Field Layouts

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

What do you think about field layouts? Personally, for example, I hate the use of barriers because it slows down the pace of the game. True, it adds a different aspect to the field and requires the use of a variety of real challenges, however I prefer an open field with as few things to run into as possible. Granted, I'm not on the drive team, however high scoring matches are scarce with more obstacles that take time to maneuver around. And in FIRST, every second counts.

So endangering people around the field is more acceptable to you?

[WaterClaw]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

So endangering people around the field is more acceptable to you?

No. In field barriers. Like in field walls. Not protective structures.

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

So endangering people around the field is more acceptable to you?

I don't see the connection, unless you're saying a more open field = more robots hitting max speed = more danger?

[dag0620]

Originally Posted by connor.worley

I don't see the connection, unless you're saying a more open field = more robots hitting max speed = more danger?

Pretty sure Ed was referencing the barriers on the permitter of the field. The one that does matter and shouldn't be eliminated.

The OP is talking about barriers within the field. i.e. Bumps in 2010 or the smaller rail bump in 2012.

[Damiaen_Florian]

Personally I like it when there are objects and obstacles on the field, I think it enhances the gameplay and strategy required for a game, and also requires a bit more driver skill (though, being a driver I may be a bit bias).

But I do see how you like the idea of an open field, though the last time there was an open field with no obstacles to speak of was Lunacy in 2009 (I'm gonna not count the trailers as an obstacle because they were part of your robot) and the general consensus, and mine as well, for that game was that it wasn't all that great.

[WaterClaw]

Originally Posted by Damiaen_Florian

But I do see how you like the idea of an open field, though the last time there was an open field with no obstacles to speak of was Lunacy in 2009.

One could argue the entire floor was an obstacle Carpet is the way to go

I could also ague that this past year in Ultimate Ascent we had a relatively open field. Ignoring the giant ominous pyramids in the middle. Still, the obstacles of Ultimate Ascent were rather easy to maneuver around it seemed as a pose to over or under.

[Jay O'Donnell]

One thing you can definitely notice in 2010 and 2012 (games with lots of barriers) is that the robots do move slower do to lack of room to accelerate/not needing to travel very far to get to their destination. In 2013 robots traversed the whole field with no bumps in the road, so they were built to be faster and had more time to accelerate. I actually agree with the premise of not enjoying bumps, as the faster gameplay we saw in 2013 made it very viewer friendly.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

Still, the obstacles of Ultimate Ascent were rather easy to maneuver around it seemed as a pose to over or under.

We left our pyramid vaulting defence avoiding mechanism off the robot this year due to weight, space, and stupidity concerns. But it's ok, because we'll have it ready for the pole vaulting game next year.

[WaterClaw]

Originally Posted by Gregor

We left our pyramid vaulting defence avoiding mechanism off the robot this year due to weight, space, and stupidity concerns. But it's ok, because we'll have it ready for the pole vaulting game next year.

That made my day

[Damiaen_Florian]

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

One could argue the entire floor was an obstacle

That is very very true, oh the fun times with regolith