FIRST 4 year game theme cycle theory

[roddonfire]

The next year should be an "unusual" game. A water game would be pretty unusual? Water game 2017 confirmed!

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by roddonfire

The next year should be an "unusual" game. A water game would be pretty unusual? Water game 2017 confirmed!

Actually, by unusual (or, in my own word, Bizzaro) I was thinking of something more like this, super-sized.

[TheBoulderite]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Actually, by unusual (or, in my own word, Bizzaro) I was thinking of something more like this, super-sized.

That'd be an interesting game. Sort of like 2011, but the pieces are shaped differently and you have to score them in the right holes for points.

[Daniel4547]

Originally Posted by TheBoulderite

That'd be an interesting game. Sort of like 2011, but the pieces are shaped differently and you have to score them in the right holes for points.

But they would double your alliance's score if you put the square peg in the round hole.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Daniel4547

But they would double your alliance's score if you put the square peg in the round hole.

Would we get a bonus for putting the square peg in the round hole during build? We have a gift for that.

[nuclearnerd]

I just played a game of "Ladder Toss" this weekend for the first time, and my first thought was how neat "Bolas" would be as game pieces

[6101 Robert]

Another user also noticed a correlation between the Vex Robotics Competition and FRC. Going back to 2014, each competition has shared fundamental elements. The VRC game of 2016-2017 involves throwing "stars" (aka jumbo-sized board game jacks) and inflated cubes across the field. This confirms your "unusual object" prediction.

[Hitchhiker 42]

On the other hand, there is a thing called confirmation bias. To some extent, I think we're all trying to stretch next year's game based on patterns that might not actually exist.

[jweston]

I saw it as a 2 year pattern of fine motor control vs gross motor control. It makes sense to use a ball with gross motor control since it works best with a highly symmetric object. Fine motor control allows for much more variety in game pieces and objective.

The observation of the 3 year climbing cycle is interesting. I hadn't noticed that but it appeara to hold so far.

[philso]

Originally Posted by Tom Ore

Lawn Gnome

2013 would probably love this

Originally Posted by Roboshant

Rugby balls?

This might give the Aussie teams an unfair advantage

Originally Posted by jweston

I saw it as a 2 year pattern of fine motor control vs gross motor control. It makes sense to use a ball with gross motor control since it works best with a highly symmetric object. Fine motor control allows for much more variety in game pieces and objective.

The observation of the 3 year climbing cycle is interesting. I hadn't noticed that but it appeara to hold so far.

In terms of education, these cycles are a good thing, giving team members a wider exposure to different kinds of problems.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Hitchhiker 42

On the other hand, there is a thing called confirmation bias. To some extent, I think we're all trying to stretch next year's game based on patterns that might not actually exist.

I certainly do not mean to question/contradict the claims from FIRST HQ that there is no pre-determined pattern. However, the ball-placement-ball-bizarro pattern has held for nearly five cycles (or a bit over five cycles if you allow that at the time, Toroid Terror was a bizarro thing) and is due for bizarro. Since its first appearance in 2004, the "robot pullup" postgame has appeared every third year for five appearances. Every even year has had solid-surface balls as the main game piece going back to 1992, and since the first introduction of a game piece which was not a solid surface ball in 1997, only one year had solid-surface-balls as the game piece, and it was the one and (so far) only non-competitive 4v0 2001 Diabolical Dynamics.

I believe that these patterns are examples of "emergent behavior". Emergent behavior in the natural world includes such things as atoms, molecules, crystals, convection, turbulence, life, tropical storm systems, the ENSO (El-Nino Southern Oscillation), tectonic plates, planets, stars, galaxies, and galactic clusters. None of these are obvious from the fairly simple laws of physics, but they all result from them. Likewise, I believe that the patterns we see are the result of the GDC's general desire to keep the challenges changing from one year to the next, and to keep teams (particularly students) from seeing a problem that they saw recently.

On the matter of "obstructions", it appears that the GDC treats this as a secondary (or tertiary) consideration. Still, it does appear that they try to not do the same thing over and over.

Looking at all of this, and making some SWAGs (Scientific Wild A$$ Guesses) as to how the patterns will continue, here's my call:

Bizarro game: 85+%. That is, there will be some completely new attribute to the 2017 game that will make many/most teams ask "How the *!$% do we do that?" on kickoff day. Previous examples have included Frisbees (and a multi-stage climb), regolith, tetras, 4V0, and (back in 1997) the first-ever non-ball game pieces.
Solid-surface Ball game: < 15%. The last odd-year solid-surface ball game was 2001. 'Tain't likely, Fibber!'
Robot-pullup endgame: < 20%. We just did this.


As far as the "theme" of the game, I definitely expect one. FIRST has done all of the same things as last year (partner with Disney, and have a "teaser" rather than a "game hint"). I expect that we will not have a game hint (which always were clues to the NAME of the game, not its content), but a teaser in which we will be supplied with the game theme and name, but nothing clear as to what will be required to play the game.

On that last point, the only element of the 2016 game hint video that might have been a clue to the game dymanics was the darkening of the sky and the brightening of the lights on the robot warrior. The value of robot-mounted cameras was certainly significant, but not as strong as many of the predictions, which would have had the robots working inside a tower or other construction, completely out of sight of the drivers. The obstructions to vision, bad as they were, were not as bad as the CD predictions.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

I expect that we will not have a game hint (which always were clues to the NAME of the game, not its content), but a teaser in which we will be supplied with the game theme and name, but nothing clear as to what will be required to play the game.

I agree on the teaser being likely.

But I strongly disagree on the game hint being a clue to the name of the game and not the content. Very, very strongly. I'll go into detail about one hint in particular, with more on request.

For example, 2006's hint, if read correctly, detailed much about the game itself, and how it played. "A game piece obsessed with a shovel's show" was the second line--if you caught that "spade" is a synonym for "shovel", and David Spade is known for the show "Just Shoot Me", the hint indicated something being shot. (Which was a first for game pieces.) The other two lines revealed something about the game as well--but that second line was figured out within about a day of hint release. (Not that anybody knew that until Kickoff.)

Want me to go on in more detail? Of the rest since '03 (inclusive), only 3 were aimed primarily at the game name, and two of those included possible content clues. Three I can't recall the hints ('12, '13, '15); the rest were targeted at game content--with one exception, '08 #3, being the scrambled password to the Game Manual (and even that had a slight hint to the gameplay).

Now, with the trailers being the new normal, I suspect that name and theme will be the primary conveyances. And I do hope that "New Dozer" returns in all of them...

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by EricH

But I strongly disagree on the game hint being a clue to the name of the game and not the content.

I should have said recently. I have only been aware of the game hints for 2014 onward as they happened, and had only read about two older ones; I guess that other years didn't get any catchy spotlight posts:

• 2015: Hint video - change is coming, recycle of game manual. The setting was an FRC arena, but it was generic (gray carpet, IIRC), not showing any game-specific elements.
• 2014: Numeric sequences of birthdates and records for assists in several sports. The thing they called an assist in AA was not like an assist in any of the sports referenced.
• 2011: Two hints:
  • Photo of Little Eva, modified to fool TinEye. Her biggest hit was Locomotion.
  • Low-res image of the FIRST logo.
• 2009: Photo of lunar moth.

Originally Posted by EricH

And I do hope that "New Dozer" returns in all of them...

+1

[EricH]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

• 2009: Photo of lunar moth.

I really don't know where that one's coming from. 'Twas an Opah, or moonfish. Theme hint.

And for 2011, you should know that poles were a key part of the game (there was a column in Hint #1), and the scoring pieces were FIRST logo pieces. Theme/gameplay hints.

On further recollection, 2012's hint was a list of donated parts for fields from one supplier. Collective "huh?", not useful for game name, theme, or play.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by EricH

I really don't know where that one's coming from. 'Twas an Opah, or moonfish. Theme hint.

And for 2011, you should know that poles were a key part of the game (there was a column in Hint #1), and the scoring pieces were FIRST logo pieces. Theme/gameplay hints.

On further recollection, 2012's hint was a list of donated parts for fields from one supplier. Collective "huh?", not useful for game name, theme, or play.

And did any of these tell you anything about the game? Honestly?