2015 HINT DISCUSSION

[Ashley Hartley]

The video is exactly 60 seconds long.
Split 60 up and divide 6 by 2, that gives you 3.
You use 3 lines to make an "H"
The zero (from the 60) looks like an "O"
Put them all together and you get "H2O"
Water game confirmed.

[Bryce2471]

Originally Posted by Brennan4256

A possible way this could happen is teams of two or three could be constantly changing based on time. Example being 1:00 with a certain group then all of a sudden at the next minute your team changes. I understand this complicates playoffs and regional finals, but it is a big change. The coopertition is high with this style without alliances existing. The recycle bin in this idea is just a re herring or a way to symbolize 2014s alliance reliant game is in the trash and a new alliance system will replace.

Any feedback? Even possible?

This is definitely a cool idea for a big change, but there are some serious issues.

Such as:
How will audience members (and drive teams for that matter) keep track of the alliances?
How will the world champion(s) be determined? Or the winners of regionals for that matter?
What color will the bumpers be?

Fun food for thought before build season starts though!

[cgmv123]

Originally Posted by Cash4587

I think they should bring back de-scoring. That'd be cool.

Originally Posted by K-Dawg157

That would be cool.

I don't consider de-scoring to be in the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, but that's just me.

[orangemoore]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

I don't consider de-scoring to be in the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, but that's just me.

How about a version of 2007 de-scoring. Taking on and off the spoilers.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

I don't consider de-scoring to be in the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, but that's just me.

It was legal, within limits, off-and-on up until the 2008 season. After that, the games (other than 2011) have not been conducive to descoring.

[Abhishek R]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

I don't consider de-scoring to be in the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, but that's just me.

Descoring was a thing back in 2007, right? I feel it would add another strategic element to the game.

Although I don't consider it to be un-GP in any way, I do feel it could possibly be detrimental to the flow of the game - it could just end up in a tug of war of scoring and descoring the game object. (to take 2007 as an example, you may just be back and forth replacing the black tube, though I wasn't around then, so please correct me if this wasn't an issue at all).

[Alex2614]

I've been thinking about things that have not yet been done in FIRST, and things that are ALWAYS in the game manual, which can be changed or thrown out. Think about things that we usually think about as a FIRST game, that have been prevalent throughout all or most of the past games. Do not be surprised to see if the very idea of the FRC game is changed.. If things that we usually expect from year to year are not there anymore. They already changed the size of the field and got rid of the endgame last year, so what can be changed or deleted from this year that has not yet been changed?

Just some "stream-of-consciousness" thoughts that come to mind.

We have never (at least to my knowledge) had a game in which just one or two game pieces were shared like a traditional sporting event. We've had games in which the pieces were not segregated, but there were many. And we've had games (2008, 2014) where there were only a couple game pieces, but they WERE segregated between alliances. What about a game in which there is one large game piece (oversized hockey puck, for example?) or maybe even two that are shared between alliances. This will make the game easier to follow for audience members.

Also, think back to FIRST Frenzy. It was a "recycling" of sorts of the previous games. We are going into the 25th FRC season, maybe they want to combine some elements from multiple previous games?

I wouldn't mind having the white plastic (it's not acutally regolith, as I've discussed in previous threads), as long as we are allowed to use other wheels. While the challenge in Lunacy was an interesting one, it severely impeded gameplay and made the matches more boring at many events (well, that and all of the other gameplay issues).

As far as things that are usually in the rule manual are things like: robot size, weight, etc. The field size. The "safe zones" and other markings on the field.

A back-and-forth motion kind of game is kind of like recycling the game piece, isn't it? I wouldn't mind that kind of game, i.e. volleyball, hockey, etc.

Essentially, I would not be surprised by anything at this point. Usually when I discount an idea saying "FIRST will never do that" or "it will be impossible to make an FRC game that way," I usually get surprised. I never thought that they would do assists, the "regolith floor," the frisbees, among others were things that I was skeptical of at first. But especially after this game hint, I would not be surprised by ANYTHING they throw at us. As I told my team, brace yourselves for some drastic changes from what we think of as an FRC game. Things that we can usually expect from year to year may be completely different now.

[gavmac928]

One thing that does seem clear to me is that we need to read into the game hint at least a little. Taken solely at face value, ignoring any little details, and if the title wasn't "this is a game hint," the video is essentially exactly the same as Frank's previous blog post about drastic, unexpected changes. I think there has to be something in the video beyond that, because why would they say the same thing twice?

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

I don't consider de-scoring to be in the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, but that's just me.

I would disagree with it being against the spirit of Gracious Professionalism if its part of the rule book I wouldn't argue with it.
Either way the biggest issue with de-scoring is while it can be a fantastic game mechanic without proper balancing most games end up in tug of war and most games I see de-scoring be a really cool mechanic are games with more then two teams.

Looking over at the emphasis on change I am completely befuddled on any catchy names for games with the word "Change">

Does anyone have copies of past rule books and have they thumbed through it?

[Cash4587]

Originally Posted by Abhishek R

Descoring was a thing back in 2007, right? I feel it would add another strategic element to the game.

Although I don't consider it to be un-GP in any way, I do feel it could possibly be detrimental to the flow of the game - it could just end up in a tug of war of scoring and descoring the game object. (to take 2007 as an example, you may just be back and forth replacing the black tube, though I wasn't around then, so please correct me if this wasn't an issue at all).

I was thinking more along the lines of vex sack attack de-scoring. I think if done right in FRC it could make the matches really intense, more so than they already are.. Just an idea though.

[aphelps231]

There are three characters in "H2O"
There is a "2" in "H2O"
2^3 = 8
There are 8 days left until kickoff
This year's game hint is change
The number of days between now and kickoff is constantly changing
Water game confirmed

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Alex2614

What about a game in which there is one large game piece (oversized hockey puck, for example?) or maybe even two that are shared between alliances. This will make the game easier to follow for audience members.

Aerial Assist already involved a lot of pushing and shoving; a single game token would raise this another level or two. If this happens, look for plenty of LOW gear ratios and probably nearly-round robot plan views.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Cash4587

I was thinking more along the lines of vex sack attack de-scoring. I think if done right in FRC it could make the matches really intense, more so than they already are.. Just an idea though.

If you want see to FRC with Sack Attack like de-scoring, you need to take a look back the 2000 season.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FJFbvHRyco

This is the match that was shown in the game hint video, and is arguably one of the most historic matches in FRC history. Team 47 had been dominant that regional season, and came into Champs as the overwhelming favourites, just as they had in 1998. Unfortunately for them, things didn't work out and they ran into an amazing alliance of 126 and 131. 47 ended up snapping a weld in this match which derailed their dream season, as there was no way they were going to beat the 126-131 combo at less than full strength. The crowd was entirely stunned when they realized what had happened. Definitely one of the most memorable matches I've ever witnessed.

[Joe G.]

Originally Posted by Karthik

If you want see to FRC with Sack Attack like de-scoring, you need to take a look back the 2000 season.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FJFbvHRyco

This is the match that was shown in the game hint video, and is arguably one of the most historic matches in FRC history. Team 47 had been dominant that regional season, and came into Champs as the overwhelming favourites, just as they had in 1998. Unfortunately for them, things didn't work out and they ran into an amazing alliance of 126 and 131. 47 ended up snapping a weld in this match which derailed their dream season, as there was no way they were going to beat the 126-131 combo at less than full strength. The crowd was entirely stunned when they realized what had happened. Definitely one of the most memorable matches I've ever witnessed.

Does anyone know if there's any video footage of the Chief Delphi 2000 machine other than this match? I have heard nearly everyone who was around at this time rave about this robot as among the most dominant and revolutionary in FRC history, and yet the only widely available video is of the match in which they broke down. I'd love to see video of this machine at the top of its game.

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by gavmac928

One thing that does seem clear to me is that we need to read into the game hint at least a little. Taken solely at face value, ignoring any little details, and if the title wasn't "this is a game hint," the video is essentially exactly the same as Frank's previous blog post about drastic, unexpected changes. I think there has to be something in the video beyond that, because why would they say the same thing twice?

In the pre-release interview, Frank stated something like "don't read too much into this hint, because we didn't put much effort into coming up with it".

What that means is that there's no weird hidden stuff, it's just a statement that change is coming, and the 2014 rule book is tossed away.

(It can be argued whether recycling is important to the hint or just the right way to get rid of a pile of paper. I vote the former, elements of past games will be recycled into this new one, but not in a way that gives veteran teams a significant advantage.)