The Only Constant is Change

[Karibou]

I hate to bring back a first page topic, but...

Originally Posted by Mr. Pockets

How about this: what would happen if there were game pieces of all different shapes and/or colors. What if during the game the values of pieces scored fluctuated. Like say...for the first minute squares are worth 2 points circles are worth 5 and after the first minute passed they switched. The only thing is that it would make tallying the score absolute heck so I doubt they'd do that.

That would fit quite well with the speculations made here.
:/

I'm not really sure what to make of the quote. With all of my speculations, I've been trying to figure out how the new PC could fit in with everything, but I haven't come up with anything that fits together yet.

[NickE]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pockets

How about this: what would happen if there were game pieces of all different shapes and/or colors. What if during the game the values of pieces scored fluctuated. Like say...for the first minute squares are worth 2 points circles are worth 5 and after the first minute passed they switched. The only thing is that it would make tallying the score absolute heck so I doubt they'd do that.

How hectic scoring would be really depends on how accurate real-time scoring can be for the given game.

For example, playing overdrive (where the real-time scoring was almost always the final score) with changing ball values would be alot easier to score than lunacy (real time scoring usually off) with changing ball values.

Originally Posted by Karibou

With all of my speculations, I've been trying to figure out how the new PC could fit in with everything, but I haven't come up with anything that fits together yet.

With the proper software, some USB ports and an Ethernet port, it could be a replacement driver station.

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally Posted by "NickE

With the proper software, some USB ports and an Ethernet port, it could be a replacement driver station.

(Shrug) For all we know it might be required to have that as your driver station.

By the way, there was once a time (a.k.a. before I visited CD) when I would never have imagined blog posts like these to have cryptic secrets.

[ATannahill]

I really shouldn't be feeding this but.......the only thing for certain is uncertainty

[Karibou]

If the PC is an upgrade to the driver's station, then there's got to be a reason why we'd need an actual computer, rather than just a screen and a few buttons, which is what I've been trying to piece together to no avail.

Edit: Nathan, they really don't have THAT cryptic secrets to them XD We're just geeks who get too bored during the summer and begin to over-analyze the smallest bits of information that become available to us, even when they most likely mean nothing at all.

Also, mods, should this topic be in the Rumor Mill instead? :/

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Karibou

If the PC is an upgrade to the driver's station, then there's got to be a reason why we'd need an actual computer, rather than just a screen and a few buttons, which is what I've been trying to piece together to no avail.

The simplest reason I can guess at is that the Classmate PC ended up costing less than a sufficiently robust fully custom solution (at least at the quantities we're talking about for FRC).

[Stephen of REX]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

The simplest reason I can guess at is that the Classmate PC ended up costing less than a sufficiently robust fully custom solution (at least at the quantities we're talking about for FRC).

What if the PC isn't part of the control system, but part of the robot!

But in all seriousness, it would let each team have a dashboard program running on their OI for monitoring robot stats. (Personally I can't wait to try plugging an eye piece into it so I have a HUD while piloting the robot.)

[Big Kid]

The classmate PC is a great tool for us if its for the driver station, especially if its the Touch screen version of it, it would make the operator controls so much cooler (i prefer joysticks still for driver), and just because I began making a Heads-Up Display for our robot for next year, GREAT TIMING FIRST!

[biojae]

The classmate PC is a great tool for us if its for the driver station, especially if its the Touch screen version of it, it would make the operator controls so much cooler (i prefer joysticks still for driver), and just because I began making a Heads-Up Display for our robot for next year, GREAT TIMING FIRST!

if it is the TouchScreen version and the touch data is sent to the robot, then my work this fall is practically wasted

[Big Kid]

Originally Posted by biojae

if it is the TouchScreen version and the touch data is sent to the robot, then my work this fall is practically wasted

Well all i have to say is continue what your doing you never know, and even if it is you can still integrate that with the new or old system if you'd like you'd only have two touch screen instead of one

[Ryan Simpson]

Going back to the actual game, could there be a constantly moving field? Then, drive teams would have to pay attention to both the robots and the field.

[miketwalker]

Originally Posted by rsimpson

Going back to the actual game, could there be a constantly moving field? Then, drive teams would have to pay attention to both the robots and the field.

This is something that, unfortunately perhaps, never occur within FIRST. Although sometimes large and more expensive objects do occasionally show up (2003s ramps, 2007's rack, etc) you have to keep in mind that teams need to be able to build a field or at least the important parts without spending their entire budget. Furthermore, anything beyond casters is pretty tough to make reliable.

A perfect example is 2004's ball release system. A simple motor assembly was created and wired into the scoring system to rotate a trap door to release balls onto the field. By the Friday of Week 1 regionals there was a need for a volunteer on each side with a rod to whack at the thing to release the balls. It's just very difficult to make mechanized components on the field and still be able to guarantee match consistency. For example, in 2004s case, imagine a match where theres a minimal point difference, something where a team won by one ball. However, the other team had to wait an additional 5 seconds for their balls to release. Who is to say that wouldn't change the match?

Don't get me wrong, I really have been crossing my finger that something like an AndyMark/FIRST collaboration (*cough* *cough* You know you want to Mark...) could try out some simple mechanical gates or trap doors like in 2004 and have a go at making a reliable setup. Plus, with something like AndyMark in the loop you know the mechanism used in the game could be purchased by teams or machined since their CADs are usually available, especially in a case like this. But trust me, an entire field moving... that's not something on the horizon. Hopefully some sort of moving component or input triggered game piece/component will be in the cards one day soon though.

[EricVanWyk]

Originally Posted by biojae

if it is the TouchScreen version and the touch data is sent to the robot, then my work this fall is practically wasted

Even if it is a touch screen class mate, your work is not at all wasted. You learned a lot, and your skills will definitely be relevant. Document it well and put it on your resume. Post on CD when it gets you a cool job!

[biojae]

Originally Posted by EricVanWyk

Even if it is a touch screen class mate, your work is not at all wasted. You learned a lot, and your skills will definitely be relevant. Document it well and put it on your resume. Post on CD when it gets you a cool job!

the touchscreen actually is the easy part. the other 80% is getting the robot to follow the path correctly

and that involves physics! and math!

[Jonathan Norris]

For me this is a very telling blog post by Bill. If major change is coming, I am totally for it. I have recently come under the thought that FIRST needs to start thinking about major change in its organization in order to reach its goal of: "To transform our culture by creating a world where science and technology are celebrated and where young people dream of becoming science and technology heroes."

The current model that FIRST uses has run its course, its done a fantastic job of getting the students involved and inspired by Science and Technology, but we aren't reaching enough students to 'transform culture' and invoke lasting positive change. In my opinion FIRST has been very stagnant since 2006, and really needs to shake things up to accelerate the growth and influence of FIRST.

Constant evolving change is the force that powers the most innovative companies in the world, many of whom support FIRST. It is this type of innovative change that FIRST needs to look for, enough refining the current model, at some point you need to accept the risks and take big adventurous steps towards reach that ultimate goal. I'm not talking about a major change in how the game is played, its got to be bigger then that.