[FRC Blog] Frank Answers Fridays: August 8th, 2014

[pwnageNick]

Originally Posted by FRC Blog

Today’s good question comes from Aaron Schmitz, an alumnus from FRC Team 2502, Talon Robotics, from Eden Prairie, Minnesota, USA:

Question

Hello Frank & co.,

Allow me to introduce myself by saying I’m alumni of FRC 2502 who works for a well-known Fortune 50 software company. Acting as de facto liaison/volunteer wrangler between this company and FIRST’s regional partner, I can say with confidence that there are many outstanding developers here and at other technology corporations who are happy to donate their time certainly as volunteers and mentors but in other ways as well.

Based on your humility on this blog, I’m sure you’ll be the first to admit that at the beginning of the season the scoring system was a source of frustration to many. As a referee during weeks one through five I was able to directly observe the evolution of the FMS over the competition season, and certainly by week three most of the issues were resolved but that’s a tough break for teams whose only event was week one or two.

That brings me to my question: how does FIRST plan to mitigate issues with the scoring system so that in future seasons behavior is rock solid week one or *crosses fingers* week zero, and more specifically either for 2015 or down the road does FIRST have any plans to continue it’s well received trend of increased transparency in order to achieve this result. There are thousands of industry professionals and thousands more students who would be happy to audit (or even write) code at no cost to FIRST without compromising the integrity of the game – perhaps freeing up your developers to work on cool things the community is asking for (tablet app for the inspectors?). Frank, tell us how we can help!

Best regards,

Aaron Schmitz

Answer

Aaron, thanks for the question. You are right that the scoring system was frustrating for many the first few weeks of the 2014 season. We were frustrated with it as well. It did not have the level of quality we had worked and planned for. The Aerial Assist scoring rules were among the most complex we have had to deal with recently, with many points and activities depending on sequences of events, rather than a simple ‘put object X in opening Y and get Z points’. We discovered several corner cases, unlikely events but still possible, that did not behave as they should have. Also, development of the game ran late, as this very different FRC game required much more than the usual effort to complete. However, regardless of the complexity of the rules or the lateness of the game development, we did not deliver the highest quality product possible, and for that we are sorry.

We have three specific approaches we’re taking for the 2015 season to help correct this. First, we’ve hired additional engineers to make sure we have the technical resources we need to do the job in the time we have. You may be familiar with our two most recent hires – Alex Herreid and Danny Diaz. In addition, we are taking a more structured approach to the game design process itself that should result in the game being completed earlier than it was last year, allowing us the time we need to put the system through its full paces, corner cases and all. Finally, the game design committee has determined that having ‘simple and objective rules’ is one of their top criteria for helping make decisions related to the 2015 game.* This should help reduce the complexity of the system required to support it.

For us to be able to test the scoring system/Field Management System (FMS), we need the full system, with all components – the FMS server cabinet and associated components (known as the Scorpion, after the manufacturer of the cabinet, not because it can sting), station control cabinets (SCCs), estops, team numbers, touch screens, indicator lights, etc, etc, etc.

Here are a few photos of parts of our setup in our Mission Control on the 5th floor:



(“Hey, why are those numbers showing, it must be a game hint!” Listen, please – it’s not a game hint. Our game hints typically start with something like “This is a game hint!”)

Our software partners in developing the FMS for the last few years, 4FX, have a duplicate system, which allows them to test the system as well.

I appreciate your offer to get community support in developing our software. I’m sure that if we asked we’d get a number of people lining up to help. However, with the time pressure we are under, and the need to have immediate access to the actual equipment to fully test the software, I think it’s best for us to rely on our internal and contracted resources. I believe that with the changes we are making for the 2015 season, we will see significant improvements.

Frank

* If you are interested, it ranks 4th out of 23 total game criteria, behind ‘Safe’, ‘Fun and Exciting’, and ‘Fair Penalties’. The 24th ranked criterion, ‘More Cowbell’ did not make the final cut.

I gotta have more cowbell!

-Nick

[treffk]

I'd love to see the full list for game criteria. Instead we just have to guess since we know 4 out of 23.

[barn34]

definitely disappointed to hear confirmation of what we have all feared: there will continue to be a severe lacking in the all-important cowbell department for the 2015 season...

words...there are no words...

first, corndogs and now cowbells...

when will you make the pain stop, Frank?!?!?!

[BigJ]

What is FIRST using all of our registration fees for if cowbells are off the table? I demand more transparency, Frank.

[ThunderousPrime]

Originally Posted by treffk

I'd love to see the full list for game criteria. Instead we just have to guess since we know 4 out of 23.

I sent in a comment on the Blog Post page asking for exactly that. I even mentioned the FIRST Community would be interested too. We'll have to see what happens.

[Thad House]

Now the real question is where are corn dogs located on that list? That is truly all that matters.

[Nemo]

I like the sound of "simple and objective rules."

I suggest not getting too fanatical about taking away referees' ability to use subjective, common sense judgment; otherwise we will still have nonsense like penalizing a team for bumping into a poorly built robot that subsequently drops a piece of itself onto the field.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Thad House

Now the real question is where are corn dogs located on that list? That is truly all that matters.

Presumably 5th. I can't think of anything else that would fall between the four listed and corndogs, and honestly, I'm a little shocked that "fair penalties" is ranked ahead of corndogs.

[Jon Stratis]

For those youngsters out there... More Cowbell! It's sure to make a lot of people (like me!) feel old when they realize this year's incoming FIRST freshmen were probably born the year that sketch played on SNL

Hey, wait a minute... that sketch aired 15 years (to the month!) before the 2015 champs! I think this might actually be a game hint!

[AllenGregoryIV]

Here's the link to the original blog post with pictures.

[Dragonking]

Well obviously the numbers 0723 are not a game hint. But the picture itself must be a game hing since he writes the sentence "This is a game hint!" right below the picture. Look at the displays. They are layered. Obviously the field will be made up of 4 levels and each driver station will be on a different level.
3 dimensional chess anyone

[ykarkason]

**Obligatory game hint comment**

Oh! Look! The number on the team-number boards say 0723 which is hex for 1827, the year Robert Brown noticed Brownian motion in pollen grains suspended in water.
Starting to think we'll get our water game for 2015!!

[artK]

Introducing the 2015 FRC event: Corndog Cowbells!!!

Corndog Cowbells is played on a 27' by 54' field, with red and blue cowbells facing upwards surrounding the field. Corndog Cowbells is played 120 corndogs. The objective of the game is to fill the cowbells with corndogs, the higher the cowbell, the more points they are worth. The Match starts with a 15 second autonomous period, where each robot starts with three corndogs in possession, and attempt to score the corndogs for more points. At the end of the autonomous period, drivers step up to the controls...

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by artK

Introducing the 2015 FRC event: Corndog Cowbells!!!

Corndog Cowbells is played on a 27' by 54' field, with red and blue cowbells facing upwards surrounding the field. Corndog Cowbells is played 120 corndogs. The objective of the game is to fill the cowbells with corndogs, the higher the cowbell, the more points they are worth. The Match starts with a 15 second autonomous period, where each robot starts with three corndogs in possession, and attempt to score the corndogs for more points. At the end of the autonomous period, drivers step up to the controls...

...


So Rebound Rumble?

[Boe]

Originally Posted by artK

Introducing the 2015 FRC event: Corndog Cowbells!!!

Corndog Cowbells is played on a 27' by 54' field, with red and blue cowbells facing upwards surrounding the field. Corndog Cowbells is played 120 corndogs. The objective of the game is to fill the cowbells with corndogs, the higher the cowbell, the more points they are worth. The Match starts with a 15 second autonomous period, where each robot starts with three corndogs in possession, and attempt to score the corndogs for more points. At the end of the autonomous period, drivers step up to the controls...

At the end of the match for bonus points teams my dispense free corndogs to the audience, the more satisfied viewers the more points you get.