|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
| View Poll Results: Is Battlebots I.Q. a threat to FIRST? | |||
| Nope, true quality and decency will show through, XFL |
|
77 | 34.53% |
| Although Battlebots will climb up, they won't be that big, think UPN vs. NBC, ABC, or CBS |
|
56 | 25.11% |
| They will be on the same level, like American and National baseball leagues |
|
39 | 17.49% |
| Battelbots IQ is a better concept and will triumph over FIRST |
|
12 | 5.38% |
| Don't Care |
|
39 | 17.49% |
| Voters: 223. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
should it
None of this should matter, to truly compare the two, you must go back to the grass roots...
1)They both started with a man and a plan. 2)Battlebots and FIRST-bots are made with love and care by dedicated engineers in hopes of raising their intellectual level to a higher standard. Sure, battlebots may have a certain violent intention for robots, but don't underestimate the power of inspiration. Some Joe Smoe watching battlebots might feel so inclined to get up, read a book about engineering, and maybe go out a make a bot. whatever it is, it sure is contagious... |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
To anyone who has not attended a battlebots competition but has expressed negative opinion of them: Please, do some more research and data gathering before forming an opinion.
I attended the BattleBotsIQ competition this past weekend along with Nathan Pell. While he got a good view of real match play, I stayed in the pits most of the day. Seeing what happens in those pits is truly amazing, watching teams of students come back to a heap of robot covered in battery base from a battery explosion, and work straight through for hours to get it back up and running. Last year, we recieved an award from RUSH, the "Never say Die" award. Our efforts last year when we won that award pale in comparison to what a standard battlebot team endures to make sure they can compete in the next match. These students are not just motivated and and excited about engineering, but they truly learn it too. FIRST and BBIQ are not competition for each other, they're different elements. In FIRST, we all did the torque calculations and the force vectors for how high you can hold a tetra and how much power you need to get out of the kit motors. In BBIQ, you try and figure out how to maximize power and minimize damage. When was the last time a team did an elastic or inelastic collision calculation for transferring momenteum from one robot to another? In BBIQ, I started doing it in my head to figure out who would win each match and by what strategy. When was the last time a FIRST team did a real material analysis to determine if Chromoly steel or titanium was more effiecent for their purpose? In BBIQ, material selection is a huge problem and is a real world engineering problem that most teams in FIRST never deal with (how many robots are NOT an Alumnium frame in FIRST?). Personally, I love them both. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
I have been doing FIRST and Combat robotics for over 5 years. I am now in an Alumni position where I can help out teams and know the Southern NH area has first but not so much on the combat side. I was wondering if there were any teams in the area who would also like to try the Battlebots IQ 15lb competition and report back what they think about it. I think both programs deserve recognition and suport. Anyone who wants to try to add this challenge to their curriculum can have their advisor contact me at robmasek@gmail.com
Thanks Rob |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Quote:
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
First of all to reply to the comment that "money isn't really as important in FIRST . . . 10k is plenty," that is absolutely false. Sure, you can enter with 10k, but the winning teams spend a lot more. Even though the bot itself may be within the (rather notinal) price cap, the price of machining equipment, facilities, etc really add up, and it is very unlikely that one wil excell at FIRST without the facilites that huge quantities of money represent.
For two years our team was a "Oh they did so well with so little" losing team, but our third year, we did objectively well with a lot of many, yet we had the same people, the same "inspiration" we had all along. ~~~ As to the detractors from the spirit of battlebots. I suppose that you advocate that Iliad and The Odyssey are not read anymore because they "promote violance.?" Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet should be banned because they provide a bad moral example? I think that many of those who criticize BB for violence, and especially for the attention it recieves fall prey to the same vice which many, many politicians fall for. What it comes down to is that the people who are "behind" FIRST have an idea for what they would like our culture to be. They are convinced that it is our ultimate culture -- the road to utopia, if you will. In fact, they are so convinced of the virtue of their position that it is the only concievable thing for others to believe. In fact, it is so good, that if people will not believe by themselves -- if they select another path -- then they must be forced to believe for their own good. Jason Morella may recall a conversation to this effect in which I (and a couple others) contended that FIRST would be willing to force the beauty of its ideals on others, even be it a suspension of free will. Thus, Battle Bots threatens FIRST because it presents a different concept. One in which the individual is valued above the system; personal creativity above the "good of the team;" the ability to survive the unknown above the ability to survive in a carefully structured environment. Not that there are not some very, very excellent things about FIRST, indeed, even though I have had some terrible FIRST eperiences, I still encourage FIRST at every opportunity. Still, the BB concepts address some of FIRST's weak points (just as FIRST addresses some of its), which is why some feel so threatened. ~~~ I suppose I can afford to be honest, it has already earned me negative reputation, so, go ahead, be big, ding my reputation. ~ Christopher |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Seriously, this thread has been around for 3.5 years now, and it's still the same bickering it was back then. Isn't it time to close the thread and send it to the archives where it belongs?
And what is a "half thought up cheep copy"? |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Before we discuss who is better we need to figure out why we participate in First...
FIRST has by far more educational and technological benefits than any battlebot or robotwar competition will ever have. For instance The robots that work in tragedy's like 9/11 and in earthquakes are products of intellectual thinkers like us who are given a task and need to figure out a way to complete that task in the most efficient way possible. We design manipulators and drive systems that when our generation truly becomes (and we are close) the engineers of tomorrow we will look back at our days in FIRST and say something like "I remember in the 2007 First competition we needed to do something just like this" Thats what we are doing here, preparing for future problems that we may encounter in the world of problem solving. BUT... FIRST is also meant to draw students to the world of engineering. We are hooked already but to bring in new blood we need to keep the games exciting. And face it a game where we are penalized for bumping too hard is not exciting to the amateur observer. We find it exciting because we know what went into making the bots and solving the problem. That why Battle bots will be successful, students will chose explosions and sparks flying over FIRST To get back the new students we need to find a happy medium where the games are exciting the the amateur eye and still continue to be as mentally challenging as we enjoy i didn't realize the thread was so old when i wrote this but the points are still valid Last edited by Chaos204 : 04-10-2005 at 10:12. Reason: I didnt realize how old this was |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Quote:
~~~ Quote:
I see it almost like the MAC vs PC debate. In one hand you have a wonderful product that works extremely well, but most people don't use it and its expensive because Apple maintains tight control over it; and on the other you have an OK product that works most of the time, everyone uses it, and its a lot cheaper. Both are effective products, but the cost of PC's and their lack of any one body maintaining control keeps the PC at most of our fingertips. I know it's an old thread, but some of us still conteplate this issue each year about this time, so get over it ![]() |
|
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Honestly, you get out what you put in. If I do a whole bunch of calc., in first or bbiq, I learn. If not, I'm building a random tank in either competition. Personally though, autonomous does add a lot to first that bbiq lacks.
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
In regards to Doug's post,
Another way in which FIRST isolates itself is by the strick isolation of the ability to run competitions. As many of you know, most scrimmages are held using hand built toggles, because they refuse to give pin-out information for the RC which would allow competitions to take place outside of FIRST. Thus the IFI RC controller is "just" another robot controller, instead of a system which people can use for competition |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Actually I think the IFI system is great, but why do we need bags of springs, wheelchair wheels, and at least 1/2 of the other stuff in the kit. I know, someone will say it was donated and such, I say forget the whole kit except the control system and it's associate electronics. Looking around at the competition last year, most teams didn't even use the kit frame, I know we didn't. The only team it benefited were the first or second year rookies. Why not let us figure what motors are best - put a limit on them or their rated wattage or something - I'd just like to see the whole enchilada changed a bit to encourage growth and reduced cost. I'm really considering other options if funding doesn't come through this year - the BBIQ, MATE program, BotBall, Rocket Challenge, etc... There now seems like a lot of other programs to inspire students to pursue science and engineering and are a lot cheaper. I grant you, nothing beats the experience of FIRST, but there ARE other options that can fulfill the same mission. Hence the point of this thread.
|
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
They tried Battlebots here but it never got near to our own Robot Wars series, which ran for 7 seasons (although nothings been heard of it since 2003).
I cannot see either of the 2 FRC teams from the UK jumping ship to a Battlebots spin off... I suppose it's like FIRST and Techno Games (UK equivelant of Battlebots I.Q. from what I can gather, albeit less violent). Techno Games was popular here, but most teams were younger than FIRST teams from what I'm aware of... Last edited by JVGazeley : 05-10-2005 at 05:35. |
|
#13
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Quote:
|
|
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Quote:
I think having a consistent set of basic building blocks is one of the important differences between FIRST and something like BattleBots. Sure, most experienced teams can do well without having things handed to them in a box, but that fosters elitism and makes it harder for newcomers. |
|
#15
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?
Quote:
Our drivetrain used the stock gearbox and sprockets. We only changed the wheel and added a couple of sets of sprockets for six wheel drive. For the game it was the right thing to do. Next year will probably be different. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|