2006 game hints?

[EricH]

Time to start eliminating hints.

First one out: No metal on robots. Why? A robot is the robot controller and anything attached to it, according to the 2005 rules. The controller has metal, therefore it can't be used, therefore you can't have a robot that is legal.
Second one out: No threaded fasteners. Again, you need those to attach the controller.
Third one out: Anything having to do with water. See the water game threads for reasons.

Anyone else want to remove some dummy hints?

[Madison]

We've often attached our controller with cable ties.

[Andrew Blair]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

We've often attached our controller with cable ties.

Yes, but the other thing supporting this are other electronics. Namely, speed controllers, circuit panels, and the brain. (The brain's back is held on by little black screws. No, I'm not obsessive compulsive, but we did consider taking one apart once. Long story. )

P.S.- We have also. I guess we've held everything at some point on a robot with zip ties.

[Zero-Bee]

I have yet to hear anything along the bounds of reason when it comes to rumors, but we need to pool every rumor we know into a single post, and fiqure it out from there.

[Jay Trzaskos]

Originally Posted by dlavery

Yeah, what Stu said.

Originally Posted by Billfred

Wait a minute, did Dave just say something flat-out? Like something that didn't cryptically refer to a hint that will still not make any sense whatsoever four weeks into build?

Of course, it's so simple... Dave's just copying what Stu said!! Next year we will have 2 of the exact same setups on each side of the field, whichever alliance is Red goes first... they have 30 seconds to do a task and then the Blue alliance must do the exact same task on their side of the field in the same order. They then have the next 30 seconds to complete another task. Then the Red alliance goes again, copying what Blue did in theirs second 30 seconds. after that comes autonomous... using only sensors !!!

^ taken from the "This Year We Need Instant Replay" thread

JT

[Birdman1011395]

Don't know about other regionals (and I don't believe this has been brought up before), but Dave Lavery at the VCU regional said something along the lines of "It's snowing outside, and it gives me some ideas". Or something to that effect and made mention of how he got an idea from the Richmond Science Museum for 2005's competition.

If one takes this at face vaulue a power based object could be used. Maybe a synthetic snow covers the playing field for reduced traction. But the problem could be for snow plows or a similar device. By thinking WAY to much into this hint I could mean that 2006 will require the stacking of irregularly shaped objects.

Of course there have been other regionals since then, so can anyone remember any hints he gave out at the ending ceremony, for other regionals? Also if anyone from the VCU regional can remember the phrase please post it in better from than I have.

[teamtestbot]

A powder coated playing field would be quite messy to set up and clean up...

[Nica F.]

it would be, but you never know what the new challenge might involve.

[Ryan Foley]

Originally Posted by iCurtis

In response to this post by Mr. Lavery.

Only two acronyms show up in that paragraph, one being "GDC" and the other being "MST" both being used fictionally. Now "GDC" also stands for "Game Design Commitee". So using inductive reasoning I'm assujming that MST is either the acronym for the object we must manipulate or the acronym of the name of the game.

Now, going off this, and Grayswandir-75's find about Tammy and 2001, here's my guess.

Manchester Standard Time: the important thing here is "time"
2001: remember the 2001 game, teams could shut themselves down for points
Dave's mentioning of RC's shutting down on their own: supports idea above.

I think points/ multipliers based on time are back.

[Rickertsen2]

I think we can rule out snow, water etc. They playing field must be something that can easily be moved from regional to regional and must be something that is within the reach of teams to make.

[lukevanoort]

I think that we might be able to put the batons onto the less likely side, if not eliminated. That hint seemed a bit too obvious.

Originally posted by Birdman1011395

Don't know about other regionals (and I don't believe this has been brought up before), but Dave Lavery at the VCU regional said something along the lines of "It's snowing outside, and it gives me some ideas". Or something to that effect and made mention of how he got an idea from the Richmond Science Museum for 2005's competition.

I remember that snow/freezing rain. I walked to the grocery store in it. I really can't see how that'd give him ideas though, unless its electronic "snow." Maybe they'll stick a transmitter set to throw static into the signal, and you have to program to counteract it. Sand and such would also be very bad for gearboxes, and maybe compreesors (are they filtered?). I can see FIRST being a little sadistic, but that's too much. I think a traction comprimised floor is quite possible though, like the top of the ramp in '03.(I might have the year wrong)

[kjohnson]

I remember that snow too - it was weird to see snow on top of the bus in Richmond in MARCH. I sure hope Dave was joking about that, but maybe he could mean a blizzard: the driver's vision will be blocked but they will have someone else (like the human player at the corner of the field this year) to tell them where to go.

Other that that kind of blizzard, I seriously doubt FIRST would make any kind of game involving something that could so easily damage an expensive robot. Even if something was falling from above, the robot would need to be completely sealed (And that starts a problem with heat not being able to escape properly). And like Rickertsen2 said, the playing fields will need to be somewhat easy to transport and not extremely expensive because teams will want to practice under competition conditions.

[jdiwnab]

You know, there is such thing as fake snow that won't damage stuff. There is also styrofoam peanuts that could work, too. I don't discount Dave's VCU regional hint. Obvious, yes, but, who knows?

And reguarding the snow, I was out there in short sleaves and shorts. Mostly because I didn't want to carry a coat/long sleave shirt/long pants around. Much easier to be comfortable in the pits and chily outside.

[lukevanoort]

I too only wore shorts and a tee, but I did have an old leather jacket to deal with the wind that a rarely wore, since the zipper made a lot of noise bouncing around. I agree with rickertsen2 on the snow issue, even if its non hazerdous material aren't going to be used, since the huge mess. But, you know we could be thinking to literally, it might be associated with something totally random in his mind, like sheep dogs or something. For example caves remind me of King Vitamin cereal.

[chady015]

Originally Posted by artdutra04

As great as hard core command line programming is, it is not for everyone. If you can understand it - you have a major advantage. But not everyone can easily understand that stuff. That is why most modern computers use use a GUI instead of command line to access programs. Apple realized that in the 1980s, that in order for computers to be bought by the masses, they had to be easy to use. They figured that ordinary people didn't care if their OS took up more memory space. Sure, the GUI isn't as powerful or as efficient as command line can be, but the GUI's are more user friendly - which means more people can use them.

Another reason why a GUI-based application for programming the FRC robots is greatly needed is that everyone learns and comprehends things differently. Some people can be geniuses, but if you lectured them all day, they wouldn't remember a thing. Other people need to be able to "see" things to comprehend them. I have to be able to "see" things to comprehend them, which is why I am great at the mechanical end of things, because I can "see" all the parts in my head and "see" how they move and interact. EasyC for Vex comes very easy to me, because I can look at the icons and "see" exactly what it does.

Right now, lets consider everyone's robot. How many this year had noteworthy autonomous programs? Not a whole lot, which is why GUI-based software for programming robots is such a great idea. This helps to balance the playing field. Now, even though it may not be as powerful, the average sophistication of the programming will dramatically increase, because now a wider variety of people can use this software.

Because of all this, for the 2006 game - expect to see a harder, longer, and more sophisticated autonomous mode with multiple tasks of varying difficulty levels.

Hi
I am a post graduate student involved with eLabtronics, the people who designed CoreChart.

Until I started programming in CoreChart I founnd it difficult to start programming in text assembler or C. CoreChart has enabled to me to pick up porgramming PICs in a short time. Most important of all CoreChart is an ACTUAL GRAPHICAL ASSEMBLER and not just a high level interface. Every one Icon is an instruction in the PIC assembler and hence CoreChart is used by professional engineers for complex real time applications! They use CoreChart to reduce prototyping time.

In Singapore High School students 14, 15 years are learning to use CoreChart for robotics competition based on the IFI EDU-Mini controllers. They then go onto dogin CoreChart PIC industry projects in Video Surveillance monitoring or home automation etc mentored by college students and industry experts. They are developing Smart kids in Singapore using CoreChart as what these 14 years old learn is actually pure assembler!


Good luck.
David