|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Here it goes...
Overall, I feel this idea.
Just two things I noticed in the rules...first, I'm not too sure about that HP job. I think we'd do well in the South, since football is king down here. But some of those schools up north may have trouble. Perhaps something more Stack Attack-y? My other thing is with the pipes in midfield. A foot and a half is pretty skinny, leading me to think that most teams would make their robot N by 18" by 12". That's pretty petite...and if there's one thing we need to keep the "civilian" (for lack of a better word) crowd interested, it's big things with lots of action (hence why I loved FIRST Frenzy). The same thing applies to the field--in 2k3, it was the stack. In 2k4, it was the bar. Every field has to have that THING. I'm not exactly sure what it could be here, though. But overall, it's a good idea. We need more footballs in FIRST. |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2005 tournament ideas
Just a few things
-No balls, no boxes, but a mixture of the two would be something. (example: boulders.) -Instead of a flat playing surface with an obstacle in the middle (such as this year: a flat playing surface surrounding a platform with a hanging bar), why not a bumpy playing field that would require careful manuevering and construction of a robot's drive train. -An autonomous mode that has many options other than one. (you can do this and this will happen or you can do this and this will happen. Not just one thing.) |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: [Official 2005 Game Design] OK, so YOU design the 2005 game...
Here's a few ideas for someone, somewhere to mull over.
1. Instead of 2x2 competition why not have 3-4 robots working in tandem to complete a number of increasingly complex tasks. If a group, selected randomly, can effectively complete a task another one comes up. Sort of similar to a game where teams have to move or place objects on a pressure sensitive switch instead of knocking it off. In this way another area would become available (via a wall or similar barrier becoming flat or a series of hanging bars placed equal distance apart for teams to grasp alternately) for another challenge. It would be a Mars Rover experience without the 7 minute delay for signals and the resultant feedback. 2. The tasks could become increasingly complex and difficult to attain and the points would then be greater. Cooperation not competition among the alliance but competition among all to get as many points as possible from each trial. 3. I like the idea that even with the auton mode that human players still have a place to participate. I'd still like to see that as a part of any new game. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 2002 game prediction contest!!! | Ken Leung | Rumor Mill | 41 | 31-12-2007 18:18 |
| On Game Design | Matt Leese | General Forum | 38 | 30-04-2004 19:08 |
| game design challenge: what was your entry | Ryan Foley | General Forum | 1 | 20-03-2003 21:42 |
| Ok, so YOU design the 2003 game... | dlavery | General Forum | 157 | 07-01-2003 23:55 |