Re: Robot Diversity
 

The under the radar teams might be taking some regionals, but i cant see many of them making einstein, einstein will be filled with perennial
champions as usual

Re: Robot Diversity
 

Personally, I feel that this year's game allowed for a lot of diversity, not in the type of robot and what it does, but in the specific design of the mechanism. However, I feel that the GDC didn't think long and hard enough about robots attempting to hang and how teams, especially newer teams, would respond to the challenge. Between SVR and Sacramento, I majority of robots were a chassis with a kicker. Even though teams that did hang made it seem easy, I think that the challenge (which I have to say was great to think about) was harder for teams than they thought it would be, thus the kicker only design. That's my $0.02.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

I think more diversity can be achieved by a open ended game, so more ways to score like football, can have a reciever, punter, kicker, running back, offensive linemen, quarter back, defensive backs, linebackers, defensive linemen... And waterboy...

but they can be condensed down to Linemen (O/D), Punter/Kicker/QB, Linebacker/Runningback, Reciever/DB... 4 possible types

Re: Robot Diversity
 

A nice theory, i like how you compared it to football thats interesting, perhaps it could be like baseball too, fielders, pitchers, batters, runners but there would be more subcategories of these things, curveball pitchers, fastbal pitchers, large catchers and small fast ones, fly ball hitters and ground ball hitters, runners would be all different drive trains but definitely the least diverse. and actually there could be a waterboy- a robot whose designated job is to reload the other ones with baseballs.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

:D My mind thinks like that, all analogies, I can even make a programming analogy: Inheritances...

Re: Robot Diversity
 

Anyone else have any ideas on how to diversify the game? I think rules definitely play a factor in it and so does popularizing said game.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

If they had taken out the 3" rule this year everyone could have probably used last years robot with some modifications.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

to me bumpers totally kill the game and design.

Teams really don't have to focus on building a strong frame because the bumpers dampen the majority of the force. My first year with FIRST was '05 when there were no bumpers, and subsequent years '06 and '07 they were optional. I thought it was really cool coming back from atlanta seeing all the scars, dents, etc. on the 'bot. Plus when new kids came to look at it they's say "Oh wow that rod is really bent" and I could then reply "Yeah, we got that when...." New students could see that these things actually compete (gives a little battlebots feel) and take damage. Bumpers may have made sense in '08 when teams were flying around at super high speeds, and maybe '09 before they realized teams wouldn't be moving very fast, but what part of this years game makes bumpers needed?

Now I see a purpose of bumpers as a design requirement that you must design around, just like real life. I just think they make everyone look the same, especially this year when everyone is either red or blue bumpers.

Now I guess back to robot diversity, this years game really couldn't be more diverse. Its soccer, you either kick or push or hang. Because the goals are low, anyone can play defense. Sure there are different ways to kick a ball but in the end you're still kicking a ball. Hanging is probably the most unique because everyone has a different way of doing it and that can be seen from the stands.

Looking back at other years in terms of diversity,
'04- probalily the most since there were so many different things a team could do
'05- very little overall, just different ways of lifting a tetra
'06- high shooters or low shooters or defense
'07- quite a bit since teams were working with an odd game piece
'08- good amount either lift over, shoot, or drive really fast
'09- the use of fans made this a diverse year
'10- imo the least diverse, and from an onlookers standpoint it makes teams difficult to pick out (unless they hang that is) when they have the same bumpers and change between red/blue.

i no this is again off subject but i would like to see a game where there are a lot of things an alliance can do to score, but they must assess the strengths of their alliance to determine which tasks they should tackle. This would make it nearly impossible for one team to do everything great (shoot well and hang for example) they would actually have to rely on alliance partners to handle the other tasks. just my $0.02

Re: Robot Diversity
 

I love that idea, it goes back to my baseball one, would you want someone who can hit fly balls or grounders, would you want a pitcher that throws curveballs or fastballs. this kind of assessment diversity would be very necessary and would see the sky rocketing of newer teams in the rankings due to just ingenuity. I am very excited to see how each game is made though.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

On the other hand, lack of bumpers can totally kill a robot, which makes for uninspiring game play.

The relevant part of the game is the one where robots are encouraged to do more than just prevent other robots from doing what they were designed and built to do. Bumpers help keep overzealous defenders from destroying in seconds what a team spent weeks creating.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

I personally can see the different viewpoints on how the diversity this year appears to be smaller compared to previous years. Most of the kicker bots are tiny little shoeboxes running around, but I believe that is because the game this year is fairly straightforward on what is the important scoring mechanism. Now there are always statistical outliers like 469, or even our looper which hasn't gotten a chance to shine yet, but for the most part the best way to score real points was to go possessor and kicker. Add in the obstacles which I LOVE, but add the cheat of a tunnel and you can see why there are so many shorties.

I personally have fond memories of Rack and Roll because it offered two distinct ways to score. Both scoring mechanisms were mostly good for the same amount of points, and it was very hard to do both scoring mechanisms well. I like a game where you have two separate but equal goals as this really allows teams to build to their own strengths and still be viable scoring robots. I would like to see separate but equal goals come back into play.

This year was creeping back towards separate but equal scoring mechanisms in that it had the hanging requirement at the end, but overall the hanging wasn't worth as many points as a really good scorer. That is why I don't think you see many people that attempted it.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

As far as I know, there are no perennial champions: only one team has won Einstein more than once (they did it twice). Can anyone confirm this?

EDIT - Others have shown this to be incorrect; sorry.

I agree with this. The more ways to score, the more diverse the game. 2008 was the most diverse year I've seen because there were so many things you could do - herd balls, hurdle balls, place balls, cross lines, knock balls off the rack in autonomous - that each scored a different number of points. 2009 was the least diverse, IMO, because the only way to score was to put moonrocks (or e-cells or supercells) into baskets or deliver them to the refueling stations, which were effectively just more baskets.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

Thunderchickens has won twice. And i was not saying the would win Einstein, just fill it up.

Re: Robot Diversity
 

67, 111, pink, and 71 have all won twice or more

Re: Robot Diversity
 

Incorrect.

71: 4 times (1997, 2001, 2002, 2004, lost to 190, 177, 987 in finals in 2007) Note: the first time, there was a totally different system in place.
111: 2 times (2003, 2009)
67: 2 times (2005, 2009)
217: 2 times (2006, 2008, lost to 67, 330, 503 in SFs in 2005)

177 has been on 4 times in a row, but only won once.
233 has yet to win the whole thing.

Fill Einstein up? I doubt it. There are 12 slots open. Typically, at least one team on the champion alliance is one that nobody expected going into the event. Let alone the other 9 teams and the backups who may be expected or not.