View Single Post
  #44   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-03-2015, 02:44
Peter Johnson Peter Johnson is offline
WPILib Developer
FRC #0294 (Beach Cities Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 265
Peter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud of
Re: Problem's with 2015…

I'd like to turn this discussion on its head a bit--rather than focusing on the things we dislike in the game, let's suggest ways in which the game design could have been improved (either via major changes in overall construction, point value changes, or even just a minor rule change) and how such changes might have affected robot designs and/or gameplay in a positive fashion. Note: I'm obviously not suggesting changes to the game this late in the season, just talking about how the game might have been designed differently from the start. To kick it off, here are two ideas I've kicked around with a couple of people.

1) Make cooperative building of stacks worth more points (e.g. mix in a bit of the 2014 game concept of "handoffs"). If one robot stacks the totes and a different robot puts the RC on top, add a point bonus. If a third robot is responsible for getting the noodle in the RC, add another point bonus. The main downside of this is scoring is a lot more complex to keep track of, but there's some interesting possible upsides in terms of gameplay strategy. Right now the gameplay at the higher levels seems to consist of near-independent 2-robot operation (two robots each building their own stacks by holding a RC and stacking underneath), with the 3rd robot being often completely neglected (or not even put on the field!); only with lower level alliances do you see actual cooperative play with different robots doing different things to complete their stacks in parallel. I find the latter to be much more interesting to watch, but they simply can't compete with the #1/#2 paired dominant alliances (at least right now; maybe such strategies will evolve sufficiently to catch up in future weeks).

2) Have only a single human loader station. I know the reason for having two was due to the rate limit of tote loading and the number of totes behind the wall, which is the main problem with this idea, but it would have the benefit of making alliance partner selection and elimination play a lot more interesting; in the current game there's not really any reason why #1 and #2 can't pair up regardless of their individual capabilities, but if there was only one human load station that would make the decision much more challenging.

Comments? Other ideas?
__________________
Author of cscore - WPILib CameraServer for 2017+
Author of ntcore - WPILib NetworkTables for 2016+
Creator of RobotPy - Python for FRC

2010 FRC World Champions (294, 67, 177)
2007 FTC World Champions (30, 74, 23)
2001 FRC National Champions (71, 294, 125, 365, 279)
Reply With Quote