A lot of good loking robots

[indubitably]

I honestly love this years game, it is going to allow robots do what they were built for (score tubes without interference) but make the path to and from the scoring zone one heck of an experience.

I do have 2 problems with it, however.
1) the game pieces are too similar to 2007's game. This is causing a lot of similar bots to be built among the more experienced team, as some already know what it takes to pick up a tube with a bot while others just copied what seemed to work in 2007. Now this is more of a hinder on the creativity that goes into building a robot, more than it effects actual gameplay.

2) the minibot just seems like a bad idea to me. Now I could be wrong, but I feel that minibots will start to look more and more alike as the season move on and that a team that gives an absolutely amzing tube placing spectacular could still lose to a fast minibots. I would feel much better about it if the scores where 20 15 10 5 as opposed to 30 20 15 10, but maybe i should just have some faith in the GDC and assume those are the perfect scores to make the elims all gut wrenching games

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by indubitably

Now I could be wrong, but I feel that minibots will start to look more and more alike as the season move on and that a team that gives an absolutely amzing tube placing spectacular could still lose to a fast minibots.

On the other hand, if all robots have roughly the same minibot, then tube scoring ability will decide the matches.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by ks_mumupsi

From everything I have seen here there are really on 4 robots to be built this year.

1 - 148/1902 style 4 bar linkage
2 - 233 style extending arm
3 - a single jointed arm
4 - 25/118 style multi stage elevator

I somewhat agree with you in that there was a lot of very easy to come by inspiration for this game but I think that is becoming the norm for every game. Last year many teams were inspired by Robocup teams that have been figuring out how to kick soccer balls for years. We have to pick up and score balls or move a large ball in a huge number of games. FIRST recycles game elements and that is a good thing because teams get to improve on designs every year.

My team was very much inspired by 25's lift from 2007 but in no way would I say that trying to design and build ours was as easy as just building their design. Our team captain put in many hours CADing a lift that though inspired by 25's was designed for our game strategy and our construction techniques and abilities.

I see many teams doing similar designs but the differences are very noticeable, if you are looking for them.

This game is very different from 2007. It may use a similar game piece but the dynamics will be very different. Defense and power is much less important, where speed will be critical. Having a free shot during the hanging process and having much smaller end caps on the pegs, means it will be much easier to get a tube on a peg than it was in 07. I think a lot of teams figured that out and designed for it. I will say that there is no way that I would want to play Rack and Roll with our 2011 robot. It might be able to pick up the tubes but it was not designed for how Rack and Roll was played. I don't think that the best robots from 2007 will be the best robots in 2011, teams that designed for this year's game dynamics will have the most successful seasons.

[BrendanB]

What will really change the game is the scoring pieces. I will eagerly recommend that our partners do not throw tubes out onto the field outside of our feeder lanes unless they opposing alliance can pick up off the ground. It makes their job so much easier since tubes are right next to their scoring rack.

Our team poked around the Behind the Design book from 2007 but weight started nagging us!

[Taylor]

Originally Posted by ks_mumupsi

From everything I have seen here there are really on 4 robots to be built this year.

1 - 148/1902 style 4 bar linkage
2 - 233 style extending arm
3 - a single jointed arm
4 - 25/118 style multi stage elevator

Even if this proves to be true (which I don't think it will - the robots shown here on CD represent about 1% of all teams), is that necessarily a bad thing? The same argument has been made every year, and to the untrained eye was the most noticable last year.


This year it's all about implementation and execution. One of my students who had just seen the 118 video asked me if an arm like they've got, or a lift like we've got, is a better system. My answer was that it all depends on who can execute their design better.

This is one reason I love the fact that spectators are encouraged to visit the pits. Up close, the individual innovations and intricacies will be exciting - both from a mechanical and controls perspective.

[Chris Fultz]

eliminated the engineering thought process

I want to disagree. A significant portion of the engineering thought process is trying to figure out how to do something quicker, cheaper, lighter, stronger, .... - there are not to many opportunities to create something from nothing.

This game gave you the opportunity to look back and see what worked in 2007, what did not work in 2007, and then try to make the ones that did work, work better. With the added challenge of trying to fit a mini-bot deployment system in, you also had to do it with less space and less weight. That's what I see most engineers doing on a pretty regular basis.

[JesseK]

John, I think this is more a dynamic strategy game than any before it. Things are more constant than they are dynamic, and there are fewer drill-down tasks than ever before. The key change is that during every part of the teleop period, there can be 1 available robot that can switch roles instantaneously to adjust to the opponents' strategy regardless of what the current strategy is. I think elite bots that can do it all will REALLY shine here. That makes it fun; it also adds to the pressure on the coaches -- pressure to look forward to, imo.

(assuming the bolts don't fall off, the breakers don't trip and the motors don't catch on fire...)

[Koko Ed]

The robots put up on CD look good but I'm more worried about the hundreds of teams who have said nothing and put nothing up at all. When I was at the Rochester Rally there were alot of teams not ready to compete and even more who did not show up. That's a bad sign.

[Brandon Holley]

Definitely a very level game, and I think a lot of it has to do with its similarity to 2007. Many teams improved upon the 2007 versions of themselves, while intelligent younger teams looked to 2007 videos and information (behind the design) to develop a robot based on some knowledge.

The way I see it playing out is the early weeks will come down to minibots. Alliances which have 2 very quick and effective minibots will be VERY difficult to take down. As the weeks go on and teams emulate succesful minibots and also figure out how to make their deployments faster/more reliable, we will see a slight shift in focus to tube scoring.

The key difference for me between 2007 and now is not scoring tubes as quickly as you can (I mean it is, but it's not just a grab and place fest). It's ensuring each tube you score is in a position to score the maximum amount of points. We saw instances in the scrimmage (small sample size warning) where teams scored a significant amount more tubes than their opponents, but did it on a different row (ie: middle and bottom as opposed to top). The scores would be close, but teams who concentrated on the top row only and took the extra time to ensure the scores were solid, tended to come out on top.

I imagine week 1 will be similar in strategy to this. Quality tubes winning out over quantity of tubes, and minibots ruling all.

-Brando

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by JVN

I thought this was an engineering challenge not a driver's challenge.

...says an engineer who is ineligible to drive the robot.

[Nemo]

I don't blame the super powerhouse teams for preferring a more difficult game like Breakaway - that was a really cool game that showed how organized and talented the really good teams are. But it's nice to have a year where more teams can field a robot that can do each element of the game pretty well. I'm happy that the difficulty of the game can vary somewhat from year to year.

[KrazyCarl92]

A possible unfortunate consequence of the access to such designs from 2007 is that many teams may see ideas from Behind the Design and try to implement similar designs when they may not have the same resources that some of these award winning teams had. It may result in many teams trying to go beyond their means of production and not having a working robot come competition. That being said, we will still see many more top tier robots this year do to the availability of these designs. It will be a contest to see who can build it faster, better, easier and who puts in the time to practice, compete, and scout the right way during the competition season.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

The robots put up on CD look good but I'm more worried about the hundreds of teams who have said nothing and put nothing up at all. When I was at the Rochester Rally there were alot of teams not ready to compete and even more who did not show up. That's a bad sign.

I agree with this.
Like any other previous years, there are hundreds of teams who are not done yet at this point every season, and given the fact that minibots can be brought to the event, you have two robots to worry about instead of one. Our HI scrimmage and the fact that many teams didnt show up was a great indication of it in our own State, not that I was surprised.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Nemo

I don't blame the super powerhouse teams for preferring a more difficult game like Breakaway - that was a really cool game that showed how organized and talented the really good teams are. But it's nice to have a year where more teams can field a robot that can do each element of the game pretty well. I'm happy that the difficulty of the game can vary somewhat from year to year.

Organized? Yes we are. Powerhouse? NO.
Even thought we had a great year last year, I would never ask to be in the same situation again as Breakaway was THE worst build season we ever had. That was a tough game to be able to do everything and "try" to do it well.

Personally, I like the game being similar to 2007. There are still other elements to this game that calls for great strategies, a great human player, great driving (backwards again to score), and TWO robots.

[PayneTrain]

There are a lot of good looking robots on Chief Delphi... but people tend to forget what gets on chief Delphi are about 50 robots out of the top 300 teams or so. When you uncrate/unbag your robot at regional and have minor installations remaining (like our lift) or none at all; and you see teams scrambling to get something, moving or not, on the field, then you remember. The week one regionals can sometimes have 3-4 moving/present robots in a match, and only one or two of them can actually be a factor.

Good looking bots get online every year. Small samples will yield skewed results.