<R11> Craziness!!!

[Woody1458]

Originally Posted by tubeheaD37

I am not so convinced about that. If you look at the dimensions of the trailer, it should be perfectly feasible to do some sort of a dump rather than a shoot for ball expulsion.
As for pickup, I was thinking about rollers even before I knew about this rule, so I don't have another solution in mind right now. I am sure it is out there somewhere though.

I do have to agree that this rule seems a little confining, and I am not a huge fan of the increased human player involvement. R11 does seem pretty crazy, but it is workable if you are creative.

While I don't want to effect any designing ideas, Having a dumping designs that utilizes gravity to dispose of balls would require that you store balls above the 36" lowest end of the trailer limiting your storage to the top 24 inches.

[Bryan Herbst]

I believe a good part of this is the fact that they expect teams to lose control of their robots every now and then.

Do you want a robot sliding out of control towards the edge of the field with a 5-foot long manipulator sticking off of it?

[bduddy]

Didn't a similar rule exist with Aim High, a game which also had a somewhat similar goal? Wasn't there quite a bit of robot diversity that year?

[Taylor]

Preface: Imagine me being contrary!

Personally, I think <R11> is the single best rule in the manual. This creates a challenge we haven't really seen before (Aim High had a little wiggle room) that I believe will create a plethora of designs and functions. This forces teams to create elegant and efficient designs, and pushes the inventive envelope.
Think of 2007. That game was the antithesis of 2009 - teams created huge, delicate manipulators that were protected (overbearingly so - ?) by the rules. Most of the robots there were carbon copies of each other, with only a few exceptions.
Every offseason, FIRST participants clamor for a new game, one with new and distinct challenges, the likes of which they have not seen. Well, here it is! (At least they're not making us climb Regolith ramps! )

[Woody1458]

Originally Posted by bduddy

Didn't a similar rule exist with Aim High, a game which also had a somewhat similar goal? Wasn't there quite a bit of robot diversity that year?

You are the second one to bring this up so I went and found the 2006 rule.

The shooter mechanism must remain within the original starting dimensions of 28 in (711 mm) by 38 in (965 mm) by 60 in (1,524 mm) tall.

AND

No part of the robot may ever extend more than 60 in (1,524 mm) above the floor. If a robot is more than 60 in (1,524 mm) high, and it shoots a ball or blocks a ball from being shot, a 5 point penalty per ball will be assessed.

so you still had outside the 28x38 with anything except a shooting device. I would be ok with a rule like this.

[Booksy]

Originally Posted by Dantvman27

Or maybe its just uping your thinking level, i like the rule, it changes the game completely

I have to agree with you.

At first I thought of all these arms and things to pickup, shoot. throw, dump, etc. and almost all involved things that left the "box". This forces you to think outside ("inside"?) the box, because the obvious way is impossible. You have 2 choices: make a square herding bot or rethink how you have done things in the past (especially different from last year, for people who haven't been around since those other games, as I personally have only been through Overdrive).

[megaman_22201]

Originally Posted by Woody1458

Does anyone else think this rule is as game changing as me? This rule scares me more then requiring us to use Rover Wheels. No playing position!!!! come on FIRST you already restricted our sizes with this giant control system, we don't need this. I'm sure there is a better way to prevent trailer defence!!

i really dont believe that the demention perameters are unreasonable. i mean, come on really!? just keep your designs simple and elegant and you will see that the demention perameters are not constranining.

[Woody1458]

Originally Posted by megaman_22201

i really dont believe that the demention perameters are unreasonable. i mean, come on really!? just keep your designs simple and elegant and you will see that the demention perameters are not constranining.

This is not a matter of me being unable to think of legal ideas, or using the larger playing configuration of the past as a crutch, rather that it does removes several designs that implement this feature and cuts down to the few that don't. Just to throw out a few that would use a larger playing config:

A tube which when filed with balls is extended like an arm to quickly drop all balls directly over an opponent's trailer

A Hungry Hungry Hippo style ball pickup

A javelin type pickup

A javelin type disposal

A simple claw and arm

and many more.

[Tetraman]

Originally Posted by Woody1458

In my mind's eye I see 80% of robots being some form of this:

http://team254.bcp.org/2006r.jpg

And?

There is no rule that says every robot has to be different. And just because each robot looks the same, that means that the matches will be decited by the internal workings of the robot, the drivers and the human players...which is just as interesting.

[ShadowNinja]

r 11 is not correctly read..in their video it shows a robot with an arm...

[Mike Schreiber]

Originally Posted by bduddy

Didn't a similar rule exist with Aim High, a game which also had a somewhat similar goal? Wasn't there quite a bit of robot diversity that year?

Last year the video also showed a robot breaking the height barrier in the opponent's home stretch which was against the rules. Don't read too much into the video, it's meant to show the game not to show you every rule.

[notaPINKtruck]

Originally Posted by ICanCountTo19

R11 in my book falls right in line with G14, I at first enjoyed the idea of a near frictionless surface but knowing we can't have any arm to easily dump the balls or any expansion at all is just frustrating and stifling. This rule basically says everyone build a similar looking robot and see who has the best "payload specialist"...Who knows someone might come up with a crazy plan that works, just my initial thoughts.

I completely disagree. There are many different creative and effective robot designs that can fit inside the "box". Designing within limits is part of the challenge, and a big part of real-world engineering.

[Andy L]

I've seen a lot of people over react to this rule. It's just another design constraint. Everyone's response to the wheels is just "well, it's part of the game" and it is, so is R11.

[Woody1458]

Originally Posted by ShadowNinja

r 11 is not correctly read..in their video it shows a robot with an arm...

We are definitely reading the rule properly. If you re-watch the video I assure you that none of the robots break the volume.

After a comb-through closest situation I could find to a <R11> penalty would be in this picture

http://img380.imageshack.us/my.php?i...icture3mj1.png

Here a robot swings its arm to launch a ball and the arm swings outside it's base area. However as you can see throughout the movie this robot has a square base meaning that it left extra room along its front to allow for this motion.

[whlspacedude]

Originally Posted by Woody1458

A Hungry Hungry Hippo style ball pickup

If you decide to pursue this idea and would like assistance please feel free to contact any 1529 member. Our 2008 robot borrowed this design.