Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

This is why I proposed 3v3 with 2v2 on the field. This would give it aspects of hockey and nascar.

*for the record I hate nascar, but it is one of the few instances where people have been excited by competitive machines. I think we could learn a lot from them. (unfortunately I think a lot of their success comes from beer :( )

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

I think 3 minutes would be enough for the competition.

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

I think a longer autonomous would be great. Maybe 20 seconds, 30 seconds at the absolute maximum, to let the programmers shine. It warms my heart to see the robot doing it's own thing, my own thing. <3

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

Eventually we will reach a point where matches will have to expand to more robots, the district format will become the dominant competition format, or both.

If you want a match that is x% longer, you will need an identical increase of robots on the field, which will introduce FMS variables and a whole host of other possible issues.

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

Not I, said the que team. As if our days aren't long enough.
I'm sure plenty of field volunteers would feel the same.

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

I'd like to see longer autonoumous periods, personally. Many people have commented that it's really an RC contest, because robotics implies autonomous operation.

It's much more challenging, so the auto mode would have to be more simple. It would require the field to be autonomous friendly, and the code libraries could be wrappered a little better so more sensors could be used more easily by all.

Of course, the humans might get bored...

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

I like where you're going with this, but I think you're pushing it a bit too far. "Professional" sports are a pure entertainment industry, whereas FIRST is about transforming its participants into the future leaders, thinkers, and inventors of our world. I agree that it should maintain a certain level of spectator friendliness in order to attract new students, sponsors, and mentors, but it shouldn't be the main focus.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard the line "so it's basically just giant R/C cars" from students and parents/adults. IMHO, I'd really like to see longer autonomous modes, and it would probably add more excitement when you know that those machines are operating without human interaction. I don't think I'd ever want to see full matches with no human operators, but we certainly should see more emphasis on showcasing the programming skills.

This, of course, is better-suited in its own thread. But I just wanted to add my two cents on that.

(And yes, I know that not all robots are "self-aware". Look at military/police bomb robots.)

I can imagine quite a few people would like to have a not-so-gracious-nor-professional word or two with the person responsible for adding considerable stress to their jobs.

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

I definitely agree with you on this one, and I'm starting to think that maybe FIRST won't be what I see it to be. Over my last semester at school I spoke with many professors about what was attractive about robotics competitions. I was working on an independent study on UX design, which a lot of web design and game design are almost identical. 7 +/-2, that's where I always start.

FIRST needs to decrease the stress on working memory, by moving goals closer together. In most matches this year, if I was to ask you at a random moment, who's winning, you probably wouldn't be able to answer. There is simply too much math complex math in these games. Unless a team is killing the other one, you have no idea who's winning.

Games like 04 allow you to focus at the center of the field. Also autonomous was a lot more exciting then, because a bin full of 19 dodgeballs dropped if you succeeded. Everything in 04 was Epic. Huge bins of big balls. Three Huge exercise balls. and robots hanging from a 10ft bar.

I wish FIRST would use cathodes to indicate teams too. Imagine if the red team glowed red, and the blue team glowed blue. It would be much easier to identify teams rather than merely by a bumper.

Also in 04, you only had 2 robots, so you had to design your robot to do everything.

It's been a long day of work so I may be leap frogging around right now.

I honestly don't think the game ever transforms people, but rather the experience does. I think the game actually acts as a distraction, and the teams that realize that always do the best.

I have a theory that if you were to start with the awards book rather than the rule book, your team would be more successful.

I would semi-argue with you on one thing, where it shouldn't be ITS focus, it should be someones focus, and that someone should get paid. FIRST is getting big enough that it should start thinking about creating more careers, and maybe utilizing volunteers less for certain positions.

Again they don't publish their staff information, so I have no idea what the paid staff for FIRST looks like.

I am seriously considering starting an IFL (InterFIRST League).
An outdoors based competition of arduino-based robots. Make it something more can afford, and make it so you and the 4 or 5 towns around you can get together on a Saturday, and play games in a school's parking lot.
I'm hoping that by using a high school sports model, rather than a pro-sports model (Which FIRST uses now), robotics can be more realistic.

It's like FIRST is trying to compensate for being geeky by holding these huge events. Personally I don't think there is a reason that all events need to be this big. You don't need a $70k field or a $7k robot to pull off FIRST. Some events should be huge, but i would personally prefer backyard FIRST. Something that anyone can participate in.

You don't need flashing lights and stadiums to make people see robotics is cool. And championships and playoff are big in the high school model too.

And no, I'm not talking about FTC or VEX. I'm talking full size robots (possibly bigger than FIRST robots), and full size playing fields. Games with robot subs, and teams (not random alliances). I'd love to see alliances that were given 400 lbs between 3 robots and see what they come up with

Maybe I'm just sleep deprived, but I think it would be fun :).

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

Being behind the glass and experiencing matches first hand, I have come to think that an extra 30 seconds added onto a match would not be a bad thing.

1) As said before, I think it would give an extra time for robots to shine and show what they have to offer. This boosts the morale of the team and team pride. Stretching the thought, it could lead to more spirit at competitions.

2) It seems when I have just gotten into the match, and getting used to the feel of the robot once again, i hear the 15 second mark, followed closely by the finishing of the match. I think that the extra 30 seconds will allow for a more entertaining match, and a chance to score even more tubes.

As well as longer matches, I think that we should incorporate an extra day into the competitions. Let me explain why.

1) FIRST robotics is a great program. We all know and experience this on a day to day basis. The 6 weeks of build season are ones that I will never forget. And then we get to the competition. Coming from a fairly well off team, I am extremely lucky to be able to experience 2 competitions every year. However, even as this is so, I am always wanting / wishing that there was more too the competition. Adding the extra day, would give more time to appreciate all the hard work that we do during the build season (the robot playing matches).

2) The second reason is that playing 9 qualification matches (i think that is the calculated average (correct me if i'm wrong)) is not enough time to really evaluate the ability of the robot. Adding more matches would give more data to work with, and overall a greater perception of what one's robot should truly be ranked before the elimination rounds start.

All in all, I truly believe that adding an extra day to competitions would make them much more fulfilling

PS. The extra day would be the wednesday

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

Or you could take one day out of the competition, and play 12 matches. And just like on late night TV, you get 2 competitions for the price of one!

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

Adding a day would raise the cost by about 1k per team per regional

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

The idea of community-based robotics clubs and competitions seems entirely compatible with FRC, FTC, and even FLL. I haven't been involved for all that long, but from the historical records I've seen, it seems like FRC evolved from high schools meeting at a gym -- was successful enough to outgrow that. It became the Olympics of robotics, but with significant growth, it needed qualifiers. Will it franchise, splinter, cross the chasm and become commonplace? My time machine is broken ... again. What about yours.

Many robotics teams seem to keep the interaction going for more of the year by competing in other contests, doing offseason events, making offseason mechanisms or practice bots, etc. If you can find the right mix of accessibility, cost, and reward, I'd say you should go for it. You could even hit up some of those already involved in FIRST, possibly FIRST itself to take part. If you want to research more about the robot contests already in existence, I'd suggest this forum thread.

To the IFL ideas. I don't get the train of thought. If you compare the needed safety elements of FTC or VEX with FRC, size not only costs in materials, but it costs in transport, field, and safety mechanisms. All sorts of electronics are used for control in the above list of contests, but generally it doesn't seem to be the expensive component.

As for the number of employees and such. Wikipedia of "For Inspiration ... " on the right hand side lists some figures. Also FIRST publishes an annual report which includes a budget summary.

Greg McKaskle

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

I would favour making the autonomous mode longer (say 30 seconds) with two levels of difficulty for the challenge as well as increasing the point value of the autonomous mode. The purpose is to give teams more incentive to tackle the autonomous mode. Of the teams hanging ubertubes, a few were attempting (some successfully) to hang two. With this model, the second ubertube would be worth even more points than the first.

Perhaps, the teleoperated mode for the elimination matches or quarter-final matches could be made longer with more game pieces. This would limit the amount of extra time required to run the tournament and would really "separate the men from the boys". The robots that make it this far would not likely break down and become speed bumps. The teams would have the extra engineering challenge of ensuring their robot can run longer than they normally would have to (during the qualifying matches).

Phil

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

Previous posts have said something about 2v2 alliances.

If 2v2 alliances were incorporated now, specialized robots would start to disappear, as alliances would need 2 fully functioning robots to play the game, unless the game can be played by one robot, in which case it gets boring.

Also if an extra day was added, it would interfere with school. FRC Regionals and Championships already interfere with school days, and to many Sophomores and Junior, missing three days of school per Regional is not worth it, especially when some teams go to 2+ regionals.

Re: Who would like to see longer matches?
 

That being said, my sisters miss 1-3 days of school each week during ski racing season. They still get straight A's. If missing 3 days of school for skiing is worth it. I think missing 3 days for robotics would certainly be worth it :).