Re: 2012 Game?
 

I, in fact, was not (points at my rookie year info box). In any respect, I think a segmented field, if used correctly could make an interesting game.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I'm thinking that the middle open area is for alliances to pass game pieces between each other in a way that isn't over the wall. Your robot can't pass across the white line on the opposite side or else penalty.

I'm not sure what the game would be, but it would have lots of Coopertition points involved by having seperate alliances attempt to not only complete their own specific tasks but if both alliances can complete a bigger task together while on opposite sides of the field, both alliances gain Coopertition points as well as some boost to their seed ranking.

I'm going to have to raise the wall near the platforms.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

4v0, trying to score as many points as possible. The sooner you stopped the clock, the higher your multiplier. (And even today, when talking about the E-stop, the Manual makes it clear that the E-stop won't affect match timing--they were used to stop the clock that year, and that year only.)

It's also up there on the top 5 "Please Don't EVER Do This Again!" list--it's not exactly a popular game. Right alongside 2003's eliminations scoring (points-based; win one match by enough and you win the round, effectively) and 2010's ranking system. Now, having both alliances need to (try to) work together to do something is not on that list.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

What if the goal was to take them from the lower end (like maybe a 5-12 inch rise over the length of the field) and put them in the square. Robot drive systems cannot go over the middle line, but manipulators can (and, of course, associated penalties).

The human player on the "high" end of the field (oh my, so many jokes) can bring the game pieces in, and return them ala bowling ball return (the human player on the "low" end would have to return them over the wall).

P.S. Thanks for the history lesson. Man, thinking about it that sounds like an abysmal game.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Taking a page from Quad Quandry, I whipped this up. Notice that the Red alliance goal is in the Blue Alliance Zone, and vice versa. Both allainces may either work together to score the most points possible, or pull the goals away to make it harder for the opposing alliance to score.

Maybe use Dodgeballs, like in 2004. I'm guessing 36 of them. Each ball in the Alliance Zone is worth 1 point, and 3 points for each ball in the Alliance Goal.

In the last 20 seconds of the match, alliances may work together to lift the two goals at least 20" off the floor and resting on the top of a robot. If the goals tip over and de-score any balls, those will have to count for being in the Zone rather than the goal. If both alliances successfully raise both goals 20" high by the end of the match, each alliance obtains 2 Coopertition points. A Bonus 1 coopertition point is eached by each individual team that is holding up the goals.

Or something like that....

(ps, the red boxes in the picture below are robots)

Re: 2012 Game?
 

As a reply to everybody saying they want a "cooperative" game, I just don't see what your seeing. Competition is what drives us, and any form play that assists your opponents doesn't really seem like it's competitive. I understand the whole "Try to work together to achieve maximum points" thing, but it's not in any way in the spirit of competition. While cooperation is vital, I don't think FRC stands for FIRST Robotics Cooperation. In my point of view, on the field, cooperation should only be done with alliance members.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems are competitors.

Unless you're talking about the F-35, that is.

Quite often, cooperation between opposing competitors can work to the good of all of them. FLL does this with the shared objective--sometimes, both teams need to do it and both get points; other times, only one can do it and get points.

The really fun trick is to make it so that if you work together it's easier to do something that benefits both a lot, but if you work separately, one or both benefit, but to a much lesser extent.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

What we should try is for CD members to actually come up with our own FRC game together like the GDC would. Discuss ideas, talk about possibilities and make it a team effort. Pick our favorites and combine ideas into our own ideal FRC game. That would be cool if it would work out.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

THis is a bad example. Big defense contractors only work together becuase of politics. Politicians want to spread the jobs across multiple states soe defense contractors put proposals together to show that the jobs are in every district. They would rather have the whole pie, and activly position themselves to take the pie from others as soon as they falter.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

What offseason? The 2012 preseason started at the social on the evening of the 30th :P

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I get that its nice and all that we "discover" that working together makes things easier than working separately, but I don't think the game should be about making this social point.
The competition should be just that, a competition, albeit a respectful and graciously professional competition, but I don't understand the need to make the competition more of a "work together to complete goals" thing. It would be ridiculous and met with distaste if we were to have a game that denied us the opportunity for this direct competition.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

How about a game like king of the hill where robots try to stay on the center of a hill and the farther out from the center the less points you get. Also above the field is a horizontal bar and the closer the bottom of the robot is to the bar the more bonus points. Teams can also give robots a boost onto the hill or the bar as well as block teams trying to get to these two areas. The hill moves and the side that has the most hill in it gets 3/4 of the points from the hill so if a red robot has control of the center of the hill(which is worth the most) and the hill is on the blue side then blue gets 3/4 of the entire sum of points from the hill.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

And FRC DOESN'T have politics?

Maybe, just maybe, those three companies put in a joint bid on the project. Maybe, just maybe, they weren't forced to by politics--Boeing put in a bid for the same project and AFAIK didn't have a major second player.

As far as FRC and politics, don't get me started--they've said and done a few rather impolitic things with regards to various areas, trying to play politics.

@Xavier--Right. That's why 4v0 was so unpopular. But if that sort of element is incorporated into the game as an option, but not required to compete by any means, well, then, that could make life really, really interesting--will the alliances play 6v0 or 3v3?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

How about an end game that deals with prisoners dilemma. For anyone who doesn't know what this is the situation goes like this.
Two prisoners are in separate cells before they go to court and are unable to talk.
If
-Both plead guilty, both get 1 years in jail
-Both plead innocent, both will get 5 years
-One pleads guilty and the other innocent, the one that pleaded guilty gets 10 years. The one that pleads innocent gets 0 years.
Both pleading guilty yields the best mutual result, but pleading innocent gives you a chance to get no jail time.
This would make an interesting end game if instead of pleading, the robots had to complete a task durring the end game that the opposing alliance could not see if it were done. Gracious professionalism says both do the task and split the points. Strategy might want to take the risk.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

How about a game where the two alliances have to interact in order to score points. Tennis or ping pong maybe. They both use a ball and I think they are both still olympic sports.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

See now I thought bout that for this year's minibot race. You would say that you could deploy it at anytime you wanted but scoring would be in reverse order: 1st to score got 5 then 10 then 15 then 20; but there would be no scoring after the match was over. So, yes you could get guaranteed points but you would be giving your opponent the chance for more.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

i had an idea that i think would be pretty sweet. what if during autonomous, teams scored very light weight inflatable or foam balls on a grid. then the goal of teleopp is to duplicate as closely as possible the same pattern, using 18 lbs bowling balls. expand auton to 30 or 45 seconds, and the fact that the bowling balls weigh a lot. i immagine a six sided grid in the middle of the field. auton balls are scored into polycarb tubes. and roll down within the tube. teleop balls are scored, but dont roll down as far. points go as follows.

auton balls are worth 1 on low, 2 on mid, and 3 on high rows in the grid.

teleopp balls are worth 1 on low, 2 on mid, and 3 on top

a pair, of teleop and auton balls, is worth 2 on botom, 4 in midle, and 6 on top.

in the last 15 seconds. teams have the chance to deploy a pre loaded, 1 per team super ball.

a super ball is worth 6 points anywhere

2 superballs on top of each other (requiring 2 robots to score them) is worth 18 points.


what do you guys think?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Sounds like Lunacy with stationary goals. ;)

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Bill's Blog said that the GDC actually considered this, and (I think?) discussed it with some teams, but eventually rejected it.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

fair point.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

So maybe we will be working with FLL teams next year, that would work well for a maze type endgame involving a minibot. And what do you mean about boeing?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Football would be sick. And just stating this but Lunacy was compared heavily to basketball so that could be speculated. Outside of a sport though with FIRST and Dean Kamen's mind combined with Woodie Flowers' and now Will.I.Am as well.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

A variation on the constantly proposed "water game" - hockey? (Maybe not on real ice...)

Football would be difficult to abstract into a FIRST game, IMO...

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Dean called attention to Boeing not having a kit of parts--or a 6-week build season--at Championship.

He's right. They don't. They have something much, much worse:

Endless possibilities and a bit of time combined with Red tape. (How long you define "bit" to be is, well, up to you and/or the project they're working on.)

Re: 2012 Game?
 

In the course of looking for mentor gifts, this was found: http://www.twopencildesigns.com/shop...?id_product=20

Just throwing this out there.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

That's the VEX game field for 2012.::rtm::

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Oops. :eek:

Re: 2012 Game?
 

The field center piece:

Re: 2012 Game?
 

My only wish for next years game is it to not revolve around handling one object at a time. 09 was 1 soccer ball, this year was 1 tube. I think a cool challenge lies within handling a mass amount of smaller objects efficiently inside of a robot. :D

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Playpen balls?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Weren't the soccer balls used in Breakaway, the game of 2010? 2009 was Lunacy.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I have great idea!
a squre field(38X38 feet) the same size.
3 alliances of two robots per alliance.(6 robots)
the winning alliance gets to the CMP(only two winners)
driver station will be at 3 sides of the square.
the forth side will be open to the crowd(someone need to see the game)
the robots start infront of the two other alliance stations.(mixed start)
I am not sure about the game but this can be really good idea for every game (it's refreshing design)
the game:
the robots need to shoot ball to a target. if you scored you can set put the minibot to 10 seconds in a maze; the minibot can score points in the maze.
after the 10 seconds the minibot must return to the hostbot.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

That may make the Robonauts regret getting rid of the refuse from Operation Playhouse :p

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I still like the hockey idea (coming from a 12 year player). the "checking" could be very interesting, along with the scoring of the goals. Goalie, anyone? :)

Re: 2012 Game?
 

What about a game that has two different game pieces that you have to put together. Maybe PVC pipes with magnets on the end that you have to slide into a hole and attach it to a piece that has another magnet that is in the hole. Then pull it back out and place it somewhere else, maybe on a steel scoring plate. Each PVC pipe is a point, but if it has the second piece on it it is worth 3 points.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

You know what would be cool? Robot bowling.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

You mean like this?
Lego NXT Wii Bowling
:]

Re: 2012 Game?
 

We need more mini-bots, and they should be carrying an even smaller robot that will then preform a short song and dance routine.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Emphasis mine.

At BattleCry, they showed a preview video, and they told us it was a sight of next year's game, and it was heavily implied robots would have to dance, maybe sing. I'm not convinced, I swear I've seen that video before...

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I have a solution for the Water Game needs.
Robots "make" water by picking up little different sized and colored balls labled H, for Hydrogen, and O, for Oxygen. They then have to put them in little goals to make water. The actual scoring method could be changed, thats all i could think of doing besides dumping them into giant goals. maybe have bonuses if your giant goal ends with a 2:1 ratio of Hydrogen to Oxygen. Just my thoughts.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

OH GOD DON'T DO IT. Our team participates in a robotics competition called BEST (I know FIRST isn't a fan..) and the 2010 game was to make different types of stuff such as water. Needless to say.. it was horrible. The rules were difficult, the scoring was awful. I would not be a fan.

That's pretty cool. But my idea of bowling is the type you see at arcades
Roll ball > concentric circles etc
Here's a picture:

Honestly, it would be a spin off of '10s game but cool nevertheless

Re: 2012 Game?
 

hahahaha. I think FIRST could probably make it a better game, but my game idea wasnt trying to really focus on making water, just more of collecting little game pieces.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I've posted an idea for a hockey game in the Game Design forum if you're interested ... ::rtm::

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Ok it cant just be me who imagined Rumble/Frenzy in a tux right?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

How about a tennis playing game? Like 3 on 3 robot tennis, it would be pretty epic lol

Re: 2012 Game?
 

How about like the moon balls had the attached trailer, that holds something, and play a game where the objective is like laser tag, who ever gets hit the most loses. The number of time an alliance hits their opponents would be there score plus a bonus for winning. A final challenge would be targets on the opposite side of the field and would be like this year's race game, first to hit gets most bonus points. It would combine the shooter bots, this year's endgame, and a new idea. It would haven to change for the hitting opponents, but very cool.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Indeed it would

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I thought logomotion had something to do with hockey? When I looked up information about this year's events it seemed to be focused on hockey. I wondered if we were shoving around tube hockey pucks or something. lol

Re: 2012 Game?
 

It would seem that tennis fits the trend. COrrect me if i'm wrong, but these things seem to go in a cycle so next year should be a sport involving launching multiple smaller game objects?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

There are many trends that people have come up with from the past years, so it's hard to tell what FIRST will do. People have said sports, ball game pieces and not, and a few others. FIRST will probably see this trend and do something completely off trend.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

So after a little reading on Bill's Blog, I noticed that he said " The Engineering team has been busy prototyping the game elements" To me at least this implies there may be more than one game element and that they may be an original creation of first.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

From FIRST games, the only trend I see is that the games are different each year (even that has an exception in the compilation games) so don't expect them to follow a pattern. You can guess that after not using a piece for a while they may use it again (even that doesn't hold up if you check the time difference between Aim High and Lunacy or Rack and Roll and Logomotion)

The pattern I follow with predictions is that there is none.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

That sounds highly probable.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Members of my team and I often joke around about how the pattern has been sport, non-sport, sport, non-sport... for a very long time, so our ideas have been: Skydiving, swimming, and gymnastics. Of course that would would be fun and impossible.

I think if they chose swimming, every electrical person would just quit.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Not me, I would be having fun. I mean, how many people have to waterproof electronics? I think it would be a fun challenge.

hmm...I should make my computer waterproof...efficient cooling...:P

Re: 2012 Game?
 

It would be fun, more fun than any other game perhaps, but near impossible in 6 weeks, although every other game is too...

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Water game scenario and the LUNACY corrollary: just as LUNACY "simulated" low gravity with regolith, could water (higher density) be simulated with a layer of small objects on the arena floor making maneuvering a challenge? Then, the "water" pieces could stick to the game pieces (weak velcro?) and simulate the challenge of manipulating a "wet" gamepiece? Just like water can get into small crevaces, the game's "water" pieces would get all into the machinery of the robots. Quite a "simulated" challenge. Need to design robot with some seal against that?

Would like to see how the arena caretakers and shippers could manage the "simulated water" throughout the season.

Just hoping to promote the idea of a "water" game. . .

Re: 2012 Game?
 

LOVE IT!!!:D :D :D

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Perhaps small plastic beads?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

or corn?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

And then our victors die....

Re: 2012 Game?
 

All part of the challenge :D

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I see gearbox mayhem if this were to be the game. Enclosed gearboxes would be fine, but AM shifters, toughbox nanos and nano tubes, and many custom/modified gearboxes would become bead grinders. Then the dust and broken bead bits would get in the grease and... it wouldn't be pretty. :yikes:

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Duct Tape? Maybe it actually has a use.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I'd love to see the day when duct tape is a game piece. The game? Use the rolls of duct tape to complete some sort of task!

Re: 2012 Game?
 

How about giant peanuts!? http://sustainabledesignupdate.com/w...-kartooner.jpg

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Yes! Love the idea! Not sure what, though!

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Using duct tape as a game piece...how about the end game being who can get the longest strip of duct tape on the ground?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

i agree i would like to see a Hockey like game for next year it would be a chalenge but it would be fun for hockey and robotics fans:D :cool:

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I think it is pretty clear we are going to see the minibot again, but I feel very confident it will require code next year.
I could easily see next years challenge require you to balance you minibot, this way teams who helped out with FTC this year have a leg up.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

And a big disadvantage in Michigan, where there are no FTC competitions. If the minibots become too much like FTC bots Michigan might be in trouble.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

That would be a mess to clean up. After all, duct tape holds the universe together.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

although i agree with you on a minibot showing up in next years game, i don't think it will require code. building ONE robot in 6 weeks is trouble enough for some teams and for the game to remain competitive at all in large scale (that is allow smaller teams or teams with fewer resources to be competitive) the minibot would need to remain simple. i know from experience on my team that the initial design of the minibot and production of a minibot actually took longer to build than the actual robot, not to mention all the other tweaks we did to it after build season.

if the minibot had more complications to it, like code, then smaller teams would not be able to compete with the large teams that have a vast amount of resources.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I think that future minibots will virtually require code to be competitive. However, it will be possible to get a non-code solution, which may or may not be better than the code solutions.

However, it will be whatever code the NXT (or chosen processing unit) runs, which isn't the same as FRC coding necessarily.

For those hockey lovers out there: 2009 was bad enough flooring wise; I could go with a street-hockey version, though.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

exactly but for second year of minibots in the FRC competitions i don't think that the GDC would take such a big step between years like that

Re: 2012 Game?
 

You mean a step like going from the blue box driver's station to the Classmate between 2009 and 2010? Or the control system change the year before (though that had advance warning)? Or the staggered robot size/weight in 2007 (which sadly vanished the next year)? That type of step has happened before, though there was only one robot to worry about then.

NEVER underestimate the GDC like that. Next thing you know, one of them spots that post and says, "Oh, really? Hey guys, look at this! What do you think?" or something similar, and then they take exactly that step.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I'll take anything that doesn't involve tubes.

Discs would be cool. Every FIRST team throws a Frisbee around at lunch...

Re: 2012 Game?
 

sort of? but the classmate switch and the control system switch were relatively easy because these major changes were already pre-programmed and pretty much ready to use without much difficulty (at least thats how it appeared on my team) but adding more code to a second robot would cause more complications

and trust me. i know that nothing is out of the imagination of the GDC. honestly who thought we'd have to build a miniature robot to but on our larger robot and then have it function outside that zone?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

The NXT unit also serves as the speed controller for the Tetrix motors. Part of my thoughts is the GDC looked at all those batteries wired strait to motors and had safety concerns.
Maybe the minibot will be 2009s super cells next year in order to make up for the added difficulty. It would be helpful to score, but a rookie bot could rack up points in other ways while you are deploying.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Alrighty then. . .

There were various suggestions on "water" simulation material. How about the kiddie ball pit . . . BAZINGA ! !

Re: 2012 Game?
 

That would be interesting, although rookie teams will have a hard time trying to figure out how to make their robot move around in all of these little balls. Unless, the little ball pit were on the side of the field where veteran teams would somehow score extra points by maybe finding something at the bottom or getting across purely as an endgame scenario. However, I find it hard to see putting the ball pit in during the main portion of the game.

*water proof minibots?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

What about being able to sort playpen ball?

Re: 2012 Game?
 

like sort them into different colors? That'd be really interesting since it would be such a touchy game piece and (potentially) difficult to master the game since a light sensor would most likely be required and then the field lighting would also play a significant role. but FIRST and the GDC has used the FRC game to promote new products (FTC and the light sensor, to a lesser degree, this year)

i would personally like a more sport-like game. i thought Breakaway did a good job as an FRC game and as a representation that FIRST is a sport. simple enough for casual spectators to understand yet complicated enough to provide a good challenge

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Then 118 would already have supplies for their field.
http://blog.iamjvn.com/2011/05/operation-playhouse.html

Re: 2012 Game?
 

This years game was similar to one from the past. I am not sure which year, but the competition involved placing tubes on a rack in the center of the playing field. I would not be surprised if next years game was similar to a game that was played a few years back.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

2007 was itself partially based on the 1997 game. These are the only times that a game has been seen to be based on another game, even loosely.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

You would be speaking about 2007's Rack'n'Roll, which I just learned was based of of 97.

Comparisons can be made between multiple games, but it would seem safe to say that FIRST likes movable goals!

Re: 2012 Game?
 

years with movable goals:

2009 (most recent)
2007 (chained to ground, but could move and swing)
2004
2002
2001
1999 (the puck)
1997 (rotated)

yep, definitely one of the more common game elements.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Although the move to the new Crio system may be solely based on making it cheaper to buy and support with more modern hardware, I'd think FIRST would like to take advantage of the upgraded memory and put a large emphasis on video processing for scoring in this game, like they did with the Breakaway targets in 2010.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

The thing with that is so few of the smaller/rookie/inexperienced teams can do it right if at all. That is simply too great of a challenge for many of the teams. I think there will be that option, but not a whole lot of emphasis if you ask me.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

The NI vision assistant basically writes the vision code for you now(with the NI labview vision example code and videos what isn't written for you could follow their model to get it working). I dont think it is hard to expect rookies to be able to use vision. You could say coordinating multiple motors using different speed controllers over a wifi network is impossible for rookie/smaller teams(On paper it seems like an insurmountable challenge). But, teams have to do it every year with the help of the FIRST examples.

http://frcdirector.blogspot.com/2011...-delivers.html
Bill spilled the beans! there WILL be field elements this year! :D
So much for any empty field ideas.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I am curious why you singled out rookie teams. I would imagine all teams would have trouble figuring out how to move around in a pit full of balls. It may be more of an equalizer than a problem for rookies, advantages to older teams come when there is a similarity to an older game, or when old design lessons can be reapplied. To my knowledge no team has a design that would effectively move through a ball pit.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I remember the FRC design commitee saying something about "blacking out" the driver stations for the end game @ Atlanta '10, honestly i think that would be pretty awesome and scary at the same time.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

unfortunately, lifting bowling balls would be a very bad idea (what if they drop on robots) accidents like that could determine winners of regionals nd such

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Next years's game pieces:

Any dropped and broken item is an automatic red card :p
-------
The goal to place the game pieces in:

A 15 x 15 Dishwasher Rack.

We'll let the GDC sit on that one for the 2013 game.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

i doubt it'll happen, but my friend and i talked to Bill at the LV regional, and we suggested basketball, which would be crazy hard, but super fun! most kids on my team think that there will be another Mini-bot.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Has anyone considered a golf based game?
Maybe they had us make mini-bots so we could get used to working with smaller materials.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Similar to golf, I was actually thinking of a billiards type of game, with 6 goals. In one of Bill's blogs he emphasized "pool." Of course that triggers thoughts about a water game, but I think the closest FIRST will come to a water game is ice. I definitely think there will be minibots involved though, considering this year's success.

Re: 2012 Game?
 

I find it strange how Bill mentioned knowing enough about the game too remind everybody to buy pool noodles. Does this mean that in the future they might not use bumpers? Different bumpers? Or maybe this year we are using MORE POOL NOODLES:yikes: . If it is the latter, is the game going to be more aggressive (thus requiring more bumpers) or are pool noodles the game pieces? Or maybe they are adding a third alliance and teams will need to make a third set of bumpers...

Re: 2012 Game?
 

Three alliances would be awesome!