Modern Upgrrade

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Clinton Bolinger

I think you can see it next to CD5, forgive my son for standing on the trophy.

Kids!

-Clinton-

I just can't get over the fact that this robot... one which played a large role in my becoming an engineer... is just chilling in the Jenkins' living room.

So cool.

-John

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

Your memory is pretty good. I'm pretty sure the first year for optional bumpers was 2000. Back then there was no mandatory construction method, so ChiefDelphi use a carbon fiber (I think) skirt to act as their bumpers under the rules that year: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/12941

As I recall the later bumper rules (say, the 03-05 bumper rules), if you wanted to use a bumper, it had to make weight with the rest of the robot and had to not be made of hard material, or something like that. I don't remember if they got an "outside the box" allowance or not. And I think that skirt sure looks like sheet metal, where the team nametags aren't...

Though I do seem to remember hearing about somebody building bumpers that acted as weight transfer devices: you drive into them, they lift you up slightly.

2006 was also the first year that bumpers didn't have to make the robot weight. A lot of people figured out that you wanted more weight for a variety of reasons relating to CG and immobility, and so a lot of robots carried bumpers even though they were optional.


Oh, and Jesse: Seconded on the cones. Traffic cones, athletic cones--just get some cones in there. (Hide a kitbot in a road barrel--if both alliances catch it as it drives around at the end of the game, coopertition points.)

[Doug G]

By far the 2003 autonomous was the most thrilling to watch, robots interacting in one place during auto was so thrilling. It seems all the auto periods recently are just too safe and not as spectacular as they were back in stack attack. It adds a very big unknown into the game which I hope returns at some point.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by EricH

(Hide a kitbot in a road barrel--if both alliances catch it as it drives around at the end of the game, coopertition points.)

I like where you're going with this! The possibilities seem to be endless

[Al Skierkiewicz]

From 2000
M2. Robots must sit, unconstrained, inside a 36”x30" rectangular footprint and be no more than 60" high at the start of a match. The weight of the robot, including battery, bumper, and control system, may not exceed 130.0 pounds.

[ratdude747]

Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz

From 2000
M2. Robots must sit, unconstrained, inside a 36”x30" rectangular footprint and be no more than 60" high at the start of a match. The weight of the robot, including battery, bumper, and control system, may not exceed 130.0 pounds.

Wasn't that the rule that resulted in robots that got stuck in build rooms when teams forgot how narrow the doorway was?

[JVN]

Originally Posted by ratdude747

Wasn't that the rule that resulted in robots that got stuck in build rooms when teams forgot how narrow the doorway was?

1996 was 36" x 36" x 36"
They fixed this in 1997.

-John

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by JVN

1996 was 36" x 36" x 36"
They fixed this in 1997.

-John

They fixed it in 1998. I remember having this problem in 1997 as the dimensions were 36x36 that year.

[ratdude747]

Originally Posted by JVN

1996 was 36" x 36" x 36"
They fixed this in 1997.

-John

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

They fixed it in 1998. I remember having this problem in 1997 as the dimensions were 36x36 that year.

I see... My knowledge of games 2008 and prior (especially pre 2006) is patchy... as is my understanding of doorway dimensions (brain fart). Oh well. You learn something every day.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Larry,
Many venues (of which there were only a couple of regionals at that time) had the maintenance crew take out the center post on some of the doorways so robots could be moved. Our Ladder Logic (1998) robot looks to be close to 36x36 too. http://www.wildstang.org/gallery2/v/...g_jpg.jpg.html
I might be able to check dimensions tonight. The ball was pretty big though. I don't have any rules pre-2001.

[Christopher149]

(realizing this thread is from 2012): Well, for 2015, we got the highest voted result of Stack Attack in the form of Recycle Rush.

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

2003.

Bumpers optional.

Make stacked robots on the platform worth endgame multipliers.

Make 68's robot legal, just for fun.

Get rid of the elimination round points system. Burn it. Nuke it. Kill it with fire.

Not remembering 2003's elim point system, we got 3-4 out of 5 of those points (1. stacking, 2. bumpers optional, 4. no horizontal dimension limits on-field)

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Christopher149

(realizing this thread is from 2012): Well, for 2015, we got the highest voted result of Stack Attack in the form of Recycle Rush.



Not remembering 2003's elim point system, we got 3-4 out of 5 of those points (1. stacking, 2. bumpers optional, 4. no horizontal dimension limits on-field)

Unfortunately, we did get the point system, in all its ugliness.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Billfred

You sure? Imagine if 2001 were played 3v0-plus-3v0, the field split long-ways with no crossover unless a ball bounces across of its own accord. I think the close quarters and drag-race concept (balls, balance, end zone) might work.

hmmmmn......

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by EricH

Unfortunately, we did get the point system, in all its ugliness.

It's not as ugly as 2003. If you were losing, you were incentivized to make sure that you scored as little as possible. The scores of the finals on Einstein were 12-130 and 52-10. The world championship alliance got blown out in the last match on Einstein (but not as badly as they blew out the other alliance in the first match).

[Al Skierkiewicz]

To quote Ken Patton in 2003 after our Einstein win...
"Sorry we lost that last match for you guys. Oh! That is what we were supposed to do."