Chief Delphi - Game trends

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- Rumor Mill (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=15)

- - Game trends (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78980)

karatekid

15-11-2009 20:10

Game trends

I have a theory. I'm new to Robotics, so please tell me if this is inaccurate.
I was reading (and hearing) about the past two games-2008 (Overdrive) and 2009 (Lunacy).
In Overdrive, the main goal (as far as I can tell) was speed.
In Lunacy, due to the low friction, you could not go too fast or you would spin out.
My thoughts are, this coming year, there will be something to do with high gravity or something of that sort.
If some veterans could tell me if the opposites has had any kind of trend before or if this is just a coincidence, it would be appreciated.

EricH

15-11-2009 20:21

Re: Game trends

There hasn't really been a trend; every time one develops, it's promptly knocked down. The only one I can see is game names; since 2005, they've been common phrases or words, or a pun on those (Triple Play, Aim High, Rack 'n Roll, FIRST Overdrive, Lunacy). Games have had themes in 2008/2009, but now that I've said that, there won't be a theme next year.

The longest-running trend was ball/odd object/ball, from 2002-2008; the orbit balls in 2009 stopped it cold.

And Overdrive was "tortoise and hare"; you could go fast and get 2 points per lap or slower and 10 points per lap. The fastest hurdlers (the "slower" category) tended to win, but a good lapbot could really affect their performance.

karatekid

15-11-2009 20:29

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 882676)

And Lunacy was "tortoise and hare"; you could go fast and get 2 points per lap or slower and 10 points per lap. The fastest hurdlers (the "slower" category) tended to win, but a good lapbot could really affect their performance.

Do you mean Overdrive was tortoise and hare? Also, I'm not saying its always so obvoius, so it might be sublte. I'm hoping for any ideas on connections-I think the spider leg was 2007, and a point bonus at the end was raising robots. There was also a bump zone. In Overdrive, you were penalized for contact.
As for the speed, the slower speed was a bonus, but it the concept was a race, from what I can tell.

EricH

15-11-2009 20:54

Re: Game trends

Yeah, I meant Overdrive. You're right about 2007's elements.

The bumper zone is something that's been around since 2006. A brief history of bumpers:
Pre-2006: Bumpers are team-designed and included in weight and volume, which results in a lot of metal-on-metal impacts. Teams began designing wedges to defend against defensive robots, resulting unintentional tipping happening a lot. One match saw both alliances DQ'd for tipping. Bumpers aren't used by more than a few teams.
2006-2007: Wedges are outlawed and replaced by optional bumpers. They had to be in a bumper zone and had to be under a certain weight--and of a standard design. As a bonus, they were not counted in robot weight or size, unless they were custom, in which case they followed the same rules as before. About half the teams began using them.
2008-2009: Bumpers are now mandatory around some percentage of the robot's perimeter in the bumper zone.

Overdrive had a contact penalty, yes--if you contacted a hurdling robot in its home zone. Other than that, standard "hard contact" rules were in force--no high-speed, long-distance ramming, no pinning, no intentional tipping, no entanglement.

Tetraman

15-11-2009 21:00

Re: Game trends

The only known trend in FIRST is the rise of unknowns.

Beyond that, there is always the chance they take ideas from the previous year to mockup game ideas for the new game. You'll never really know unless you were on the GDC yourself.

ebarker

15-11-2009 21:15

Re: Game trends

very strong trend toward wheels and motors.

so far there hasn't been any walking, flying, hovering, levitating robots.

hmmm.... there is that cirque du soleil guy on the GDC.

RoboMaster

15-11-2009 23:40

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebarker (Post 882686)

hmmm.... there is that cirque du soleil guy on the GDC.

The second we see the game, it's going to be filled with platforms and like a big pit or trampoline and we'll be like "DOH! That was him!" :D

Borisdamole

15-11-2009 23:58

Re: Game trends

the only trend is that there is no trend... lol

Ian Curtis

16-11-2009 02:10

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by karatekid (Post 882677)

You're right. Speed is the central element to almost any FRC game. Granted some of these games had other elements too, but it's typically hard to win in end-of-game bonuses alone.

2009: Score Moon Rocks... Fast.
2008: Hurdle Trackballs... Fast.
2007: Score Ringers... Fast.
2006: Shoot Poof Balls... Fast.
2005: Cap Goals with Tetras... Fast.
2004: Collect Playground balls... Fast.
2003: Knock over the stack of bins... Fast.

You will hear lots of crazy theories once the hint (or hints, as it has been in recent years) arrive/s. They will be largely wrong and occasionally humorous. Almost no-one will read the game hint thread through, so there will be lots of repeats. A good time will be had by all, and once kick-off arrives, it will be so obvious we'll wonder how we possibly could've missed it. :D

Despite the "bump-to-pass" rule in the rulebook, I don't believe I ever saw that play out. Provided you weren't silly enough to think you could get away with stopping up the flow of traffic, it was the same as any other game. Contact was definitely acceptable, but the very nature of the game precluded the existence of "high-speed-long-distance ramming" as everyone was trying to Drive!Straight?turn!LEFT!?

karatekid

16-11-2009 07:18

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by iCurtis (Post 882719)

The 2009 game, you couldn't go fast due to low friction. You would spin out.

Billfred

16-11-2009 08:10

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by karatekid (Post 882726)

The 2009 game, you couldn't go fast due to low friction. You would spin out.

Re-read that. Curtis never said anything about moving fast, just about scoring fast. One of the things that made 217 so effective in a season of "oh shooters won't have a chance" was the fact that as long as they were saddled up next to you in pretty much any orientation (weren't they one of the ones that were scoring over other robots?), they could adjust and put a crap ton of balls in your trailer while most of their opponents had to be lined up just so. Could you still beat the Thunderchickens? Sure--it happened 14 times this season. But you had to bring your A game to do it.

EricH

16-11-2009 10:55

Re: Game trends

To add to what Billfred said, many teams had traction control, allowing them to NOT spin out, no matter what they did.

Also, 2003 and 2004 had HDPE as the surface in places. Very rarely would a robot be going so fast by them that it would become airborne. Not so much as in 2006, when a ramp structure had diamond plate on the ramp and Lexan on the top.

(And some teams had unique ways of scoring quickly, those years.)

Joe J.

16-11-2009 11:33

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebarker (Post 882686)

so far there hasn't been any walking, flying, hovering, levitating robots.

71's robot "walked/crawled" in 2002
http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv/match/2002cmp_f1m1

and I remember hearing about a hovering vacuum cleaner serving as a placebo bot pre 2000

jamie_1930

16-11-2009 13:46

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by karatekid (Post 882674)

I like the idea of seeing trends in the game and I've been looking at one in particular. FIRST has a long history with ramps and, when this was mentioned by a mentor at one of our recent meetings, I researched this and from looking at the trend we are overdue for a ramp game.

Also I feel like we may see a spring loaded ramp like in FTC's Face Off last year.

EricH

16-11-2009 13:49

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamie_1930 (Post 882785)

I think the longest without one has been two years, at least if you leave out 1997-1999. Not quite overdue yet.

Doug G

16-11-2009 14:06

Re: Game trends

Of the 10 past games, six of the games have included objects or field elements in which robots must navigate over or under. 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2009 are the only ones that didn't. I'm not sure you would say this is a trend, but I would be surprised to see yet another flat field in 2010. Start designing those 12" wheels!!!

karatekid

16-11-2009 16:22

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billfred (Post 882733)

Sorry. Also, the comparison I was making was regarding moving fast.

karatekid

16-11-2009 16:23

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 882756)

To add to what Billfred said, many teams had traction control, allowing them to NOT spin out, no matter what they did.

Also, 2003 and 2004 had HDPE as the surface in places. Very rarely would a robot be going so fast by them that it would become airborne. Not so much in 2006, when a ramp structure had diamond plate on the ramp and Lexan on the top.

(And some teams had unique ways of scoring quickly, those years.)

What is the HDPE?

Andrew Schreiber

16-11-2009 16:32

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug G (Post 882789)

I would disagree, one problem with navigating over/under things is that said thing has to be robust (read as probably heavy) and large (read as, heavy++). There are exceptions but in the interests of keeping field costs down I would doubt us having any massive field elements.

Additionally, going over Tetras was a real problem in 2005, I saw quite a few teams try to drive around the field and end up immobile due to getting caught up on a Tetra (either the large goal ones or the small game piece ones)

Quote:

Originally Posted by karatekid (Post 882804)

What is the HDPE?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-density_polyethylene

Also, breaking my own rule not to say stupid stuff but, yay, 900 posts. Interesting fact, in 100 posts the number of digits in my post count will equal my mental age.

rulesall2

16-11-2009 19:11

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 882676)

Games have had themes in 2008/2009, but now that I've said that, there won't be a theme next year.

I might have to disagree, it seems like FLL, FTC and Jr. FLL have all included a general theme the last 2 years, so my guess is that it would continue. The theme isn't really a "game element/trend" I guess it is more of a way for FIRST to say they are trying to inspire kids into solving "real world" problems. Also, it seems like the game pieces have centered around FIRST's logo.

2009:circle (orbit ball)
2008:circle (giant ball)
2007:circle (inflatable ring)
2006:circle (NERF ball)
2005:triangle
2004:circle
2003:square(i think)
2002:circle(also scoring receptacle design was recycled as trailers in 2009)
2001:circle
2000:circle

You get my point. So, my guess is this year will incorporate a circle, square, or triangle.

Andrew Schreiber

16-11-2009 19:40

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by rulesall2 (Post 882826)

The logo theory has been debunked repeatedly in as far as I recall.

As for the theme, there has always been a theme to FLL, remember, we are dealing with 8yr olds who have no attention span so the FLL game tends to be very story oriented to hold attention.

Ryan Simpson

16-11-2009 19:46

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber (Post 882830)

As for the theme, there has always been a theme to FLL, remember, we are dealing with 8yr olds who have no attention span so the FLL game tends to be very story oriented to hold attention.

Keep in mind that FLL also has a research part to it. The themes aren't just to keep the kids interested, but to give them something to research.

JaneYoung

16-11-2009 20:16

Re: Game trends

If we pay attention to everything that Dean and Woodie and Dave talk about when they are directing their attention to the potential and the impact that FLL, FTC, and FRC can make on changing the culture, it becomes very clear that trends run much more deeply than the playing surface or the game element or the slope of the ramp or its absence.

If you want an opportunity to gain some terrific insight into that vision and that commitment, attend an FLL event. Volunteer at the competition. Talk to the teams. Talking to their mentors is awesome and inspiring but if you talk to the students, you gain a very clear understanding of their grasp of what Dr.Flowers and Dean Kamen are saying. When you get that, then you understand FRC a little more fully. And then - you can begin to think about trends in a little different way.

Jane

hipsterjr

16-11-2009 21:12

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by rulesall2 (Post 882826)

I am so tired of circle game pieces, I really want to see a ramp and rectangle game, sort of like 2003.

rulesall2

16-11-2009 21:39

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipsterjr (Post 882843)

I am so tired of circle game pieces, I really want to see a ramp and rectangle game, sort of like 2003.

I agree totally. I would also like to see a team on team battle much like this year, where robotics was more like a sporting event, instead of each team trying to complete more of the task than the other. Personally i would like that better.

Back on topic, it would be interesting to see a large change in a common rule this year, like a drastic change in the maximum size of the robot just to switch things up, its almost like we're in a rut here with the same size bots and the ball thing. Maybe I'm wrong but that would be neat. Also, there isn't really a color trend, i was thinking about that earlier...

Molten

16-11-2009 23:23

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 882787)

I think the longest without one has been two years, at least if you leave out 1997-1999. Not quite overdue yet.

Aren't we already past 3 years? 2007-2009 had no ramps. I guess 2007 did if you count the one's people put on their robots, but even then we are at two years.

Eugene Fang

17-11-2009 00:11

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipsterjr (Post 882843)

I am so tired of circle game pieces, I really want to see a ramp and rectangle game, sort of like 2003.

Or a game with multi-shaped game pieces? Like filling bins with balls, then putting those bins somewhere? We haven't seen that yet..

delsaner

17-11-2009 13:02

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pikat (Post 882864)

Or a game with multi-shaped game pieces? Like filling bins with balls, then putting those bins somewhere? We haven't seen that yet..

I would not be surprised if that ended up being the objective of the game this year. In another thread, a game hint consisted of boxes and cans, which could mean multi-shaped game pieces. However, there is no portion of the hint that gives out a possibility of a putting pieces in bins (that doesn't mean we should give up on that idea though). ;)

Wayne TenBrink

17-11-2009 13:27

Re: Game trends

FIRST games don't follow trends, although there are a few randomly repeating themes. However, there are some general "constants" and apparent trends in the overall FIRST program.

Randomly Repeating Themes:
- Spherical vs. non-spherical game piece (with emphasis on FRC logo shapes)
- Single game piece handling (2008, 2007, 2005, etc.) vs. Bulk handling (2009, 2006, etc.)
- "Flat" floor (2009, 2008, 2005, etc.) vs. "Climbing required" (2007, 2006, 2004, etc.)
- Expanding robot envelope (2008, 2007, 2005, etc.) vs. fixed robot envelope (2009, 2006, etc.)
- An unusual feature thrown in to keep us off balance (2009 floor/wheels, 2008 "hybrid" period, etc., etc., etc.)

General Constants (but never assume anything...)
- 27' x 54' field (the basic field perimeter structure is re-used each year)
- 3 vs. 3 matches (drivers stations are part of the basic field structure)
- Max robot starting size about 28x38x60 in, 120 lb. (fit through standard door, fit existing crates, 2 students can carry, etc.)
- Autonomous period, teleoperated period, end game (usually involves a different task)
- A game that works for both rookie and veteran teams
- A camera that tracks a target light/color to assist in acquiring the game piece
- Achieving the basic game task quickly while being defended is the key to victory (duh!)
- No water games!

Apparent FIRST Trends:
- Cost reduction via re-use of parts, smaller venues (set up by volunteers), self-transport of robots, etc.
- Increased "value" for the money (more matches per event, more events per team, fewer teams per event)
- Summary: Michigan District format.

Chris is me

17-11-2009 13:41

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billfred (Post 882733)

217 had a shooter that launched over robots. 1114 later replace their shooter to do this (based on 217's design, I presume) and seemed to use the feature more frequently than 217. I've only seen 217 shoot over robots when it had a Supercell. 1114 used their shooter even when they weren't being held against a wall, while 217 seemed to prefer driving around until they could push the opponent from the side and fire down.

Part of that might have been since 217's shooter was on the front of their robot, another robot that incurred under 217's intake could block their over-the-top shooter (2775 did this in an IRI mentor match). 1114's shooter was located farther from the front of their robot, so they could more easily shoot over the top of other robots.

I have this gut feeling that I know far, far more about the functionality and scoring style of other team's robots than I ever should know.

Andrew Schreiber

17-11-2009 13:41

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink (Post 882954)

FIRST games don't follow trends, although there are a few randomly repeating themes. However, there are some general "constants" and apparent trends in the overall FIRST program.

Randomly Repeating Themes:
- Spherical vs. non-spherical game piece (with emphasis on FRC logo shapes)
- Single game piece handling (2008, 2007, etc.) vs. Bulk handling (2009, 2006, 2005, 2004, etc.) (Gotta disagree, a lot of teams handled 3+ tetras in 2005)
- "Flat" floor (2009, 2008, 2005, etc.) vs. "Climbing required" (2007, 2006, 2004, etc.)
- Expanding robot envelope (2008, 2007, 2006 , 2005, etc.) vs. fixed robot envelope (2009, etc.) (2006 allowed expansion horizontally but not vertically)
- An unusual feature thrown in to keep us off balance (2009 floor/wheels, 2008 "hybrid" period, etc., etc., etc.)

General Constants (but never assume anything...)
- 27' x 54' field (the basic field perimeter structure is re-used each year) (Since 2005)
- 3 vs. 3 matches (drivers stations are part of the basic field structure) (Since 2005)
- Max robot starting size about 28x38x60 in, 120 lb. (fit through standard door, fit existing crates, 2 students can carry, etc.) (Exception made in 2007)
- Autonomous period, teleoperated period, end game (usually involves a different task)
- A game that works for both rookie and veteran teams (Up for debate)
- A camera that tracks a target light/color to assist in acquiring the game piece (Since 2005)
- Achieving the basic game task quickly while being defended is the key to victory (duh!) (Also, up for debate)
- No water games!

Apparent FIRST Trends:
- Cost reduction via re-use of parts, smaller venues (set up by volunteers), self-transport of robots, etc.
- Increased "value" for the money (more matches per event, more events per team, fewer teams per event)
- Summary: Michigan District format.

Wayne, I made some small changes to your themes and constants. All rather minor. The only major one being that in 2005 you were allowed to handle multiple tetras, the weight made it a pain but it was legal. A small minor one was that 2006 allowed horizontal expansion but not vertical expansion. Interestingly, 2006 and 2007 explicitly forbid FlopBots (67 in 2004/2005 and 16 in 2008) 2007 was also the year of the multiple weight/size classes. All size and weight constraints have remained relatively standard since 2005 as have 3 team alliances.

Chris is me

17-11-2009 13:54

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by rulesall2 (Post 882846)

This is really kind of the yin / yang or balance or whatever you call it of FRC game design in my opinion. On one hand, you want a game with relative separation of tasks that are not completely dependent on your partners and opponents so that "good" teams seed high. On the other hand, you want games where the alliance has to work as a unit directly against the opponent for more exciting matches, variance between elimination matches, and emphasis on alliance selection. It's a tricky balance.

JesseK

17-11-2009 14:00

Re: Game trends

The real question is ... what are NASA's greatest challenges right now? What have they recently accomplished of great significance that can be simplified and quantified into a game? Additionally, what parts of those accomplishments are easily tailored in order to facilitate some of the other challenges facing the GDC, including improvements to the game format, regional competition format, and/or funding?

Ares I multi-stage rocket
Water on the moon

Therefore it's painfully obvious that we're facing an air, space, and/or water game this year. Time to get your spacesuits, goggles and bathing suits on!

11Mort11

17-11-2009 16:14

Re: Game trends

im feeling cones so its gonna be fast.

Robert Cawthon

19-11-2009 14:06

Re: Game trends

I think part of it will be driving by camera like is being done with the Mars rovers. The only question to my mind is would there be enough band width?

GaryVoshol

19-11-2009 22:09

Re: Game trends

The Mars rovers are mostly autonomous. There's several minutes of delay in getting radio signals to and from; they can't be "driven". Only general directions can be given. Like "drive staight", and then the rover determines whether straight is save.

AustinSchuh

19-11-2009 22:49

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol (Post 883454)

Various sources on the internet say 10 - 15 minutes, as a rough first approximation. Dave might be able to provide a more precise number. So, the delay that the driver would experience would be 20 - 30 minutes, provided there is radio access to the robot. That alone cuts out even more of the day.

Hmm. Now that would make for an interesting game. Delay the packets to the robot and back again by a couple of seconds.

dlavery

19-11-2009 23:38

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinSchuh (Post 883466)

The round-trip signal time for communications with the Mars Explorations Rovers varies between 11 and 45 minutes. The actual delay time depends on the relative positions of Earth and Mars in their orbits, which causes the distance between the planets to vary between (approximately) 55 million and 400 million kilometers.

-dave

-

hipsterjr

20-11-2009 11:13

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by JesseK (Post 882961)

NASA is retiring the shuttle at the beginning of next year and Lego league's challenge this year is "smart moves." If you combine this with the train based clues, you get some kind of transportation based game, moving large or heavy objects around the field. But when you think about, that's the challenge every year:rolleyes: so I don't know if my input has any meaning.

my $0.02

BT987

20-11-2009 12:59

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 882680)

no entanglement.

No entanglement?

http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv...8sdc_f1m3:mad:

EricH

20-11-2009 13:58

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by BT987 (Post 883564)

No entanglement?

http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv...8sdc_f1m3:mad:

No entanglement allowed. If you'll notice, I was referencing the "standard" contact penalties, of which entanglement has typically been one. Whether or not it's called is a matter of judgment on the ref's part, which typically involves judging intent/tendency to have things like that happen, which is tough to do on the fly.

Carol

22-11-2009 20:39

Re: Game trends

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pikat (Post 882864)

Or a game with multi-shaped game pieces? Like filling bins with balls, then putting those bins somewhere? We haven't seen that yet..

The closest to this was in 2001, when balls were put into tall goals, a larger ball was put on top of the goal, and then the goal was balanced on a teeter-totter.

See http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/17356

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 13:55.