Are the three day builds affecting designs?

[Anupam Goli]

I can't speak for other teams' seasons, but even though our robot looks very similar to a build blitz robot, we actually did all of our proof-of-concept and prototyping independently. We did look at the Ri3D and build blitz for proof of concept, but we put all of our ideas to the test and wound up going with the ones we found were most effective and efficient to build. We did turn to build blitz for inspiration on our launching mechanism, but that may be the only thing we outright designed based off of the 3 day projects.

[Jon Stratis]

From what I saw at week-0 events this past weekend, there is still plenty of variety in robot design!

[nxtmonkeys]

A lot of teams seem to have the horizontal intake system, like RI3D 1.0

[Max Boord]

I think they are too. Our team started with a vacuum pickup mechanism. We got soo far that it was installed on the practice robot before we realized it didn’t work in any way shape of form. We quickly decided to switch to el toros after seeing how well they worked even in comparison to the jvn top roller concept.

As for rookie teams it is huge. At the 2013 champs we were paired with several Ri3D bots which allowed us to quickly develop a game plan knowing there exact capabilities.
This year with 5 Ri3D bots i see 2 roads:
The rookie : improve slightly but mostly copy these championship worthy robots.
The veteran : use Ri3d as a prototyping done for you. This was our approach as the pickup we had on just did not work and we were way too late in realizing this to prototype a new intake.

Ri3D also helps with concept development. To quickly see that a pneumatic puncher does not work allowed us to totally throw out that concept on day 1. The same is true with spatula pickup and slingshots.

Scouting: our pit scouting sheet will simply have a list of the mechanisms on each Ri3d robot (and a blank to write down mechanisms not used on a Ri3d) making scouting much simpler.

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

From what I saw at week-0 events this past weekend, there is still plenty of variety in robot design!

Variety is dead, long live variety!

But seriously, there were more moving, functional robots at our week zero than I remember in any previous year. I partially credit Ri3D/BB for that.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Affecting? Sure. Negatively so? I'm not sure.

I admit the first thing I do when games are announced is think back to what teams have done in the past to manipulate similar objects. I know the other mentors do the same thing. But let's be honest, a lot of teams don't have that kind of experience. The quick builds allow teams to gain access to SOME level of historical knowledge in the form of all the experienced mentors building robots.

I think it's a "good" thing from an inspirational view point. Teams have something to guide them.

However, I don't think it's a good thing from an audience standpoint. When 80% of the robots look similar it takes away from the spectacle and people start to think we had to build to that spec. Idk, I'm still a little torn on this one tbh.

[waialua359]

Several thoughts.
1. 3 day robots inspire both new and veteran teams to get ideas. At the very least, a starting point in which to create their own robot and features.
2. Its a good thing. How many teams actually spend an adequate amount of time during the last week to test, make revisions, practice, program, and make the bot pretty? There's a good amount of teams that still cram during the last week to finish. If anything, the 3 day robots help lessen the no. of teams stuck in that position.
3. I think the most important reason for doing this is more than just providing ideas to teams. It highlights companies, the leaders in FIRST, and great designers of past to showcase their skills and create a relationship with their audience.
People always talk about mentoring and doing outreach. What better way to do this than the 3 day robot idea?

[Ragingenferno]

The videos definitely helped many teams come up with ideas.

We here at Martin Van Buren high school have two teams, one is the girls (4789) and the others is the boys(3053). Our girls team is on there second year and still a bit of a rookie team although we aid them with help and support.

The girls team will be using a mere image of three day robot but it's not to be ashamed of.

I do agree that most teams would have came up with the same pick-up mechanism.

But the three day robot helped the boys team too. We decided to try and come up with a completely different idea and we are doing great too.

[JamesCH95]

I think that the Ri3D projects are a good thing. There is the obvious reason that it helps inspire/provide a starting point for younger or rookie teams.

There is the less-obvious reason that it gives me an idea of what sort of robots we might be playing with and against during the season. That sparks different design avenues for cooperative and defensive features or objectives that I probably wouldn't have come up with had I been working on an island.

It also lets me know what designs are likely to become common and thus I can figure out which concepts my team comes up with are likely to be innovative and/or different enough to catch people's attention.

[nxtmonkeys]

One day, I hope that my team will be a RI3D team.










-Zombies are jealous of our smartness. That is why they eat our brains.

[LeelandS]

Anyone can look at the teams who have posted pictures of their robot this year and say that the Ri3D ventures have absolutely influenced many robots this year. I have also seen several people say that because of this, Ri3D should be discouraged.

By looking at these robots, you can tell many designs were inspired by 1114 of 2008. Should 1114 be admonished for this as well? The only difference between deriving inspiration from 1114 and Ri3D is time. Does that make it any different?

There is nothing wrong with this, in my opinion. Teams aren't forced to follow a mould. If a team determines that another robot design is the best choice, they can do it. If they don't, they can come up with something else.

No need to reinvent the wheel.

[Electronica1]

The way I see it, all the designs you see from Ri3d and other teams, you will have to beat. Now if you do that by optimizing their designs or by coming up with something else is completely up to your team.

As others have said, before Ri3d, designs were just influence by previous designs with similar games. All Ri3d does is make it easier for rookie teams who were not around for those similar games.

[fox46]

I along with many of the students on our team have been shocked by the commonality of the machines this year but also thrilled that ours is seemingly very different. By the end of the first weekend we had our concepts prototyped, partially integrated and working in the carcass of last year's practice bot which left us mostly immune from the effects of Ri3D. The result is a machine which looks quite different from everything else I've seen posted on CD thus far.

It is my strong belief that teams are taking "the easy way out" and mimicking Ri3D which I feel does not foster creativity or innovation as well as being left on one's own to brainstorm and design. Even some very strong teams have shown up with extremely complicated mechanisms and processes to pickup and shoot the ball which just seem incongruent with their usual solutions.

On the other hand though, I have always maintained that a good idea today is better than a great idea tomorrow because with a little time to tweak and tune, the good design can often be made to be great. In this sense I can see the merit in taking someone's design and improving upon it however, this year I think there were much better ways to pull off the game tasks which simply have not been explored by most teams.

[Mark Sheridan]

So far I have seen a lot of teams use concepts from the 3 day builds either to to justify their own designs or as inspiration for better ones. I have seen very few straight up copies. Seems like every el toro mechanism is superior than the original.

Plus there are a ton of "1114 '08" style bots but so far every version I have seen is radically different. The only similarity is a roller claw at the end of a puncher. Seems like every bot has a different take on geometry and degrees of freedom. The mechanisms for the puncher have changed a lot for the longer shot distances. I feel this is analogues to cars. A lot of cars of piston internal combustion engines in the front but there is a huge variety.

[Joseph Smith]

While I believe that the Ri3D teams definitely affected the designs this season, I don't think it made a huge impact- I think many teams would logically arrive on these designs themselves after a few days of sketches and prototypes. What Ri3D did was prove that these designs can work, and that they can be competitive- from there teams are free to expand and improve the basic systems to infinity and beyond.

Also, I think Ri3D has a very positive impact on the level of gameplay for the younger, less experienced teams or teams with less resources. Where they may struggle to get a functional design together otherwise, now they have some ideas that they can play with that they know will work and allow them to be at least somewhat competitive, which is a boost for everyone else in FIRST when they get one of these teams as an alliance partner.

All that being said, I do feel like this year lacks much of the design creativity that I've seen in the past. I remember years when I would walk around the pits and have to stare at a robot for a few minutes before I figured it out, and times when I see a bot and think "wow, I never would have thought to do it like that." It just seems to take some of the fun and discovery out of it.