So what do you think of the new game?

[Jillian B.]

I was really wanting more hanging, more climbing stairs, but hey, it's not another Stack Attack, so I'm happy.

I guess I agree with some above me. The game is going to have to grow on me before I'm enthralled with it.

Good Luck Everyone!

~ Jill

[Cyberguy34000]

Overall this year's game is going to be a very different from previous years. Because you can pretty much put most designs into 2 different categories, defence and tetra capper (I don't think many teams will be just ferrying Tetras), the variety in designs will certainly be quite a bit smaller. Many of the robots will begin to look a like after a while. But then again, the strategy element is quite a bit more challenging. It shifts the main focus of the game from how you design the robot to how you play the game. It was very interesting making a map of the course and coming up with possible strategies for winning.

Overall, I think that this year's game will be a welcome challenge.

Now I wonder how this year will affect next year's game ...

[Chris Reynolds]

Alright... As a "semi-rookie" i have not fully participated in a FIRST competition, but, I have to say that i am already FLOWING with ideas as to what our team can do. This years game does indeed lack the number of game elements that were used in previous years, but, the 3-robot alliance will be quite interesting... Good luck everybody. Hope to see some of you at the Mid-West regional!

~Chris

[Ken Loyd]

Does anyone think they can find a bonus tetra, pick it up, and place it on the center goal in 15 seconds?

Ken

[generalbrando]

I think they've done an excellent job on the game as they did last year, except this time they've given us yet another completely new challenge...

My instant reaction to the game convinces me it'll be great. I was excited, but I winced in pain - playing with those tetras will be challenging because it's going to be so important. But the challenge is a huge positive. I can't wait to see what people come up with to manipulate them.

As a side note, I'd like to use this post to also say that I'm thrilled with FIRST's improvements this year, especially in the kit. Going through the kit was like Christmas morning. Every little package I opened held more and more cool stuff. And this new drive train and chassis ... I'm thinking we're all going to see a whole new level of competition this year - no more will we see so many crippled robots out there! (hey, we were one of them, so no offense!)

[Joshua May]

I must admit, I didn't entirely like the game when it was first unveiled due to the simplicity. However, its starting to grow on me thanks to the great strategy possibilities.

[Mikey229]

I was thinking the same thing. Because in the time it takes you to find the tetra find the goal raise it up and put it on. I dont know how fast the cameras work yet but i was thinking 3-4 seconds to find the one tetra, 4 seconds to drive over and pick it up,3-4 seconds to find goal then a few to put it on top. im sure its possible or they wouldnt of put it in the game.(It might be like 1-2 seconds to find the tetras im not sure)

[sabrina752]

Def. involves good strategy... I look forward to it all.

[Rabbit222]

This is going to be tough. All arm operators: GET CRACKIN'!!!!!!

[geeknerd99]

My team has come to the conclusion that it all boils down to the tetras capped per 30 seconds and where those tetras go.

So, it's really like this year's challenge is all about speed and efficiency.

[blueWarrior]

I agree with everything everybody said above. There isn't that much room for scoring/elements. It will basically come down to:

a. How fast you can stack your tetras, at our first design planning meeting (lol we got going early) it looks like even stacking on the central goal might prove to be a challenge.
b. The last 15-20 seconds are going to be the determining factors of the game.
c. How fast your team can strategize on the spot.

Personally I'm quite depressed with the game, maybe it's because today was a long day I'm sure ideas will come soon. lol

[wafflesk]

Well, im my opion i realyl dont like the game. Maybe because im a etern and have seen many challegnes but i just dont like the aspect of having only one or maybe two wyas to realyl solver this challenge. I liked it last year where there were tons of differet things you could do. This year it seems like eveyrones gona be just doing the same thing and i think thyat takes away something from FIRST. I rememberl asty ear Dean saying sometihng about how there are always more then one way to solver a problem. Ive also heard countless times how its great to see 1000s of different soltuinos to one problem. This year it takes that away. Its becoming less enginerring and more about strategey. I liked bulding our own motor mounts and chasis. It may have been a lot of work but it was worth it. I dont know. Maybe this years challenge will grow on me.

[KimT]

This is my third year in FIRST, and I would actually say I'm THRILLED with the game, and here's why:

1. I still remember the ridiculously complicated strategies we all put into Stack Attack, only to discover that stacks were SO easy to knock over that the game mostly came down to the best push bots and the occasional lucky stack. It was fun, but there was so little motivation to be good at stacking, so there were a lot of technical wonders we never saw the best of.

2. Raising the Bar ran into some similar difficulties (though not nearly so often) with the 2X balls, but mainly big point incentives like hanging often made collecting balls MUCH less important.

3. What I like about this game, is that every point will count, especially with six bots on the field, and the highest extra score being ten. I would not be surprised if matches are won on the efficiency of a team in simply placing tetra-hedrons under goals.

4. This game will require excellent strategy and tactics. Drivers and coaches will have to work together.

5. Lastly, (and this is a big deal for our team, though maybe not for others) there is a TON of incentive to be an incredibly reliable robot. There aren't a thousand different tasks to split our attention. Our team may actually build a stable, sturdy robot this year.

I know people are disappointed by the appearance of simplicity, but I can GUARANTEE that this game will give you a run for your money. It focuses on different aspects of building than any previous game I am familiar with, but that won't make it any less challenging.

Also! I think it will actually be super exciting for audiences to watch - like live tic-tac-toe on caffeine! A bunch of matches are going to come down to the buzzer and the last moment cap.

[AnonymousMan]

Well, before I start, I just want to let you all know how much I respect the brilliance and amazing engineering I see on a daily basis from this organization. So, I'm not going to sugar coat this forum; I'm going to be brutally honest. As such, I've gone as anonymous as I can.

So, to be frank, and to state my point: This game is not only a severe disappointment; it is a waste of the money I worked hard to raise.
his game lacks several crucial elements of a "good" US FIRST challenge. I define good as intriguing and challenging for the players, allowing them to reap the reward of their hard work; and as enjoyable for the spectators, who want to watch interesting high school students express themselves through intelligence and engineering. The main element it lacks, from the definition of "good", is engineering value. As was shown in the video, and was highlighted by the human robot explanation, each and every robot is the same, more or less. Like Woody said: "this one has better vision, but this one has better speed. This one has TWO manipulators, but poor eyesight. ..."

Confining the brilliant roboticists and engineers of FIRST, perhaps even those who have been around for years, to construct the SAME robot that a rookie team / inexperienced engineer to create, is not only a disservice to FIRST engineers, but is a form of COMMUNISM. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this game is a game of equality. Each robot is the same, and each robot should perform the same. Sure, "efficiency" is a factor, but, quite frankly, making my robot slightly better than yours is not what drives me; it's not what FIRST is about. I want to make a robot that is different from yours, better through uniqueness, not simply through a slightly different arm design. Some examples of this are: the team that could move left and right on the bar last year, the team that turned the Stack Attack ramp into a steeper ramp, the team that knocked over the entire wall of boxes within 2 secs with a giant arm in Stack Attack. Those are unique FIRST solutions, and some that are UNAVAILABLE this year.

This year, there is only solution. Each robot must have the same ability, to pick up Tetra's, and place them on cones. Every robot is the same, and the only thing that changes is a team's strategy per game: attack, defend, create rows, etc. That is BORING: no spectator wants to see the same thing over and over again; no self-respecting engineer wants to recreate something that is already been made.

What pisses me off the most this year is the price increase. That extra $1000 went to waste, as far as I'm concerned. Sure we got cooler parts, cameras, more motors, better electronics, but they mean nothing. This year, they spent more time on making a better kit than they did on making a better game.

Well, at this point, you should know how I feel on this game. FIRST really let down it's core group of kids: young engineers who like to tinker, create, design, and to solve problems with beautiful solutions, to learn and to "earn" their way to the top. It is most certainly not brand new rookie teams, without previous experience or knowledge of any hand tools, electronics or programming. It seems that this year, the game has been dumbed down to an extreme.


FIRST: you disappoint me. I expected better from you.


Now, with the majority of my argument/rant over, I want to encourage any remaining readers to respond to this: tell me why this game is a true FIRST game, tell me how there is more than one solution, tell me how this is more than a one-dimensional game. Tell me why this game doesn't suck.

[Petey]

Frankly, I'm a bit disappointed.

Sure, the tetras bring in some new spice, but, fundamentally, this game is "stack attack" with a tic-tac-toe twist thrown in.

The 3vs3 thing will, I think, piss more people off in the end, because, with the same size field, your robots are going to be crunching into each other.

Not to mention the ramifications this is going to have on scoring. The discrepencies between the high ranked and low ranked teams will win, and it is even less likely that a deserving team will go to the finals. After all, one great team might be able to carry a two person alliance, but a three person alliance? Pish.

The human player interaction is abysmal. As a human player from last year--and as an athlete--I think it's a joke. Last year had a perfect meld between machine and person. This year, we have human players who are nothing more than glorified switches. Their job, literally, could be done by a trained monkey.

I understand why Dean, Woody, and the rest of the FIRST crew don't like athletes. For one, they're all nerds. Today was the first day I've seen Dean without his SEGWAY for a long time. For another thing, they are perfectly right in criticizing the disproportionate amount of influence and demagoguery that our atheletes weild among children today.

This is no excuse to cut athletics from the program, though. It is impossible to create the ubermensch Dean seems to have in mind while ignoring the body. Would it be so hard to involve a simple throwing variable? Last year was fun and dynamic. There were buzzer-beating shots!

What would I have liked to see?

A) If we had more alliance partners, increase the field size! Go to a hex shaped field.
B) Keep a human player role that required more skill than simply walking and having a certain weight.

Anyone else agree with me?

--Petey