Go to Post And to think, a lot of students are planning parties and celebrations on their last day of school and you guys are recycling trash. - JaneYoung [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: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 16:30
Adam Y.'s Avatar
Adam Y. Adam Y. is offline
Adam Y.
no team (?????)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,979
Adam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to Adam Y.
Quote:
Stairs would be fun but teams with less resources would have a huge disadvantage. Year to year the game has to be simple for the new teams but different from the previous years to throw of the old teams.
It's not hard or expensive to build a robot that travels up stairs. With the tri-star design all you need is 12 small tires, roller chain, and some sprockets. Tank treads are a lot more complicated but still get the job done but you may need a little fancy designing to do figure out how to get the treads to ride up the stairs. Even giant wheels would get the job done like monster trucks riding on the cars. As long as the wheel's center isn't not below the obstacle then it will travel up the stairs. There is another method to travel up and over obstacles but it looks horrendously difficult to explain without a diagram. Stairs may be a little too complicated though how about pot holes.
__________________
If either a public officer or any one else saw a person attempting to cross a bridge which had been ascertained to be unsafe, and there were no time to warn him of his danger, they might seize him and turn him back without any real infringement of his liberty; for liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. -Mill

Last edited by Adam Y. : 12-04-2003 at 16:52.
Reply With Quote
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 16:58
DanL DanL is offline
Crusty Mentor
FRC #0097
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Somerville, MA
Posts: 682
DanL is just really niceDanL is just really niceDanL is just really niceDanL is just really niceDanL is just really nice
Send a message via AIM to DanL
Quote:
Originally posted by wysiswyg
It's not hard or expensive to build a robot that travels up stairs.
I've heard that WAAAAAAY to many times.... if I've learned one thing through robotics, it's that if someone tries to convince you to do something by telling you it's not that hard, you ALWAYS work to the last minute getting it done.
__________________
Dan L
Team 97 Mentor
Software Engineer, Vecna Technologies
Reply With Quote
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 18:07
Adam Y.'s Avatar
Adam Y. Adam Y. is offline
Adam Y.
no team (?????)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,979
Adam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to Adam Y.
Quote:
I've heard that WAAAAAAY to many times.... if I've learned one thing through robotics, it's that if someone tries to convince you to do something by telling you it's not that hard, you ALWAYS work to the last minute getting it done.
Meh wheels and tank treads are pretty reliable ways to get up stairs.
__________________
If either a public officer or any one else saw a person attempting to cross a bridge which had been ascertained to be unsafe, and there were no time to warn him of his danger, they might seize him and turn him back without any real infringement of his liberty; for liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. -Mill
Reply With Quote
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 18:28
Not2B's Avatar
Not2B Not2B is offline
Registered User
AKA: Brian Graham
FRC #0862 (Lightning Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Farmington Hills, Mi
Posts: 401
Not2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond reputeNot2B has a reputation beyond repute
MMmmmmm stairs

While sitting in Grand rapids at the WMR, I started to make wild predictions for next year.

And I say Stairs.

What a limit to indoor mobile robotics.... We will have to overcome. Any anything with high CGs willbe cool, since people like to watch robots fall over..... ok, not thier makers, but civilians LOVE it.
__________________
Brian Graham
Reply With Quote
  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 20:01
Ryan Foley Ryan Foley is offline
Registered User
FRC #5687 (The Outliers)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: ME
Posts: 447
Ryan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond repute
[quote]Originally posted by EvanG
Perhaps a 4 vs. 2 idea, in which 4 people are on the offense, and 2 on the defense. Half of your 8 games will be on either side.

Hmm, a very intresting idea

I like the outnumbered robot idea, although 6 bots on 1 fiel might be a bit much.
The challenge for the outnumbered alliance/ robot would have to be simple enough tht they would have a decent chance to beat the larger alliance.

Reminds me of those 1 vs 3 games from mario party for nintendo 64
__________________
Ryan

FRC #5687: The Outliers [2015-?]
FRC #1995: Fatal Error [2007-2009]
FRC #350: Timberlane Robotics [2001-2004]

FRC/FLL volunteer since 2005

Last edited by Ryan Foley : 12-04-2003 at 20:20.
Reply With Quote
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 20:11
Koci Koci is offline
Registered User
#0624 (CRyptonite)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 62
Koci is an unknown quantity at this point
I agree that having a separate offensive and defensive team is an interesting idea, although i think 4 vs. 2 would be too complicated to watch with 6 robots on the field. Maybe a 2 vs. 2 or a 2 vs. 1 depending on the game. This would force teams to play the game as prescribed, and completely eliminate any potential collusion. It mimics baseball in a way, forcing robots to be able to play 2 completely different positions. If this occurred, we may finally see more robots that have parts to switch on and off their robots, much like in the lego league.

While bringing up collusion, I just want to make sure that the people who posted earlier understand that collusion is NOT inherent to the 2 vs. 2 style of gameplay, only the scoring system that has been used the past two years. I do realize to continue that further would be getting off topic, so I will leave it at that.
__________________
2001 Highest Ranking Rookie at Lone Star Regional
2002 Imagery Award at Lone Star Regional
2003 Delphi's Driving Tomorrow's Technology Award at Arizona Regional
2003 Delphi's Driving Tomorrow's Technology Award at Lone Star Regional
Reply With Quote
  #22   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 20:12
Duke 13370's Avatar
Duke 13370 Duke 13370 is offline
C is for cookie...
#0862 (Team Lightning)
Team Role: Webmaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Plymouth, MI
Posts: 215
Duke 13370 will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to Duke 13370
You keep saying "change the alliance setup," but i'm suprised no one's ever thought about a 1 on 3 game.

Mabye like this: one end of the feild is the scoring zone for the one robot and the others have to stop it from getting there. have some special terrain of sorts (Make it so the lone robot can have 4+ ways of getting up to the scoring sone (stairs, etc.)). Add in some other ways of scoring, mabye moving a large cube onto one end of the feild or something. The team of 3 get the number of second it took the other robot to sit fully on the end for a score, and have the one robot get 120 - his time in secs. for a score and voila. game=designed.

It's be interesting because one match you may be a defender, and next time, you could be on the offense.

Finals with that would be a little odd, though.

Sorry, I'm just rambling a bit.
__________________
---Lightning Robotics!---
Reply With Quote
  #23   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 20:49
Yan Wang's Avatar
Yan Wang Yan Wang is offline
Ithaca is Gorges
AKA: John Wayne
FRC #0639 (Code Red Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 1,910
Yan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud of
Send a message via ICQ to Yan Wang Send a message via AIM to Yan Wang Send a message via MSN to Yan Wang Send a message via Yahoo to Yan Wang
The only changes that need to be made is that FIRST needs to take 20-50 FIRST vets and have them sit in a room to discuss a game plan that FIRST proposes.

This years game was great. It involved programming/electronics more yet still required the drive team to do a lot.

However, the problem was that the effects the game rules would have on robot design were not carefully thought out. Being on top was worth too much and we found out that destruction is easier than creation.

By not going through these 'little' things, the game turned into a brawl more often than an elegant match of stacking. Though the game is entitled stack attack, the whole section in the rules about stacks was almost not needed at all because the other sections clearly showed to certain designers that winning didn't require stacking.

My proposal stands that FIRST makes an elegant game. Then they get veterans of the game, engineers, etc to discuss for an extended (perhaps 1-2 weeks) the effects on design and game outcome if the rules were implemented and how to revise it to make it more balanced.

However, my one change would be 1v1 matches. Then robots are judged by how good they are and not whether the alliance partner can move. This does not seem practical with the 50+ teams at some regionals, but I would trade my 8 qualifying matches for 4 with just our robot against another.
__________________
Code Red Robotics Team 639 Alumnus | www.team639.org
<Patrician|Away> what does your robot do, sam
<bovril> it collects data about the surrounding environment, then discards it and drives into walls
Reply With Quote
  #24   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 21:27
sevisehda's Avatar
sevisehda sevisehda is offline
Registered User
#0666
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 215
sevisehda is an unknown quantity at this point
Send a message via AIM to sevisehda
The playing feild has to be very basic and cheap, teams used to complain because fields cost too much and were impossible to be temporary. If you look at the past 4 years the fields have been about the same size, the perimiter railings very similar and the player stations virtually identicle. Having huge features is something avoided, like the hills they had a long time ago. 6 bots a a field would be fun but very crowded. This year looked crowded because the crates took up a good amount of room as well. I really can't see a big vs small aliiance because it would lead to enourmous damage to bots. The defender would just be a tank, the majority of teams would go modular and remove manipulators and add rams. Plus on a 3 vs 1 match one offenense could just pin the defender and the other 2 offense would have a field day.

The 3 on3 idea would be nice but you can still have some fun with it. What if you could 'tag' the third bot and take your bot out of play and put theres in. This could be as simple as 3 bots on the field for each team, 2 start activated a third is dead, every team is equiped with a 2001esk kill switch, when 1 of the active teams killed there bot the 3rd bot would activate. Or to make it more complex have an area dedicated to this 'tag'. This would give you the benefit of 6 bots but since only 4 could move it would be less 'busy' out there. Also if a bot were to throw a chain, tip over, or otherwise die you would have imediate backup (the reason alliance have always had the extra bot).

I enjoyed the freedome FIRST gave us there in the starting positions and hope its carried to next year. I'm not a fan of humans on the field to start, I prefer the oldschool human plays during the match.

As for fun thing to manipulate, noodles(the foam pool toys) would be great. Maybe road cones.

As for an obstacle, the rollers they have at factories and warehouses to slide boxes on. The passive ones not the powered. They would be fairly cheap and depending on there size also mobile. Plus they would be a major challange to get over.
Reply With Quote
  #25   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 22:12
Adam Y.'s Avatar
Adam Y. Adam Y. is offline
Adam Y.
no team (?????)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,979
Adam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to Adam Y.
Quote:
As for an obstacle, the rollers they have at factories and warehouses to slide boxes on. The passive ones not the powered. They would be fairly cheap and depending on there size also mobile. Plus they would be a major challange to get over
Yeah they would be nice obstacles if you wanted no one to get over them. The car industry uses passive rollers to test there cars on without having them move. The robots would be spinning there wheels in vain.

Quote:
The playing feild has to be very basic and cheap, teams used to complain because fields cost too much and were impossible to be temporary.
What stairs are cheap especially if your in a two story school. Your bound to find something that resembles staris without having to build them.
__________________
If either a public officer or any one else saw a person attempting to cross a bridge which had been ascertained to be unsafe, and there were no time to warn him of his danger, they might seize him and turn him back without any real infringement of his liberty; for liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. -Mill
Reply With Quote
  #26   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2003, 23:30
Caleb Fulton's Avatar
Caleb Fulton Caleb Fulton is offline
Z = Z^2 + C ......WHEEEE!
AKA: aXvXiA
#0461 (West Side Boiler Invasion)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: West Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 205
Caleb Fulton has a spectacular aura aboutCaleb Fulton has a spectacular aura aboutCaleb Fulton has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to Caleb Fulton
Capture the flag with 1/2 the time being autonomous mode!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 00:36
DanL DanL is offline
Crusty Mentor
FRC #0097
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Somerville, MA
Posts: 682
DanL is just really niceDanL is just really niceDanL is just really niceDanL is just really niceDanL is just really nice
Send a message via AIM to DanL
Few more comments...

About the unbalanced team idea - it seems like something cool, but I don't know if it would work.

2 vs 1 means only 3 'bots per round and at the bigger regionals, that would result in a lot less matches played. Personally, I'd rather have more matches - if we spend 6 hard weeks, I'd want to play with the bot as much as possible.

3 vs 1 I think is the worse. First, it would be a bit TOO unbalanced unless the defending bot had a REALLY big advantage. Then there's the fact that two offensive 'bots could easily pin the lone defending bot, letting the third offensive bot have a field day. There's also the fact that if the defender fails for some reason, not two but THREE teams get to do whatever they want and have pretty much total control over the rest of the match (in the past two years, two teams only got to do what they wanted if two other teams failed). This could lead to some unfair advantages.

3 vs 2 I think is the best compromise on all these issues, except for the fact that it might be a bit crowded. But then again - like it was mentioned before, the field this year only seemed crowded because of all the boxes. I'm not sure what effect the introduction of a 5th bot would have on overall gameplay, but I think this would be the best way. However, the IFI controller would have to be tweaked to allow more than four competition channels (atleast I think it has only four competition channels this year).

Finally, 6 bots or more I think is a bit too many bots on the field at one time.

One also has to consider if, say, it was 3 vs 2, would the size of the final alliances be upped to four?

Long story short, although I like the idea of unbalanced alliances as something new, well, I thought this year's game would be something fun, but if we would have thought hard about it, we would have realized it was nothing more than a pushing war.
===========

And about the veterans getting together to discuss the game... part of the balance is the fact that ALL teams find out the rules at the same time. Maybe I misunderstood you, but I wouldn't be a big fan of the more expierienced teams getting even a 1-week's head start on the design just because they're more expierienced (actually, ESPECIALLY because they're more expierienced).
__________________
Dan L
Team 97 Mentor
Software Engineer, Vecna Technologies

Last edited by DanL : 13-04-2003 at 00:39.
Reply With Quote
  #28   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 01:36
Jeff_Rice's Avatar
Jeff_Rice Jeff_Rice is offline
ElementisRegamusProelium
#1359
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Linn County
Posts: 283
Jeff_Rice will become famous soon enoughJeff_Rice will become famous soon enough
My idea-
A game with four robots but-
there are no official alliances. There are two sections.
Winning section teams get their score multiplied by 1/50 of the opposite section's score. A robot must be in a section for that section to have a score (no 4 on 0)This is cool because you can win by losing and lose by winning(or win by winning and lose by losing). Points would need to be more difficult to undo, this year it was just too easy to descore.

Another thing that would be awesome- you might see three on ones. Or shifting alliances.
__________________
"He said my name is Private Andrew Malone
If you're reading this then I didn't make it home
But for every dream that's shattered another one comes true
This car was once a dream of mine now it belongs to you
And though you may take her and make her your own
You'll always be riding with Private Malone" David Ball, "Private Malone"

Last edited by Jeff_Rice : 13-04-2003 at 01:39.
Reply With Quote
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 01:39
Winged Globe Winged Globe is offline
Don't Panic
AKA: Xiao-Yu Fu
FRC #0481 (The Hitchhikers)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: San Pablo, CA
Posts: 97
Winged Globe is a glorious beacon of lightWinged Globe is a glorious beacon of lightWinged Globe is a glorious beacon of lightWinged Globe is a glorious beacon of lightWinged Globe is a glorious beacon of lightWinged Globe is a glorious beacon of light
Send a message via AIM to Winged Globe
Quote:
Originally posted by Caleb Fulton
Capture the flag with 1/2 the time being autonomous mode!
That would be... extremely challenging. It would require a much greater focus on sensors and some pretty complex AI. Now, I'd love some (or a lot) of better sensors and the programmer inside of me would love a challenge (although I'd definitely want something better than PBASIC... gah...), but a game such as this would be difficult for a rookie team that doesn't know much about programming. That's why I doubt autonomous would be that long, although it may get more complex to promote sensor use. It will probably still come at the beginning of the game, and can still decide a major part of it.

Also, earlier there was discussion about the big points given to getting the goals or getting on top of the ramp and the relatively few points given to ball manipulation or stacking. I'm pretty sure that this is so because FIRST doesn't want to leave teams out. After all, building a robot is *not* easy. Some teams, rookie and veteran alike, may be short of funds, or time, or mentors, or luck, and the best they can come up with is a box on wheels (still a marvelous accomplishment). FIRST doesn't want to exclude them after they paid upward of $5000 to enter. Hence, a large portion of the points can be accrued by a simple box on wheels, either by pushing goals into position or plowing onto the top of the ramp, so they aren't left out of the experience. It promotes the entrance of rookie teams and gives even them a chance to win.

I think specialized functions could be better promoted if they lower the worth of KotH-type points by a little (15/20 instead of 25). Even if they don't, specialized bots can still get picked as an alliance partner for elimination rounds or win a technical award. And beyond that, remember the goal of FIRST is not just to build robots, but to build people and ideas. Sure, it'd be great to win, but I would still feel awesome if I know my team worked as hard as it could to make something cool. And if you really did that well, I'm betting that you would be recognized at least by the other teams at your regional, if not also by people here on CD.

And now that I've gone sufficiently off topic, I'll be quiet and return you to your regularly scheduled game predictions .
Reply With Quote
  #30   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 17:50
AlbertW's Avatar
AlbertW AlbertW is offline
harker robotics :. 1072
AKA: Aonic
#1072 (Harker Robotics)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 323
AlbertW is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to AlbertW
Quote:
Originally posted by SuperDanman

One also has to consider if, say, it was 3 vs 2, would the size of the final alliances be upped to four?
at sacramento this year there were only 27 teams. if there were 8 alliances of 4, and there were only 27 teams, the last 5 teams would only have three teams on them.

not that that's BAD, necessarily, but... whatever. haha.
__________________

We were the first seeded first-year team at a first-year FIRST regional.
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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2002 game prediction contest!!! Ken Leung Rumor Mill 41 31-12-2007 18:18
2004 Game, and LEGO similarities... Sachiel7 Rumor Mill 7 15-09-2003 20:43
pic: 2004 Game Revealed! CD47-Bot Extra Discussion 28 12-09-2003 12:08
What changes to this year's game...? DougHogg General Forum 16 20-04-2003 15:35
Ok, so YOU design the 2003 game... dlavery General Forum 157 07-01-2003 23:55


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:04.

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