[Official 2006 Game Design] Game Elements and Subtasks

[sirbleedsalot]

I know I have posted this before, but putting the electronic id tags (like what is found on high priced items in stores) on the scoring objects, and then placing the detectors on goal posts. It would be easy to create a game like soccer that would be scored in real time. I know I am not the best at explaining things so I understand confusion.

[Andrew Rudolph]

Originally Posted by sirbleedsalot

I know I have posted this before, but putting the electronic id tags (like what is found on high priced items in stores) on the scoring objects, and then placing the detectors on goal posts. It would be easy to create a game like soccer that would be scored in real time. I know I am not the best at explaining things so I understand confusion.

I think it would be really neat, this goes along with autonomous and sensors, but if whatever scoring element we had wasnt colored. Then Usign RFID teams had to identify if the scoring object counted for them.

I.e. All the tetras were white this year with RFID chips installed in them. Then scattered about the feild. Teams would have to go pick them up to see if they counted for thier alliance. THAT would be awesome!

[sanddrag]

Remember how in 2004 the bar could be raised or lowered with a drill put into the side of the platform? While it was rarely used, I think it was pretty neat.

What if there was something similar where robots could drive over and do that. Like there would be a hex shaped receptacle in the field and then the robots would have a hex shaped spinning bar and they could drive up, stick it in, and raise or lower the bar or something else to make it easier for themselves or harder for the opponents.

[Ronald_raygun]

For the '06 game no matter what the challenges are, I thinkthey should elevate the driver stations. It was kinda difficult to see the goals on the other side of the field.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Ronald_raygun

It was kinda difficult to see the goals on the other side of the field.

That's the whole point of having the driver stations at field level!

[Ronald_raygun]

Originally Posted by EricH

That's the whole point of having the driver stations at field level!

The problem is hitting a robot in the loading zone accidentially and potentially hurting someone. Besides, the center goal on the ends of the field kinda made it hard the the center drivers to see even past the middle goal.

[robot180]

I liked the idea of a multi-level field, but what about an elevator? There could be a box, made of metal on the bottom and either lexan or wire mesh or something on the sides. It could have doors and be controlled from a button at each end of the field. The elevator should be large enough to fit two robots that each fit inside the envolope. At the end of a match, all of the robots could fight to get into the elevator for extra points.

In addition to all of that, there could be more to the game, like ways to earn points from both the first level and the second level.

Robot Safety:
For the safety of the robot, the door could automatically close before the elevator begins to move and open when it stops at its destination. Also, the elevator could have a lexan box built around it so a robot does not drive under the elevator and the elevator does not lower down onto a robot. The elevator could be set to not stop until it reaches a floor and gives sufficient time for robots to get out and new robots to get in, like a real elevator in a building.

[Ronald_raygun]

There is one problem with that elevator design. Is it easy to build? Assemble/disassemble?

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Ronald_raygun

There is one problem with that elevator design. Is it easy to build? Assemble/disassemble?

Howabout an elevator powered by a robot? One robot gets inside and a partner grabs a rope and starts pulling which raises the elevator. It would be a collaborative effort. I think that would be wicked cool.

See, this way you don't have to have any special motorized mechanisms or anything. Basically just a box with a rope that goes up to a high pulley, and then some easy way for another robot to get ahold of that rope.

I'm really liking the idea of robots powering field elements.

[SoftwareBug2.0]

Originally Posted by Ronald_raygun

For the '06 game no matter what the challenges are, I thinkthey should elevate the driver stations. It was kinda difficult to see the goals on the other side of the field.

I disagree. As a driver, I did not find it difficult to see the our team's robot. In my opinion, the most difficult part was when the robot was right up next to the driver's station, which would not be helped by a raised platform.

Originally Posted by EricH

That's the whole point of having the driver stations at field level!

There are a couple problems with raised drivers stations. One is that they would take more time to setup, and the other is that they would block the spectators' views. In my opinion, the drivers stations have been at their current locations it is the easiest to setup, and afford good visibility.

[robot180]

I was thinking of a different type of "spinner". How about a hexagon shaped rotating platform at mid-field. It could have a much smaller one ontop of it. A robot could climb on the first one to turn the second one. Maybe, we could put a mark on one side of each hexagon. The number of sides between the mark on one hexagon and the other would be the score. So, you would want to get the mark on both to be on opposite sides from each other.

I noticed that everyone here is talking about large, stationary game pieces that everyone fights over. Are there any other ideas for smaller scoring objects, such as tetras or bins or somehting?

Last year, someone posted a possible hint to the game, involving orange construction cones. I thought that would be a great idea. The thing about the tetras was that they were easy to pick up, compared to bins and balls.

[Ronald_raygun]

the other is that they would block the spectators' views

Software, I was referring to this kind of field the all the drivers are on one side.

[663.keith]

I am against the idea of a wide field for the operators. Most motion on the fields earlier (like 05) was back and forth, so the operator was usually in the same direction as the robot. In other words, when the operator pushed both joysticks forward - the robot would move away from the operator. if the operators were lined up 90 degrees from the robot, most of the time the operator would move the joysticks forward, and the robot would move right or left in relation to the operator.

Also, I like the human player aspect of the game for two reasons. It gets one more person involved in the game, and it is very enjoyable to watch interaction between robot/human during the game.

As far as a big finish goes, I am hesitant to jump back on the bandwagon. I feel that it ruins the rest of the game. A team that does not have the ability to complete the big finish will ultimately fail -- this means teams would design their robot specificily for the big finish, detracting from every other element in the game. I liked the end zone triple play this year because it was a small enough point value that some people didn't go for it, and yet it still made huge changes to the outcome of the game