2010 Game Hint #2

[JKWarrior]

Originally Posted by Katie_UPS

What if they weren't thinking "NASCAR" and were thinking "Toad's Turnpike"?

I think its kinda lame that you're bashing them like that. I've been on a GDC for a mentor challenge. Every once in a while you get an outstanding game idea and refine it till it's fantastic. But if that doesn't happen, its INCREDIBLY HARD to make up a new game to play.

+$.02

im sure you are right and im sorry that im a liitle un familiar with Toads Turnpike, unless you are sayimg mario cart 64, in which i give you mad props. i guess im just a NASCAR hater

[infinitydex]

-finnaly school is over wat up people

-any ideas on the field floor
-and the first hint was as some of my team members said was a object holder

-any ideas on the objecs that will be used
-on another skript page i herd something about shooting objects threw holes in a wall that separates the field.

[Taylor]

Originally Posted by infinitydex

-finnaly school is over wat up people

-any ideas on the field floor
-and the first hint was as some of my team members said was a object holder

-any ideas on the objecs that will be used
-on another skript page i herd something about shooting objects threw holes in a wall that separates the field.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...threadid=78869

[jamie_1930]

Originally Posted by JKWarrior

Overdrive was dumb, and it lacked creativity. I mean come on NASCAR? I understand that the silly sport is really helpful in the design and technology of new cars, including efficiency and aerodynamics, but i almost died of shame that First couldn't come up with a more creative game.

In my opinion overdrive was fine, it had a lot more to do with coming up with ways to capture, move, and hurdle the tracks balls, then it had to do with NASCAR. It seems to have lacked creativity when you think of it at first, but it made for an interesting game, have you ever seen so many robots tip over before?

[onetree3]

I think the floor is just a distraction. But i don't think that the gate is the focus. Lots of people think that the yellow things are to Velcro to hold down the field. They have to be touching the floor for the velcro to work and it appears that the gold things are slightly off the ground.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by onetree3

I think the floor is just a distraction. But i don't think that the gate is the focus. Lots of people think that the yellow things are to Velcro to hold down the field. They have to be touching the floor for the velcro to work and it appears that the gold things are slightly off the ground.

It's not that we think that, it's that we know that. I've said this before, but I've helped set up the field at least once per year at an official event since 2007. Every year, both sides got 4 trip guards, one over every support on the outside.

They are flat because they are made flat, then they bend under the Velcro that holds them to the floor and the metal they protect people from, if they aren't pre-bent.

[infinitydex]

by my oppinion i think that the wall is a large part of the competition because that means the field will be split or that that image is a side wall image and its to keep objects from flying all over the place

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by jamie_1930

It seems to have lacked creativity when you think of it at first, but it made for an interesting game, have you ever seen so many robots tip over before?

Yes -- in 2005. (Why do I feel like this must be a trick question?) A lot of robots rolled on the ramps in 2006, too.

[Thuvishan.R]

Originally Posted by Kaushal.K

Would someone be able to verify that the "Gate" looks wider than it has been in past seasons? or is that just me seeing things because of the scaling of the image?

Assuming that I can clearly varify where the gate is located it looks like the size of the gate hasn't changed so that dosn't mean larger robots. Although it looks like the place ment of the gates have changed Meaning that the gates might be in the centre of the field thus the scoring objectives would be down on opposite ends. which would lead into the new DS because if the opposing teams robots were down on the opposing alliance side, Their view would be obstructed thus meaning that the robots would do better if they had visual capabilities coming from a camera attached to the robots. Allowing drivers to visually see the targets through the DS if all else fails.

Just my $0.02

[infinitydex]

Originally Posted by onetree3

I think the floor is just a distraction. But i don't think that the gate is the focus. Lots of people think that the yellow things are to Velcro to hold down the field. They have to be touching the floor for the velcro to work and it appears that the gold things are slightly off the ground.

my point is that wat about the wall seems to be conected to the metal rods. the wall means that there trying to keep stuff in the field. so i think there will be objects flying aroud the field projected from other robots.
didnt they have a wall in the 2008 competition to keep the balls in the field.

[Karibou]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Yes -- in 2005. (Why do I feel like this must be a trick question?) A lot of robots rolled on the ramps in 2006, too.

Don't forget 2008! So many tipped robots from mis-hurdling and metaphorically T-boning the overpass...

[EricH]

Every year, they have had the border that is currently displayed in some form.

In 2008, there was indeed a larger wall, near the overpass. There was also a center divider, if you'll recall. The purpose was to keep the folks that were right there from the effects of a missed hurdle, as running is a bit harder if you've got a scoring device in hand or on the table in front of you. The fence used was not attached to the field border in any way, shape, or form, save some zipties between members at passing points.

In 2006 and 2009, no such walls existed; the standard field border was deemed sufficient. In the rare cases it wasn't, a field reset person would give chase to the offending ball.

(Reason to be Field Reset rather than Scorekeeper #47: You get your daily exercise.)

[JimWright949]

Hmmm. What if the gate is not a gate but instead of a gait (a manner of walking).

Which leads me back to my game theory I shaired with the Washington State FIRST board last night:
O Walking robots, no wheels allowed.
O 3x3x3 matches (yep 9 teams on the field)
O The robots will have to 'launch' bowling balls around the field.
O In order to involve more chemistry students, the 'launching'
mechanism for the bowling balls have to be a chemical reaction and not mechanical.
O There isn't a speed limit on the speed of the bowling balls,
however there is a limit on the chemicals that a team can use to cause the reaction.

ok ok ok, maybe just the first point is valid.

-Jim

[Brian C]

y my, many folks are thinking 2v2 and 3v3...............

What about 4v0 and everyone has to work together towards a common goal, similar to 2001?

Or maybe......maybe...no not 6v0!!

[EricH]

2001 was one of the least-liked games in FRC history. I'd have to say that if the GDC brought it back at all, especially the Xv0, they would hear more about it than from 2008's <G22> and 2009's <G14> combined. (You might also include 2005's loading zone penalties, but that's probably stretching it a bit too far.)