Go to Post mabye this is a case of I AM JVN to the Extreme! - Tytus Gerrish [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 11 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #181   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 16:20
excel2474's Avatar
excel2474 excel2474 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Aaron Stewart
FRC #2474 (Excel)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Niles, Michigan
Posts: 177
excel2474 is a jewel in the roughexcel2474 is a jewel in the roughexcel2474 is a jewel in the roughexcel2474 is a jewel in the rough
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by waialua359 View Post
I disagree.
We were 30th after our 1st 3 matches and by the end of the day, ranked 3rd.
We held onto the #1 spot and lost it in the final match by 6 total points.
Good example. That's probably because you weren't the only ones that had a couple bad rounds. It all works out.
__________________
"Find some thing you like to do and EXCEL at it with dilligence."

University of Notre Dame- Mechanical Engineering.
Reply With Quote
  #182   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 17:33
Breadbocks Breadbocks is offline
Registered User
FRC #1002
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Breadbocks is on a distinguished road
Re: Week 1 Observations

I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.
Reply With Quote
  #183   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 17:50
Boltman Boltman is offline
Registered User
FRC #5137 (Iron Kodiaks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 861
Boltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud of
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Breadbocks View Post
I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.
And in Dallas ONE bot put up 95. So relying on Co-op is not a good strategy sure it helps and is arguably the easiest 40 points but it does rely on others and that is never a good thing , scouting could ferret out those that do typically and those that don't there is video on prior matches...if you were scouting.

You team "shafted itself" by not being prepared for unsuccessful co-op pts. Teams that scored higher may have had the same issues yet scored higher...why? You create your own points based on how well your alliance performs as a unit.


Take IE Regional (Listed by QA in Quals):

Now strictly Cooperation

80 <---------------#1 1572 Hammer Heads (2 matches with co-op)
120
200
80 <--------------- #4 973 Greybots (2 matches with co-op)
160
200

....

240 <-------------------------#13 Golden Gears (6 matches with co-op....Best Co-Op% and 17th pick in draft)

So Co-op #'s are not indicative of Finals placement.


Hammer Heads NEVER did one single co-op attempt nor did Grey Bots and both were in Playoffs and NOW Hammer Heads in World Championships as non co-op bot.
__________________

Iron Kodiaks Team #5137 San Marcos, CA

2016 Semi-Finalist | Central Valley Alliance Captain #2
2016 Semi-Finalist | San Diego 2nd bot alliance #8
2015 Semi-Finalist | Ventura 3rd bot alliance #3
2015 Quarter-Finalist| San Diego 2nd bot alliance #5
2014 Rookie All-Star | #21 San Diego | Galileo Division #91

Last edited by Boltman : 02-03-2015 at 18:19.
Reply With Quote
  #184   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:02
PayneTrain's Avatar
PayneTrain PayneTrain is offline
Q&A Dartboard Detractor
AKA: Lizard King
FRC #0422 (The Meme Tech Pneumatic Devices)
Team Role: Mascot
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: RVA
Posts: 2,271
PayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond reputePayneTrain has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Breadbocks View Post
I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.
1) Wait, you're telling me that you think each team should be averaging 80 on their QA in the coming weeks? Currently available data for mean QA for week 1 didn't even break HALF of that. I would be shocked if mean QA ever hit 80 before CMP.

2) While this is a true thing that does suck, 148, 3824, and other high ranking teams ranked high with <50% co-op stack conversion rate. I know our rank dropped precipitously because by the time we fixed our robot we hit a stretch of matches without co-op capability on the opposite side of the step. It's an issue we're looking to solve in two ways for our next event.
Reply With Quote
  #185   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:05
AdamHeard's Avatar
AdamHeard AdamHeard is offline
Lead Mentor
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Atascadero
Posts: 5,524
AdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to AdamHeard
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltman View Post
Take IE Regional (Listed by QA in Quals):

Coopertition

80 <---------------#1 1572 Hammer Heads
120
200
80 <--------------- #4 973 Orange Crush
160
200
Not really a fan of our new name.
Reply With Quote
  #186   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:12
Boltman Boltman is offline
Registered User
FRC #5137 (Iron Kodiaks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 861
Boltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud of
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard View Post
Not really a fan of our new name.
Ha fixed
__________________

Iron Kodiaks Team #5137 San Marcos, CA

2016 Semi-Finalist | Central Valley Alliance Captain #2
2016 Semi-Finalist | San Diego 2nd bot alliance #8
2015 Semi-Finalist | Ventura 3rd bot alliance #3
2015 Quarter-Finalist| San Diego 2nd bot alliance #5
2014 Rookie All-Star | #21 San Diego | Galileo Division #91
Reply With Quote
  #187   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:14
AdamHeard's Avatar
AdamHeard AdamHeard is offline
Lead Mentor
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Atascadero
Posts: 5,524
AdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to AdamHeard
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltman View Post
Ha fixed
Ehhhhhhhhhhh. Try again.

Code Orange is 3476.
Reply With Quote
  #188   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:16
Mark Sheridan's Avatar
Mark Sheridan Mark Sheridan is offline
Head Mentor
FRC #3476 (Code Orange)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 561
Mark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond reputeMark Sheridan has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltman View Post
80 <--------------- #4 973 Code Orange (2 matches with co-op)
When did we trade names with the greybots?
__________________
Team 3476| Mentor| 2014 - Current
Team 3309| Mentor| 2011 - 2016
Team 766 | Mentor| 2006 - 2011 | Alumnus | 2002-2005
Reply With Quote
  #189   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:16
Boltman Boltman is offline
Registered User
FRC #5137 (Iron Kodiaks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 861
Boltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud ofBoltman has much to be proud of
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard View Post
Ehhhhhhhhhhh. Try again.

Code Orange is 3476.
Got it thx anyhow both still got far without needing co-op
__________________

Iron Kodiaks Team #5137 San Marcos, CA

2016 Semi-Finalist | Central Valley Alliance Captain #2
2016 Semi-Finalist | San Diego 2nd bot alliance #8
2015 Semi-Finalist | Ventura 3rd bot alliance #3
2015 Quarter-Finalist| San Diego 2nd bot alliance #5
2014 Rookie All-Star | #21 San Diego | Galileo Division #91

Last edited by Boltman : 02-03-2015 at 18:21.
Reply With Quote
  #190   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:20
dave1027 dave1027 is offline
Registered User
FRC #1027
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West Springfield, MA
Posts: 14
dave1027 will become famous soon enough
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by DareDad View Post
But, a marginal team with a kit-bot could manage to do autonomous mobility and a 10 point climb. This year, a basic kit-bot can be part of a robot set, but only if the other two members of the alliance don't blow it off as unneeded points.

Beyond that, if they try to push single totes onto the scoring platform, they're likely to get yelled at by their partners for "cluttering" the field and getting in the way. There's certainly a place for a less advanced team with a good driver to pick up litter, but that would require engineering and manufacturing an effective noodle grabber which would mean that they aren't a less advanced team.

Last year, it was about all 3 robots on an alliance working together, this year leaving the third alliance robot off the field in eliminations has been an effective strategy.
This year is a great year for teams with less engineering and manufacturing power. With a kit bit chassis, power drill, some basic hand tools, and a trip to home depot, a competative robot could be built capable of a four stack, plus topping with an RC. I know because this is what we did for a prototype. We took our prototype a few steps further, but we could have competed with the prototype. No special expertise required. I'm not saying that it would be a power house/rock star, but it would be competitive, it would have contributed.
Reply With Quote
  #191   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 18:20
Nuttyman54's Avatar
Nuttyman54 Nuttyman54 is offline
Mentor, Tactician
AKA: Evan "Numbers" Morrison
FRC #5803 (Apex Robotics) and FRC #0971 (Spartan Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Seattle, WA/Mountain View, CA
Posts: 2,139
Nuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Nuttyman54
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Sheridan View Post
When did we trade names with the greybots?
Why are these so-called "Greybots" orange? Some questions can never be answered...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #192   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 19:54
Breadbocks Breadbocks is offline
Registered User
FRC #1002
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Breadbocks is on a distinguished road
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain View Post
1) Wait, you're telling me that you think each team should be averaging 80 on their QA in the coming weeks? Currently available data for mean QA for week 1 didn't even break HALF of that. I would be shocked if mean QA ever hit 80 before CMP.

2) While this is a true thing that does suck, 148, 3824, and other high ranking teams ranked high with <50% co-op stack conversion rate. I know our rank dropped precipitously because by the time we fixed our robot we hit a stretch of matches without co-op capability on the opposite side of the step. It's an issue we're looking to solve in two ways for our next event.
1. I'm projecting that the average will be around 80, for good teams at least, in coming qualifiers, unless there's major changes to the way scoring works. Just how large the potential points from noodles are as well as coop didn't really seem to hit until a day or two in, but now that word's out teams will know to train throwing noodles and plan around them and coop.

2. Part of why I expect matchmaking to matter a lot more is because of 1. With coop becoming a thing everyone knows to do, or at least attempt, there's more pressure on everyone else to be able to do it as well. If everybody does coop, it doesn't matter. If nobody does coop, it doesn't matter. If everybody except a few teams do coop, it's brutal on the few teams because they can't and it impacts teams that get matched against them because then they get dragged down by a significant margin, unless in the time it takes your team to grab the yellows and dump them in the middle is equal to the time it takes you to get 40 points from stacks.
Reply With Quote
  #193   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 21:46
notmattlythgoe's Avatar
notmattlythgoe notmattlythgoe is offline
Flywheel Police
AKA: Matthew Lythgoe
FRC #2363 (Triple Helix)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 1,728
notmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Breadbocks View Post
I disagree with the "Robots control their own fate" thing. This year, more than ever, you're vulnerable to bad matchmaking.

This time, you're running the risk of being shafted by the opposing alliance not doing coop. Coop points are half of the baseline 80 points that's going to be expected of every single team every qualification match in coming weeks, and you 100% cannot do the entire coop stack yourself. If you get matched against potatoes, your ranking is going to drop, and drop precipitously. Our team dropped from top 4 to what eventually became 9th because the opposing alliance never put a 4th tote on the coop stack in one match, which was brutal on our average.
I actually have the exact opposite opinion you do on matchmaking. Since the randomness of your opponents ability to stop you from scoring is taken out of the equation you are only worried about the randomness of your partners.

Previously you could get paired with 2 good robots and end up against an alliance of 3 great robots. That's a loss usually. This year if the opponent is great it doesn't matter, you can still put up the points and the fact that they did more doesn't effect you.
Reply With Quote
  #194   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2015, 23:05
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,817
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Week 1 Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuttyman54 View Post
Why are these so-called "Greybots" orange? Some questions can never be answered...
I've never been able to figure that out, though they were wearing BLACK yesterday (I was looking for orange...).


For Tom B.: I think Glenn missed an opportunity to plug their third partner, who kept very busy running smaller stacks into position. VERY busy. One medium-tall stacker (359, #2 seed and #1 pick), one RC specialist that could handle short tote stacks (1572, #1 AC), and one short-stacker (Livewire--forget their number), one set of dominating matches.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

Reply With Quote
  #195   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-03-2015, 00:11
Sperkowsky's Avatar
Sperkowsky Sperkowsky is online now
Professional Multitasker
AKA: Samuel Perkowsky
FRC #2869 (Regal Eagles)
Team Role: Leadership
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Bethpage, NY
Posts: 1,916
Sperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond reputeSperkowsky has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain View Post
As much as I would love this, it makes the rarely used but still existing "processing litter" mechanic hard to execute. I'd prefer if they go ahead and "recycle" all of the noodles tomorrow morning, though.

With regards to the numbering on robots, I can't tell you how surprised I wasn't how the numbering turned out. Bonus points to robots at Palmetto with vertical and split numbering, as well as teams just throwing on the number plate they get in the pits and rolling out to the field with them (this actually happened).

With regards to the game being hard to understand, I really don't know how the GDC expected it to be easy to understand. I know hindsight is 20/20 but to improve the understandability of the game, I would have done this:

1) Get rid of Litter
2) Divide all remaining point values by 2 (not really necessary, but it helps later)
3) Instead of gratuitously stamping the FIRST logo on every game piece even though the banners, scoring overlay, and logos on the field walls apparently aren't enough, and replace every logo with the point value stamped on to the object. Every tote has a big white "1" printed on each side and each can has each FIRST logo replaced by a big white "x3" stamped around the cylinders.
3-a) Change auto point values so we don't see the most useless auto period since 2010. Tote set is worth 6, robot set is worth 4, and stack set is 12, but the containers are x3 to your auto score for both consistency but also to encourage better auto play.
4) Replace the gold totes on the field at the start of the match with gray totes, or a different color. Keep gold totes off the field. Allow the new totes in the staging zone to be scored on the bumps. Stamp the +1 on those
5) Replace the vision targets no one uses with the "grabsomefeet" co-op logo on the cans. On each side of the step have a display that shows the current point value of the co-op stack. In eliminations, have the display show the seeds playing in the matches.
6) Maybe have displays on top of each backstop showing how many points currently sit on each backstop.
7) (Totally optional and a little crazy) Somehow get the bumps to illuminate where a scored stack is placed

If I had no clue what this game was when I saw it, I would wonder why teams are throwing scoring objects to the other alliance, why teams are delivering yellow totes to a center object in qualification matches for a lot of points but don't ever touch them in eliminations (when points matter more, right!), why a stack of 6 totes tall is not worth any more than 6 totes laying alone on the bumps, and understand exactly how much cans help.

I'm pretty sure as much as 11 years ago FIRST had scoring object values printed on the objects (Frenzy, right?). This way I could look at the field and figure out exactly what was happening. You count "1, 1, 1, 1, x3... that's 12 points!" You see the co-op display and know how much that is worth.

Post-match overlay could be really good if some thought was put into it. One idea I have at 2:30 AM is this:

1) Take a screenshot of the field before the field gets the green lights.
2) Have the first overlay take up the lower third, like the small one we see in the playoffs, while you see the field screenshot.
3) After that screen, move to a screen that shows the final score of the match as well as a sample of the standings. Have 16 slots to show at once. You get the top 10 + the 6 robots in the last match on the screen showing their rank and change arrow, QA and change arrow, Co-Op score, and Next Match. The teams not in the match are not highlighted while the ones from the match are highlighted in their alliance colors. If one of the teams from the last match are in the top 10, you show the 11th place team, 2 means you show up to 12th, and so on.

One concerning thing I have gotten out of this game so far has nothing to do with FRC the program. FRC is a product. A game like this is hard to sell as a product to potential sponsors, volunteers, media partners, schools, etc.
I agree with most of what you said but keep those vision targets we use them.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:30.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi