Which game would be most epic if replayed with 2016 tech and rules?

[Ty Tremblay]

Which of the previous FRC games (2001 - present) would be changed the most with 2016 tech and rules? Would the game be broken, better, worse?

This topic came up within GameSense earlier today and I'd like to see what CD has to say about it. For example, I'd really like to see 2006 played with 2016's motor selections, but I think it would be completely broken with no ball velocity limit. Defense would be much heavier with modern bumpers, but goal tracking would be much easier with today's cameras and processing power.

What do you think?

[pandamonium]

Over the past decade not only has technology improved but teams have improved as well. 2016 was basically a way harder version of 06 and 12 so we kind of have seen it replayed already. I would like to see 05 replayed with out any rules changes and 07 replayed today perhaps with slight rules changes to endgame like a bonus for lifting a robot 3ft. Very few teams were able to execute high scoring autonomous modes back then.

[Roboshant]

I think if teams were allowed to have cameras on board their robot for better vision for the drivers, 2010 would have been way different. Especially with the 469 robot that year. Teams with cameras might have been able to go to the side that 469 was going to shoot in advance, rather than guessing the side. This could have taken away from their dominance that year.


I am actually not sure if cameras were allowed, but one of our mentors who drove for 217 in 2010 said they weren't. He played many hours of defense against 469, and was talking about some strategies he used to defend against them.

[jtrv]

I'm unsure about 2016, but the transport configuration & size limits (or lack thereof) rules for 2015 would be pretty hilarious for the 2013-14 games

[kaliken]

Originally Posted by Roboshant

I think if teams were allowed to have cameras on board their robot for better vision for the drivers, 2010 would have been way different. Especially with the 469 robot that year. Teams with cameras might have been able to go to the side that 469 was going to shoot in advance, rather than guessing the side. This could have taken away from their dominance that year.


I am actually not sure if cameras were allowed, but one of our mentors who drove for 217 in 2010 said they weren't. He played many hours of defense against 469, and was talking about some strategies he used to defend against them.

Cameras were allowed in 2010... we had one and it was mounted down to see balls that were blocked by the ramps/bumps. It was vital to finding balls that needed to be cleared out in stopping the dreaded loop..


if I was to replay one I would say 2005. The auto period nobody could do a cap of the green tetra. Nowadays we would see 2x caps.

[Mitchell1714]

I think Ultimate Ascent would easily be the most broken game. 2013 was a much more technically challenging game than most others. The big challenges of 2013 were figuring how to pick up the disks, building a shooter for a game element we had never seen before and climbing. All three of those tasks could be easily figured out with the resources available today. If Ultimate Ascent were played today, there would be hundreds of Cheesy Poofs PTO climbers and King Rec style full court shooters.

The scoring would be immense.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I-IrVbsl_K8
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pPvZPnkMWC4

[Billfred]

A replay of Aim High (2006) with modern rules would be interesting. On the one hand, the quality and quantity of motors available to teams this year is ab-so-freaking-lutely ridiculous compared to the automotive-heavy lineup of the day. 775pro, Mini CIM, BAG, six CIMs, BaneBots 775--you'd have no trouble maxing out the muzzle velocity limit or in feeding balls to the shooter.

On the other hand, the frame perimeter has shrunk appreciably (28x38 was 132" vs. 120" this year). That's going to cut into ball capacity, meaning teams would have to stay more mobile to reload.

-----------------------------------

I'd also like to see 2002 replayed, under the same logic. That was a year for bonkers drive systems, but could modern firepower outdo file cards?

[efoote868]

My team in 2007 could have benefited from more processing power. These days using a control loop on the robot is pretty trivial (even if the students have vague ideas of what things are doing).

Add in some vision feedback for the driver and the game would have played differently, IMHO.

[AllenGregoryIV]

I think it's 2008 for sure. Having unlimited 775pros and MiniCIMs in a game that required driving very fast and launching a very heavy object would be a game changer.

In 2008 you basically only had 2 Fisherprice motors, 2 RS-550 Motors, & 4 CIM motors.

The motor rules alone would make this game so much more fun to watch.

[Koko Ed]

I would love to see FIRST Frenzy: Raising the Bar from 2004 retooled for modern play (though I'm not sure how they'd fit six robots on the field when it was tight for four). Ii would love to see the autonomous tweaked (releasing the balls early is not a reason to bother with autonomous) and climbing points should be minimized a bit but it was a really cool game (the robots never looked more athletic playing this game).

[Ty Tremblay]

Originally Posted by Billfred

I'd also like to see 2002 replayed, under the same logic. That was a year for bonkers drive systems, but could modern firepower outdo file cards?

71 couldn't have existed with current rules in the 2002 game. Their file card drive would have been illegal due to metal being used for traction. Which robot would have been next in line to dominate?

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Ty Tremblay

71 couldn't have existed with current rules in the 2002 game. Their file card drive would have been illegal due to metal being used for traction. Which robot would have been next in line to dominate?

Probably 60 or 180.

[troy_dietz]

Originally Posted by Ty Tremblay

71 couldn't have existed with current rules in the 2002 game. Their file card drive would have been illegal due to metal being used for traction.

Not just metal, anything that could be considered attaching.
G12: The following actions are prohibited with regards to interaction with ARENA elements... C. Attaching to (including the use of hook-and-loop tape against the FIELD carpet)

[EricH]

Originally Posted by troy_dietz

Not just metal, anything that could be considered attaching.
G12: The following actions are prohibited with regards to interaction with ARENA elements... C. Attaching to (including the use of hook-and-loop tape against the FIELD carpet)

71's '02 robot--and the many others that used metal that year, including 330--are the reason for that rule. Now, the tread-covered floor-pushing plates would probably be just fine. Many teams used those, too.

If '02 was played again, the primary concern I'd have would be damage to the floor under the carpet. I've seen robots go right through the carpet with just their drivetrain. Now imagine a pushing war every single match... Some slight rules changes (say, using Lunacy wheels as the drive system ) might be necessary.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by Billfred

A replay of Aim High (2006) with modern rules would be interesting. On the one hand, the quality and quantity of motors available to teams this year is ab-so-freaking-lutely ridiculous compared to the automotive-heavy lineup of the day. 775pro, Mini CIM, BAG, six CIMs, BaneBots 775--you'd have no trouble maxing out the muzzle velocity limit or in feeding balls to the shooter.

I mean, we basically played 2006 again in 2012 and 2013. If 2006 was 100% recycled again I bet the muzzle velocity rule would go away, as it was probably an artifact of the fact it was the first shooting game of the modern era.

When is FIRST Frenzy (2004) going to get its long overdue repeat?! It's time we raise the bar.