What do you think of this year's game?

[Mike Rush]

Not much. Shades of Diabolical Dynamics in terms of the lack of defense possibilities. After having competed in the both heavily offensive games and heavily defensive games, I prefer the latter. "Can't we all just get along" doesn't make for very exciting spectator sports (and this is one of the challenges for FIRST if it is to become more than just a High School activity).

Lets get back to hockey... Checking is OK but High Sticking is not.

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by pendragoner

My only problem with the years game is I feel the middle bridge is over powered. Maybe i see this because it went against me but still. My teams robot had the most bridge points at our regional event but we were ranked very low because we didn't get a chance to go for the middle bridge. this is my only problem with this years game.

If you were so good at balancing on your alliance bridge, how is it you "didn't get a chance" to get coopertition points?

[Wildcats1378]

Being pretty much a brand new team, I thought that the game was pretty good. Quite challenging and exiting. The one thing I disliked was the barrier though. It seemed like in all the matches but the final matches, the team were just sitting on their own side scoring. Not much a game until the final matches came up.

[372 lives on]

so bill was at the seattle regionals. and he spoke and mentioned how water games arent to crazy of an idea to be thrown straight out the window!1!!!!!!1

This is only my 2nd year in FRC (though I have seen videos of other years) and I have to say I liked Logomotion just a little bit more.

From what I've gathered from my teachers, who got to watch some matches from last year and some from this year, they understood last year's game better. My teachers commented that they were confused as to whether we were trying to balance with a team on another alliance on the coopertition bridge or we were trying to tip each other over to get points or something like that (I immediately told them that it would not be very gracious professional of either team to try to tip another robot over). Last year's game was a better spectator game.

I liked last year's "endgame" more. Although watching robots try to balance on the bridge is exciting I prefered watching minibots race up poles. It seems like playing defense is harder this year than last year. For teams that do not have a shooter the only way they can really help their alliance is to try to balance on one of the bridges, which can be hard if that robot also does not have an arm. The barrier makes it even harder for robots to play defense.

I'm not trying to be completely negative here. There are many things I like about this game. I like the theme this year (basketball) and the scoring system. I like how the coopertition bridge help teams in the rankings and let alliances work together. I like watching three teams try to balance on one bridge in the eliminations and love it when they succeed.

I'm not saying Rebound Rumble is bad; I'm just saying I liked Logomotion a little more. They're both good, well thought out games that get me cheering my head off.

[Jin Hayashi]

Now that our team has finished competing in a regional, I would like to say this game is one of the best that I have seen. I have to agree with some of the posters about the weighting of coopertition bridge. It is a great idea, however, I found that some teams climbed the rankings by purely spending the whole teleop focused on balancing and then parking on a balanced bridge for the remainder of the match. My perhaps biased opinion is that balancing could have been more dramatic by allowing interference of the balancing until the endgame where alliance bridges could then be protected.

[HumblePie]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

That's just not true. Watch our qualifiers at FLR and any of our games at Buckeye, and you'll see a lot of defense doing a lot of good for alliances.

Sounds like your regionals were different, but in the 2 regionals we've attended (Orlando and Palmetto), I've seen maybe 3 robots play effective defense, and they were only able to stymie robots intent on dumping or shooting from close range. In a perfect game, IMHO, the rules would provide for equal value from defensive or offensive design concepts. Typically, most teams will design for scoring, but I really enjoy the out-of-the box designs that utilize a defensive strategy that make scoring difficult (but still possible). I think this year's rules are a little too restrictive on defense. BTW, I really enjoyed the video of your team sniping the ball out of the air. Maybe if the offensive bot couldn't reach out and tap you for 3 pts, your team could have come a little closer and blocked a few more shots?

[cire]

Other then the balls driving me insane, this game has been my favorite since i began in 2003. I like how the game is balanced between the different tasks - there is no useless task (besides the kinect) that was presented as a challenge to us this year.

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by HumblePie

Maybe if the offensive bot couldn't reach out and tap you for 3 pts, your team could have come a little closer and blocked a few more shots?

We actually did quite a bit of camera interference by skirting the edge of the key... No key fouls at FLR, and I believe only two at Buckeye, in spite of very aggressive driving on Adam's part.

[badger3.14]

Originally Posted by Taylor1023

This is only my 2nd year in FRC (though I have seen videos of other years) and I have to say I liked Logomotion just a little bit more.

From what I've gathered from my teachers, who got to watch some matches from last year and some from this year, they understood last year's game better. My teachers commented that they were confused as to whether we were trying to balance with a team on another alliance on the coopertition bridge or we were trying to tip each other over to get points or something like that (I immediately told them that it would not be very gracious professional of either team to try to tip another robot over). Last year's game was a better spectator game.

I liked last year's "endgame" more. Although watching robots try to balance on the bridge is exciting I prefered watching minibots race up poles. It seems like playing defense is harder this year than last year. For teams that do not have a shooter the only way they can really help their alliance is to try to balance on one of the bridges, which can be hard if that robot also does not have an arm. The barrier makes it even harder for robots to play defense.

I'm not trying to be completely negative here. There are many things I like about this game. I like the theme this year (basketball) and the scoring system. I like how the coopertition bridge help teams in the rankings and let alliances work together. I like watching three teams try to balance on one bridge in the eliminations and love it when they succeed.

I'm not saying Rebound Rumble is bad; I'm just saying I liked Logomotion a little more. They're both good, well thought out games that get me cheering my head off.

I completely agree except I think the coopertition bridge is overpowered. it leads to mediocre teams being in the top 8, which is not the way it should be.

just my opinion.

[Gregor]

As this is my first year, I have no other games to base this upon, but I do like the fact that this game almost enforces you to meet with your alliance AND the opposing alliance to talk strategy and (mainly) coopertition bridge balancing.

+$0.02

[aldowyn]

I was very "meh" when it was announced at kickoff (well, relatively), especially since I'm not a huge basketball fan, but I was pleasantly surprised. It was MUCH harder to be completely dominant. Last year I saw robots that could double auto, fill both top rows, and get a minibot up first, in OKC and Dallas - not especially competitive regionals. This year, there was much more diversity, although there were a LOT of "meh" robots that could TECHNICALLY accomplish the task, but weren't good - at all. The top robots had a lot of completely different designs.

The end game was much easier to understand, and it rewarded good drivers (last year was almost completely design and manufacture. Lining up isn't hard with a camera). The autonomous was much more intuitive, though it gave a HUGE bonus to good teams (we got 34 at one point, I have no idea how. I think that was the highest at OKC or KC, and we were the 5th alliance. Most alliances tended to be 1 key shooter and 1 or 2 dumpers, maybe a 2-pt shooter instead).

The biggest issue I had, like many others, was the co-op bridge. Someone else suggested it only be worth 1 pt, and that seems like a good idea to me. The bridge isn't that difficult a task that it should be worth as much as a win. (Of course, we only got it 3 times in two competitions, and it cost us big time in the seeding at OKC. 8-2, with THE most teleoperated points, and we were 12th.)

[kmusa]

I've been really impressed with Rebound Rumble. It's clear that the GDC put a lot of thought into it, including how the different components interact. I haven't been involved long enough to claim "Best Ever", but RR is up there.

Originally Posted by smurfgirl

I also think the Kinect could have been worked into the game better - right now it really doesn't add any value or functionality to hybrid mode, so there's no incentive for teams to use it.

It may be that the Kinect interface isn't efficient enough for effective use during the 15 seconds of hybrid, but there are plenty of opinions like the above, as well as the fact that few (at FLR), if any (at DC, if I remember correctly), robots actually used the kinect interface, that I just don't understand.

With the Kinect interface, you basically have human control of the robot during the bonus phase of the match, and situations that aren't trivial to code for autonomous (to wit, collecting missed shots or getting and shooting balls from the co-op bridge) that can benefit from that human control.

[Steve-Man]

Compared to Logomotion, Rebound Rumble is (In my opinion anyway) a little easier to understand and explain to people as far as the main scoring goes, and it's a lot more fun to watch.

With that said, the game is a lot harder to play than Logomotion and definitely a LOT harder than Breakaway. I'm going to hop on the Co-op bridge bandwagon and say that it could have been worth less and people still would've used it. It's a very neat concept however and I hope to see more "Coopertition" game elements in future games.

@Kmusa, I agree with your point about human control. The kinect sensor seemed like a neat gimmick, something fun to try, but autonomous movement/shooting is going to win out over human interaction. (That and the kinect hasn't worked very well for games as is, I wouldn't trust it to drive my robot. Though that's personal bias on my part.)

[CyberEagle9416]

I enjoyed the fact that you can shoot uninterupted on the key. but it proved difficult for the defending bot. the fender in front of the hoops also was a good part of the game. the coop bridge however did not help. it gives both teams the same points and doesn't really effect the match or any of the teams except by ranking.