RACK & ROLL Reaction

[Tetraman]

Originally Posted by BuddyB309

I see some interesting problems that can occur

Team A "Alright we got are ramp down and are ready to allow a robot to climb on top of us"

Team B "Look! team A has there ramp down and we only got a few seconds left!! Hurry!!"

Team A "NO stop! your comming in to fast!"

Crash!

Hahahahaha.

Def something teams need to worry about

[Dan Petrovic]

My jaw dropped when they revealed The Rack.

I don't like the name.

I don't like the impact autonomous has.

I don't like the human player interaction.

I don't like how you can't take over a goal when someone has already placed a ring there.

I do like the lifting, that will be very impressive

I do like how speed is very important

I do like the bonuses from making rows

I do like how teams can really work together to form a great alliance.

That's what I think.

[Lil' Lavery]

My first thought was "Crap"
My second was, "hey, this is Toroid Terror."
But I can say, after watching about an hour of Toroid Terror videos from the 97 Mid-Atlantic Regional, strategy-wise they are nothing alike. Nothing.
Toroid Terror rewarded points for actual inner tubes (which this doesn't, which is the first demise of volume scoring). Additionally, Toroid Terror rewarded bonus points only for vertical rows, not horizontal. Toroid Terror had no alliances. It allowed human players to place the tubes on the robot (not just through a slot), and receive new tubes from the robots. The tower freely rotated in Toroid Terror, and several rings could be placed on each prong (you're only allowed 2 this year). Toroid Terror didn't have autonomous, and had no "King of the Hill" or Positioning Bonus points. Toroid Terror allowed bots to carry more than 1 game piece. Now that we've thrown away the strategic value of Toroid Terror, someone please help me develop a game strategy?
As for the vision around the Rack, notice this little rule:

Originally Posted by 2007 FIRST Game Manual

<R109> Any decorations that involve broadcasting a signal to/from the ROBOT, such as remote
cameras, must be cleared with FIRST Engineering prior to the event and tested for
communications interference at the venue. This is the one permissible exception to Rule
<R66>. Note that 900 MHz camera systems will not be approved, and are not permitted at
any time.

[BaysianLogik]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Norris

To score effectively you are going to have to use the CMU in the scoring process like last year. The really effective teams are going to be able to use the CMU in auto and in-game for blind (driver) scoring. I actually like that they are forcing the CMU on us this year, people said they did last year but many teams got away without using (my team included). This year you have no choice but to use it for autonomous, there is nothing else you can do in auto (other than D), unlike last year with dumping.

I'll believe that we'll have an effective use of the camera when i see it...they've said for the last 3 years that they've made an effective out-of-the-box camera setup, and each year it's a pain. Adding the difficulty of the arena geometry algorithm you have to do in order to properly estimate where the pole is in-system, i'm not holding my breath.

[Rick-906]

so im just wondering... and this is most likely against the rules... why not just pick your robot up... and put a tube under it for the bonus points... its not touching the playing field, and if its light enough it wont pop the tube, im sure they thought of that, but it would be interesting if they didnt

[(Click_Here)]

Well If the team didn't take apart their 1997 robot we would all ready be done.

But the game it's self is very nice this year, the only problem will be trying to drive the robot with a huge obstacle in the way that can make it hard to see whats going on.

The USB ext on the operating interface is going to be very cool for inovative controls and also having the ease to make the controllers a lot smaller in size.

Inter tubes are going to be very fun also.

Good Luck Everyone on your design.

[pyroslev]

(Looks away from the monitor the rule book)


I love the rule that you can only carry one, can't push during it and such. It's one of those things that will prove interesting on the field.

Add in the USB and it will prove interesting as to what we see.

Scoring seems rather simple.

[darkember]

Originally Posted by Rick-906

so im just wondering... and this is most likely against the rules... why not just pick your robot up... and put a tube under it for the bonus points... its not touching the playing field, and if its light enough it wont pop the tube, im sure they thought of that, but it would be interesting if they didnt

It states in <G56> that the robot can't be in contact with any element of the field, which probably includes the tubes.
your right, it would be intresting.

[KTorak]

My first reaction was "Where am I am gonna find pool noodles AND inner tubes in the middle of winter in Michigan?" As for the game, it has potential to be pretty interesting, but I suspect we'll see a lot of similar appendages that we have seen from 2005 (most likely) and other past games.

[crafty]

My first reaction:
"How could I have not figured out the clue before now?"

[BBnum3]

At first I was sad because we weren't shooting anything. I really liked that aspect of the game last year and that it felt like a real sport. After thinking about strategies and game tactics more though, I am starting to like Rack and Roll a lot. I love the elevation of robots in the home zones and the different weight/height classes. They offer an interesting trade-off. It is nice to see something different, and I think it will be great to see how the game is played.

[Tetraman]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Now that we've thrown away the strategic value of Toroid Terror, someone please help me develop a game strategy?

Be fast............................................?

This is exactly why I don't like the game design. The entire competition is 'in the moment'. Possibly the only strategy you can formulate now is the robot stacking.

[darkember]

you know what will be hard, if a robot is nearly six feet tall and it trys to climb a ramb onto another robot. The robot will probably fall over.

[darkember]

The bonus points seem to be harder to get then the game points.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by darkember

you know what will be hard, if a robot is nearly six feet tall and it trys to climb a ramb onto another robot. The robot will probably fall over.

That's far too broad a statement to be making. Lots of six-foot robots climbed the ramp in 2006, which was far steeper than teams have to make theirs this year.