[artdutra04]

Originally Posted by fredliu168

the part where the robot must be off the ground makes team collaboration very useful. I'm going to be looking out for the triplets this year. (imagine 3 robots stacking on top of each other)

There are not going to be any Niagara FIRST triplets this year. They are still going to collaborate together, but they are not going to have identical robots. Karthik posted this here.

Originally Posted by Horman Havoc

Does anyone have a copy of the game video yet? maybe someone recorded it... or a link to where it is on the site?

http://robotics.arc.nasa.gov/events/2007_kickoff.php

Originally Posted by Pavan

I'm very sorry to say this but although many people will design many new robots. The winning teams will do research with previous games that had similar concepts etc. and maybe pick and choose wisely from old robots and than make their own of those ideas. I do not think that this game is challenging because of this reason. Last year for instance we had not had a game similar to this but this year this is basically a FIRST KICK OFF '9? Version 2.

This can happen for nearly any game. Last year teams around from 2000-2002 could look back at their ball gathering systems to use similar ideas for picking up Poof balls. 2005 unique only in manipulator design, otherwise teams could go back at look at previous arm and elevator designs. In 2004, hanging on the bar was new (unless you count the really short bar in 2000), but manipulating big balls could use the same designs as 2001.

Originally Posted by Jonathan Norris

I think this will be a higher scoring game with the opportunity to realistically score 8 tubes in one row for 256 points, I will bet that it will happen at least once.

I personally believe 256 point rows will occur about as frequently this year as having all goals capped in 2005 or having four hanging robots in 2004. It will happen, probably about once or twice per competition, but it sure should be exciting!

Originally Posted by IndySam

Don't count on high scores. I think defense is being underestimated. A simple KOP robot could cause a sophisticated robot a lot of trouble. A well build defensive robot could cause havoc for an entire alliance.

This year there are 24 places to score inner tubes. Last year, the majority of defense played was on teams trying to shoot into a single goal. It will be much harder to block all eight vertical columns at once, and with the huge rack in the center of the field it will prevent teams from barreling across the field to push you out of the way.

Originally Posted by Pavan

Honestly, it is not the fact that they changed a FEW concepts of the game. It is still the same game to a degree. No matter what you do you are still putting tubes on poles. The fact of the matter is that they had around seven months to develop a challenging UNIQUE game yet they chose to modify an old one. That is my "beef" with FIRST.

Is the 2004 game FIRST Frenzy just a reiteration of the 2001 Diabolical Dynamics game, where robots scored small balls into mobile goals, and could cap them with large 30" balls? No. Is the 2007 game Rack 'n Roll just a reiteration of the 1997 game where teams inner tubes onto a rack in the center of the field? No.

You will not see many unique games very often. Balls (of some type) are used on average ever other year. So at some point, you're bound to reuse some game elements like mobile goals, ramps, steps, hanging bars, playing field parts, etc. But does it really matter? 1997 was 10 years ago. If you were a freshman on a team in 1997, you would have graduated high school in 2000, graduated with a 4 yr. bachelor's degree in 2004, and by now you might be considering marriage, buying a house, and/or settling down into your life.

If you think about games on the term of a high school 'generation', 10 years is a long time, and there are not that many people in the program today who were involved with FIRST in 1997.

Originally Posted by M.O.R.T.

I'm willing to bet there's going to be a lot of tipping...more so than in previous years. If you have a 6 ft bot going to try to hang a Ringer from the top level of spider legs, and a little 4 ft bot trying to play defense...gravity will eventually take its course. Granted with no wedges and the bumper zone in effect it won't be ideal conditions for tipping (not that tipping is ever ideal) but still...expect tipping to occur.

Think about 2005, the year of nine-pound tetras atop huge arms and elevators as high as 12-14 feet above the ground. This year, you won't have to go much above 9 feet with a playing field object that weighs virtually nothing when compared to a tetra.

Just because games involve high objects does not necessarily mean there will be a lot of tipping. (Who would have thought that 2006, the year of no extensions above 5 feet, would be the year of massive tipping - even more so that 2004 or 2005?)