2015 HINT DISCUSSION

[Poseidon5817]

Here's a screenshot of the white floor, possibly a rail though... But looking at 2014 there was no rail there on the guard wall...

https://onedrive.live.com/embed?cid=...Gdsoa3LlkCDF5s

[mateoland]

The recycle bin was a red herring. It simply meant that Aerial Assist is trashed for now but will be reused again someday in the future.

In apocalyptic terms, "Change is coming" could possibly be translated to "The End Is Nigh". (The recent Mayan "end of days" was supposed to be a "change" rather than doomsday. "Nigh" is translated to "near" or "close".)

End game confirmed.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Poseidon1671

Here's a screenshot of the white floor, possibly a rail though... But looking at 2014 there was no rail there on the guard wall...

https://onedrive.live.com/embed?cid=...Gdsoa3LlkCDF5s

Since this field perimeter was introduced there has always been a piece of angle at the bottom of the side rails.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Poseidon1671

Here's a screenshot of the white floor, possibly a rail though... But looking at 2014 there was no rail there on the guard wall...

https://onedrive.live.com/embed?cid=...Gdsoa3LlkCDF5s

That's NOT floor. That's the inside of the side rail, where the side panels rest against the rail.


Folks, Frank (and the recycling bin) are on the near side of a field, near midfield or the "near" border. The bin is raised up a bit, I'll assume on a small table, or is a tall bin. The field rail in view is not the near side rail; it is the FAR side rail, inside of the field view. Note the gate ramp visible in the bottom right corner of the linked picture: It's down, obscuring the rest of the bottom rail from view. (You can see the "rest" that's used when it's up quite clearly--the "rest" is sticking up.) See the attachment for the general arrangement: orange is camera, blue is the bin, black dot is Frank, and the black box is the field border.

Now, I'm going to guess that the field section shown (a small one) is not representative of the 2015 FRC game. I'm guessing that they used an empty field--all the stuff that was on or in that field can change (and does, year-to-year).

[Bryce2471]

I haven't read this entire thread, so i apologize if this has already been said, but when viewing the hint this seemed too strange to not mention.

When the video is shown for 2002, it is a clip from one of 71's matches. They were truly dominant, and I've never seen a video of a match where they lost. In the clip shown, they are clearly moving backwards down the field as if they are being out pushed by their opponents. Unless this is a clip of video that I've never seen, I would guess that FIRST deliberately chose to show this clip in reverse.

Just food for thought.

Let me know if there is actually a video around in which 71 gets pushed backwards, or if this has already been brought up.

[g_sawchuk]

Originally Posted by Bryce2471

I haven't read this entire thread, so i apologize if this has already been said, but when viewing the hint this seemed too strange to not mention.

When the video is shown for 2002, it is a clip from one of 71's matches. They were truly dominant, and I've never seen a video of a match where they lost. In the clip shown, they are clearly moving backwards down the field as if they are being out pushed by their opponents. Unless this is a clip of video that I've never seen, I would guess that FIRST deliberately chose to show this clip in reverse.

Just food for thought.

Let me know if there is actually a video around in which 71 gets pushed backwards, or if this has already been brought up.

Maybe this year is a "trip back in time?"

[cjl2625]

Originally Posted by Bryce2471

I haven't read this entire thread, so i apologize if this has already been said, but when viewing the hint this seemed too strange to not mention.

When the video is shown for 2002, it is a clip from one of 71's matches. They were truly dominant, and I've never seen a video of a match where they lost. In the clip shown, they are clearly moving backwards down the field as if they are being out pushed by their opponents. Unless this is a clip of video that I've never seen, I would guess that FIRST deliberately chose to show this clip in reverse.

Just food for thought.

Let me know if there is actually a video around in which 71 gets pushed backwards, or if this has already been brought up.

It's not in reverse. The timer is ticking down normally, and you can see the balls fall into the goals, not fly out of them.

This is the video where it comes from: http://youtu.be/lAmAnkYDUQM
71 gets pushed back at first, but they ultimately overpower the other alliance and win.

[Bryce2471]

Originally Posted by cjl2625

It's not in reverse. The timer is ticking down normally, and you can see the balls fall into the goals, not fly out of them.

You're right. I guess it just caught me off guard to see 71 moving backwards. False alarm. lol

[Boe]

Originally Posted by Bryce2471

I haven't read this entire thread, so i apologize if this has already been said, but when viewing the hint this seemed too strange to not mention.

When the video is shown for 2002, it is a clip from one of 71's matches. They were truly dominant, and I've never seen a video of a match where they lost. In the clip shown, they are clearly moving backwards down the field as if they are being out pushed by their opponents. Unless this is a clip of video that I've never seen, I would guess that FIRST deliberately chose to show this clip in reverse.

Just food for thought.

Let me know if there is actually a video around in which 71 gets pushed backwards, or if this has already been brought up.

It is taken from this clip, they did get pushed back a bit in the beginning.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmAnkYDUQM

[tindleroot]

Originally Posted by Bryce2471

I haven't read this entire thread, so i apologize if this has already been said, but when viewing the hint this seemed too strange to not mention.

When the video is shown for 2002, it is a clip from one of 71's matches. They were truly dominant, and I've never seen a video of a match where they lost. In the clip shown, they are clearly moving backwards down the field as if they are being out pushed by their opponents. Unless this is a clip of video that I've never seen, I would guess that FIRST deliberately chose to show this clip in reverse.

Just food for thought.

Let me know if there is actually a video around in which 71 gets pushed backwards, or if this has already been brought up.

So, you bring up an interesting point. And no, no one has noticed this yet.
I personally believe that the video is not shown in reverse, since Hammond moved so slow that year that a reverse video would have to be sped up as well but definitely was not. I feel like the backwards motion of 71 must have been the initial push they got before deploying their torque system. But that's all that I can think it is. None of the other clips are backwards.

[D.Allred]

"Change" is coming is not a new message from Frank. It must be something relatively fundamental otherwise it would be anticlimactic.

2v2v2: Possible, but doesn’t seem very much like a sport or easy to explain to an outside observer. We have enough trouble with 2 sets of bumpers. 3 would be madness … unless there are no bumper color requirements.

4v4: That would be tough for a 30+ team district event and crowded without smaller robots.

Recycle last year’s game: Recycling games elements is not new. Recycling last year’s game is just odd. (We’re changing by not changing the game.)

No bag and tag / stop build day: Admin manual says otherwise, unless that gets tossed in the recycle bin.

Change size or weight: Possible. Doubt we would go with larger weight or starting configurations. More weight is more cost and a safety hazard. Lighter would need to be for a specific game purpose. The kit base appears to be roughly the same size.

Change the field: Shape is roughly set. Primary surface could be different. Multiple surfaces and elevations have been previously done.

Match length change: Possible. There was a minor change last year. Autonomous end game could be interesting game change, but difficult for most.

Different elimination tournament format / ranking system: Obviously something has to give for Einstein. Don’t see this changing at regional or district events.

As for the game hint, I’m going with the triangular game piece theory because it fits my predefined paradigm. I’ve been waiting for a Triple Play re-do.

David

[Orthofort]

One thing that I'm not exactly sure about is that the entire video is in 4:3 aspect ratio (hence the black bars), and is also maxed out at 360p. This is what causes the newer game clips to look in a bad resolution and look squished. I don't exactly how youtube handles resolution because it might just be a result of mashing together the older videos (which were likely in 4:3 and bad resolution), or it was intentional.

One thing that strikes me though, is that the final part seems to have actually been filmed in 4:3, since it doesn't look squished. Perhaps this means it was actually intentional? This could be going with the idea of a "throwback", maybe recycling something from an older game, like maybe the '97 or '99 game.

[MrForbes]

Originally Posted by Orthofort

One thing that I'm not exactly sure about is that the entire video is in 4:3 aspect ratio (hence the black bars), and is also maxed out at 360p.

Long, long ago....everything was in 4:3 and low resolution. This only changed in the past few years. A high quality video that has to use old content, is also filmed in 4:3. I think it just means that they wanted the hint video to look contiguous.

[tindleroot]

Originally Posted by Orthofort

One thing that I'm not exactly sure about is that the entire video is in 4:3 aspect ratio (hence the black bars), and is also maxed out at 360p. This is what causes the newer game clips to look in a bad resolution and look squished. I don't exactly how youtube handles resolution because it might just be a result of mashing together the older videos (which were likely in 4:3 and bad resolution), or it was intentional.

One thing that strikes me though, is that the final part seems to have actually been filmed in 4:3, since it doesn't look squished. Perhaps this means it was actually intentional? This could be going with the idea of a "throwback", maybe recycling something from an older game, like maybe the '97 or '99 game.

How about they just had some guy take video of Frank one day, and they didn't care about the aspect ratio?