.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I'd like to see a cube as a game peice, personaly. Maybe a dynamicly changing feild(height of sections, steepness of ramps, ect). Also maybe a diffrent feild shape, like a hexagon.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

As cool as it would be, the problem with a dynamic field is the cost to practice.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Oh god...the thread is slowly growing faster...

Well, I'm guessing the game element will be a fragile object, but easily fixable. But at least we know one thing, the carpet's back!!!!!!!!! :D.

"We’ve laid out carpet salvaged from Championship and set up field #1" - Bill

CALLED IT!!!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Crackerjack can also be a term for "crazy", which is what you guys are. Go take some time off from FIRST for a couple of months. You'll need it. Don't believe me? You will in a few years.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

To be fair there was even carpet this year. They just put the regolith on top of it. I don't see them using anything other than carpet though. Every other surface seems to be similar to carpet or regolith, either low or high traction...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

they could take it to extremes and cover the field in ice :P

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Logistically speaking, ice would be a pain in the butt to maintain, probably harder than a water game, or what not, but it's a nice thought.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

if we can build a ski resort in the middle of a desert, we can maintain ice
http://www.skidubai.com/

:P

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Good old Dubai...you gotta love their projects.

I like the dynamic field idea, but it's too impractical to do...maybe a game where the robots have to open a box of Crackerjacks and get the prize out, without crunching up the jacks, and putting them into a bowl?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

We also learned that the carpet is very absorbent. It can be moistened frequently without damage.

-dave



.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

... and so it begins :D




.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Just think how much fun everyone would have if the game piece was squirt bottles.

So many options such as a fine mist or a straight zap.

So, I best mosey along now...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

...._____
....||||||]---------------------------
....|88|\
.../888|.\
./88888\
|888888|
|888888|
|888888|
|888888|


look ma, it's a 2010 KOP item!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Begins? You mean continues, don't you?

Oh, and Dave, I thought you were still hibernating. It's not the end of summer yet...:D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

mmmmmm....


The field reset crews would love that:rolleyes:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

But it'd be so tasty! And it involves Cracker Jacks!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I don't think that FIRST is going to have two years in a row of Non-Carpet Floor.

I think that the field is going to be a symmetrical obsticle course, and robots will have to retrieve a game peice from the other side. Sorta like CTF, but better, and with robots!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

instead of a slick floor, I would like to see slick ramps!! Keep the floor carpet, but for the end game have people climb up ramps that are both steep and "icy" so to speak.

Or have a king of the hill style end game with a raised slick platform in the middle. First one to get traction sends everyone else sliding off the side.:D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I want ramps so sufficiently steep and slippery that the only way you can climb them is if you hook your robot on something and pull your bot up the slope.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

How about a rope hanging down the slope? and the bot has to pull itself past markers on the slope, the higher up it is the more points at the final buzzer?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I guess that the game would be fun after a while, but like...for the first minute and thirty seconds it wouldn't be that much of a joy...

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

This would be a component of an endgame rather than an entire game.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

anybody ever think about water.......? as in boats......? that would be very interesting.......... :ahh:

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

no, never. :P

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I really like the idea of either a slope or something to climb. Maybe a rock wall? It would cause the robots to need to be lightweight, maneuverable, and powerful enough to lift their own weight.
As for water, the setup would be really extensive, I would be suprised if they decided to do it. Not that it wouldn't be awesome! :D

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I love how everyone want the human player to do less however i feel as if the whole point of these games is to bring robot life closer to human life. so if a game that has involvement of both seems brilliant idea . although this past years game was a little too dependent on human player i think its a great challenge to build robot that can outdo humans thus last years game so i look forward to another challenging and fun year that involves both

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

So basically, human player interactions with the robots present constraints or opportunities, depending on how one looks at it and makes use of the challenge.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I could go with the climbing thing. It's been a few years. 2004 and 2000 were the last two games to have a hanging element... It's not a matter of getting up to a certain height, it's a matter of staying up there until you want to remove the robot.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Robot Jousting anyone?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Alright, this is a game concept I came up with. Obviously, as it stands, it has no way to incorporate human players. However, I see it is as an expandable concept. More tasks or objects could be added to make the game even more difficult.

To start off with, this concept can be seen in a lot of video games. It is also found in different shapes and forms.

In this basic concept, teams are required to mine resources from the opponents mine, and then bring them back to their own mine to transfer them. Teams could gain defensive/offensive bonuses by having more robotics in a mining area. For example, in order for blue to steal from a red mine, they must have more robots than red in the red mine. So if there are 2 blue robots and 1 red robot in a red mine, then the blue robots successfully steal resources from the red. Then are then free to deposit it in their own mine.

Depositing could then be done by either the robots that took it or any robot on the team. Also, they could be required to have to more than the other team in their mine to deposit them.

Also, other objects, such as big boxes, or little balls could be pushed around for bonuses. There could also be obstacles or ramps to overcome.You could implement a universal mine for both teams to get resources from or a gold mine or mountain for bonus points.

Im not sure how the points transfer could be done, perhaps with sensors or manually with scorekeepers at each mine.

After trying to explain this, I realize it may be too complicated or boring to implement, but perhaps you guys can find ideas or ways for it to work. After all, it is just a concept.

:ahh: Whatever the game, perhaps a way to STEAL points, it makes it more dynamic. DISCLAIMER: Stealing is bad and should not be attempted at home.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

I would like the game to be called Sanity. Just for irony's sake.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

That's not irony, that's sarcasm!

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Water game is probably unlikely because of the tricky setup and the fact that the field gains the potential to totally wreck your bot if you make a slight oops (something that will leave everybody cranky). It would be neat if they could find a way around that though.

That or you could go from the other direction and make it possible to unscore your opponents points. Either way it would be really neat.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Yeah, I'd like to see descoring return; it was legal back in the day. Adds an extra strategic element.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Maybe it is just a little bit of both. :)

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Descoring was eliminated from the matrix of desirable game design characteristics after 2003. The feedback from teams for several years preceding that was consistent and universal - they hated descoring. This was reconfirmed with the brief flirtation with "Spoilers" in "Rack 'n Roll." So don't look for descoring to come back any time soon. At least, not before 2010.

-dave



.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Based on my recollections of the community 'responses' to FIRST games...I would think that the feedback was more in line with:
"We don't like that it is so easy for teams to undo what we did."

I would believe that most teams would accept descoring if it was suitably difficult, and I believe that teams would admire a robot capable of it.

That would be a far cry from 2003 when a robot could drive into a stack and undo 2 minutes of work in 2 seconds.

I'm sorry to hear that "descoring" was entirely removed from your matrix.

-John

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

John,
This may be a good opportunity to point out some methods where descoring would require as much or more skill than scoring. as you mentioned, 2003 was a prime example of too easy to descore.
In Triple play it was very difficult towards the end of the match to score without descoring some of the more highly contested positions.
Rack and Roll would have required similar efforts to score vs. descore (at least thinking about it initially).
What are some possible scoring methods where descoring would be more difficult than scoring? Balls into a fixed tube? removing something that is latched onto something else?

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

Whatever the game should be...

Please make the game cheap (inexpensive, easily obtainable game pieces and floor)

Please let the teams think out of the box, and in different ways.

Re: Next Year's Game?
 

The fundamental problem with de-scoring is that there are very few types of games in which it is not as easy or easier to de-score than it is to score in the first place. The goal for each team is to achieve a low-entropy goal state. Increasing the entropy of the field state (knocking down bins, tipping goals, etc.) will almost always be so much easier than decreasing it that, in a minimax sense, optimal strategies will rely heavily - even exclusively - on de-scoring.

Spoilers in 2007, and ownership of the goals in 2005, are constructive de-scoring techniques - the total entropy of the field has been decreased, but the field state has been moved further from the other teams' goal. These are the only sorts of de-scoring mechanisms that I feel can be a part of the game without dominating the effective strategies for playing it.

I think I speak for (almost) everyone when I say - I don't want a game that can only be won by playing with a certain strategy. 2003 was such a game.