[Official 2006 Game Design] Game Elements and Subtasks

[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

[care_hardy]

After hearing several of the names given to past FIRST games, including "Stack attack" and "Raising the Bar", a few things occurred to me... 1) the recurrence of stacking (or piling) of objects in most games and 2) the idea of putting bars to another use. Using those two basic thoughts, here's what I've come up with.


The goal: Create a ladder. For those of you who enjoy the names of the different games each year, this one's got lots of opportunities for a play on words.

The field: The central feature would be a ladder structure missing its rungs. In short, posts with rests attached to them will scatter the field on which tubes will be placed. Depending on the level of difficulty desired, these ladder skeletons could be placed in clusters or at different heights. Other obstacles like a ramp may be added to increase difficulty.

The object to be manipulated: Tubes (possibly made of the same material as the tetras were this year) with something on the ends to prevent them from slipping off of the rests. Length mary vary depending on how much driver skill will be emphasized (shorter ones = more difficult to place). I haven't thought out yet how these will be picked up or loaded on to the robots.

Challenges: Designing a robot that can accurately pick up and place the tubes at varying heights, and possibly having to control your robot while on a ramp or other obstacle.

Scoring: Points are awarded for the number of tubes placed, whether the team/alliance occupies a full ladder (much like the tic-tac-toe aspect of Triple Play) and what ladder skeleton it is placed on (read: more difficult to get to? More points)

Penalties: Penalties will be distributed for unnecessarily, and intentional, rough contact. Teams would not be allowed to remove another team's already-placed tube. If they do so, accidentally or intentionally, that amount of points will be deducted from their final score.

There are still a few kinks to work out, but that's what I've come up with thus far. I'm really looking forward to seeing what the Game Design Committee comes up with for the 2006 season! Hopefully we'll see a few new elements in the game that will result in very unique robot designs.

-Care

[EricH]

Here's an unusual idea (not that there aren't too many already): a POWERED field element. For example: one goal of some form wanders around the field on one of several paths. Teams get twice the score for any object placed on it that they do for anywhere else. However, it also acts as an interference bot against both alliances, only depending on who is in the way. Another example: a swinging gate of some form that you have to wait for.

The problems: the main one is that FIRST would have to design this element, give it power (which means either extension cords (for the gate) or a large supply of batteries (for anything mobile)), and program it. Then again, it would add at least one level of difficulty to the game.

[Kyle Love]

Heres my off the wall idea. Use tires or something like the "LIVE strong" and "VEX" wristbands just on a bigger scale, and make square or rectangular goals in the center that are elevated 7 and 10 feet off the ground. (3 goals, 2 7feet 1 10feet in the center) Have a 2 foot tall gap under the goals so teams could go under the bridge. Have 5foot tall goals at the red and blue alliance home zones. Still have it 3vs3. 1 Autoloader per alliance and have a suspened "tire" hanging on a hook on the side of the field with a green panel in the center (similar to this years vision tetra) for the CMU. Also, have a human player area with a 3'x3' box on both sides to distingush the "loading zone".

My paint drawings can be found here

-KL

[sanddrag]

I like the idea of using tires for a gamepiece. The shape would make them easy to put on a pole or something, but the weight would make it very challenging to maniupluate. I'm thinking along the lines of something like a small car spare tire or a small trailer tire. Also, they are very durable. Almost no chance of breaking. But they might be a little pricey. Used or reject tires maybe?

Or maybe part of the playing surface can be covered in tires like this http://www.eddabney.com/confidence_c.../Dan_tires.jpg but no horse and smaller tires.

[Ryan Foley]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

I like the idea of using tires for a gamepiece. The shape would make them easy to put on a pole or something, but the weight would make it very challenging to maniupluate. I'm thinking along the lines of something like a small car spare tire or a small trailer tire. Also, they are very durable. Almost no chance of breaking. But they might be a little pricey. Used or reject tires maybe?

Or maybe part of the playing surface can be covered in tires like this http://www.eddabney.com/confidence_c.../Dan_tires.jpg but no horse and smaller tires.

Check out the 1997 robots, they had inner tubes that year. 111 in particular had a very cool way of picking them up.

I love the idea of all or part of the field being covered in tires. That would make a great all-terrain style element, however, teams with very good drivers could avoid the holes and only have to worry about getting onto the tires and riding the edges. A lot more tank tread robots would appear I imagine.

If you want to be really evil however, make a wall of tires standing upright. I would love to see a robot try to fit through the hole in the center.

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Ryan Foley

If you want to be really evil however, make a wall of tires standing upright. I would love to see a robot try to fit through the hole in the center.

Or maybe even better yet, make some sort of mound of tires (attached/connected/rigid/stable) that you can climb to the top of in order to get points. I'm still a big fan of kind of the hill. We just need a more interesting hill.

[sanddrag]

What about a midfield barrier of large proportions. Maybe like 5-10 ft high but not quite vertical, maybe like 70 degrees referenced from the horizonal (on both sides, so it would look like this /\ ) And then there could be some sort of horizontal bars on it (like rungs of a latter almost) for helping to get over it. And maybe there could be a bar high above it to winch off of or something.

You'd have to have an alternate option of getting to the other side of the field but it can't be too easy because then people wouldn't do this. There must be great scoring incentive for scaling this wall and getting back down to the other side.

[Ryan Foley]

Here's an interesting idea for a midfield barrier.

Place a 2ft diameter pipe on it's side, spanning the width of the field. For robot scoring, robots would have to climb on top and not be supported by anything but the pipe.

Options:
1) fixed pipe on ground
2) freely rotating pipe (about an axle of course) only raised enough off the ground so it doesnt contact the carpet. Some interesting defense could be played if teams could get on top and then start using their wheels to spin the pipe. Log rolling competition anyone?*
3) Cut out some parts of the pipe, so that there are tunnels leading to the other side.
4) raise the pipe off the ground (perhaps a smaller diameter, like 1ft or 1.5ft would be better if this was done). Imagine the 2001 or 2003 limbo bar, just a lot bigger.
5) put another one (same diameter) at least 8 feet above the first one. Then teams could hang off that one for points, climb on the bottom one for more points, or use the the higer one to pull them up and onto the bottom one.

Interesting Combinations of options mentioned above:
A) 1 and 3
B) 2 and 3 (it would almost be like something out of mini-golf, could be fun)
C) 2 and 4
D) 2, 3 and 4. The clearance under the pipe could be 8inches, and under on of the holes could be 16in, that way you dont have to be less than 8in to get under.

*= I'm not suggesting anything about water when I say "log rolling"


PS: this midfield barrier also keeps the piggy-back robot option that seems to be applicable to every game since 2001 in some way. Check out 111's 2001 robot if you don't know what I mean by "piggy back robot"

[Kyle Love]

Bike tires! Then you can stack TONS at one time!

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Kyle45

Bike tires! Then you can stack TONS at one time!

Great idea. Those would be great scoring objects. Light enough to handle yet large enough to be exciting.

[Karthik1]

I would like to see a part of the field that is not carpet, plastic, or any type of hard surface. I want to see a surface that conforms to the shape of the robot. I am not talking about the entire field, just a part. It would be interesting to see a surface like a bed, foam, or even sand.

Also I like the robot bridge idea, maybe there could be a ramp like 2003, but not connected in the middle, so in-order to get across the robot must get over some big gap.

[Billfred]

After fitting most of my belongings for college into six Stack Attack bins, I have a suggestion for the next game element: Make it something a college student can make use of in his or her life at college.

(And if the name of next year's game becomes Dorm Room Derby, I apologize to the FIRST community in advance.)