anyone have any ideas about next years game?

[dag0620]

Originally Posted by demosthenes2k8

(I also hope Dean doesn't actually give away part of the game before the actual Game animation, like he did this year.)

Yess!!! Halfway through the speaches we could all tell it was soccer based. I think we all say we want to know the game ahead of time, but haveing gotten this close to knowing, don't ruin it for me until the animation!!!!!

[Karibou]

Well, Bill mentioned Pennsylvania in his newest blog post, titled "The view from 30,000 feet"

My newest guess is that it will involve dropping tennis balls into something. I don't know what Pennsylvania has to do with it, but it is called "the keystone state," which makes me wonder...

[Radical Pi]

Taking a slightly different approach to the blog, I'm running off of the title "The view from 30,000 feet". According to wikipedia, mount everest has a max elevation of 29,029 ft. Looking for links between Pennsylvania and everest, the only thing I can turn up is a University of Pennsylvania leadership trek to the mountains that has gone to everest from 1998-2001 and 2003. What does this mean? I have no idea

[andgordo558]

Originally Posted by sircedric4

With the Classmate and camera's finally being standard equipment for everyone, I think they should make a game where the bonus round requires the camera and driving from the camera.

Like submarine ROV's and robots in space sometimes the only feedback you have is what the camera is telling you. I would like to see a bonus round where they drop a curtain in front of each driver station, and then you have to manipulate a game piece or do something else difficult based only on your video feed.

As an alternative, they could have some sort of enclosure in the middle of the field where some game pieces are and the only way you can play with them is to have a camera on the end of your manipulator.

I would suspect this sort of game design feature would be coming soon.

That seems like a great idea, however the cameras don't seem to be up to speed yet (ours sent back approx. 1 frame per 10 sec. of time...)

[Radical Pi]

Originally Posted by andgordo558

That seems like a great idea, however the cameras don't seem to be up to speed yet (ours sent back approx. 1 frame per 10 sec. of time...)

Were you trying image processing? On ours once the graphs were removed from the dashboard the camera was at a perfectly acceptable speed

[davidthefat]

Now I think that automation of robots will beat out any human driver in a maze type of game. It will be very hard to keep track of where you are going and where you went with just a camera. With automation, the robot can keep track and it will be a lot faster than humans controlling it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L9rkLAskWU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bproY...eature=related

[hg273]

Originally Posted by Radical Pi

Taking a slightly different approach to the blog, I'm running off of the title "The view from 30,000 feet". According to wikipedia, mount everest has a max elevation of 29,029 ft.

Check out the CD Thread about the new collegiate FIRST competition. The game called "Best Trajectory" has all of the elements discussed here. Square moveable goals, and a large mountain in the middle. Plus tennis balls are the game objects!

More information can be found on page 25 of the manual posted here:
goo.gl/​01muw

[MarkoRamius1086]

Originally Posted by Radical Pi

Taking a slightly different approach to the blog, I'm running off of the title "The view from 30,000 feet". According to wikipedia, mount everest has a max elevation of 29,029 ft...

What if thats just it. There's a big mountain on the feild? Instead of two bumps or one "mountain", it's literally an angled feild? It would get higher as you got towards the middle!

(Im not good at this guesstimate stuff so dont riddicule me if im way off what everyone else is thinking.)

[BJC]

Originally Posted by MarkoRamius1086

(Im not good at this guesstimate stuff so dont riddicule me if im way off what everyone else is thinking.)

Hey, your guess is as good as anyone elses. (except Dave's, I'm pretty sure that guy doesn't know what he's talking about.)

[Dominator1619]

Did some thumbing through the new manual for 2011 and found a light bulb in section 1 ( last years section 0 ) which wasn't in last years manual. So possibly the return of lit vision targets?

[dag0620]

So I had a dream last night about Kick-off and what the game is. I don't like this idea, but I thought I'd better put it up here just in case...

The field is a simple set-up. Theres 1 big Ramp in the middle (double Sided). Each alliance is then given an equal amount of Tenis Balls. The teams then need to try to get all of their tenis balls over the ramp to the other side while trying to stop the other alliance from getting tenis balls on their side. The Finale had the addition of an extra big tenis ball that is worth a certain amount of extra points (the details were fuzzy, it was a dream). The alliance that has the least amount of balls on their side wins.

Take of this what you will.

[davidthefat]

Originally Posted by dag0620

So I had a dream last night about Kick-off and what the game is. I don't like this idea, but I thought I'd better put it up here just in case...

The field is a simple set-up. Theres 1 big Ramp in the middle (double Sided). Each alliance is then given an equal amount of Tenis Balls. The teams then need to try to get all of their tenis balls over the ramp to the other side while trying to stop the other alliance from getting tenis balls on their side. The Finale had the addition of an extra big tenis ball that is worth a certain amount of extra points (the details were fuzzy, it was a dream). The alliance that has the least amount of balls on their side wins.

Take of this what you will.

Problem: its too simple for a FIRST game. Most FIRST games from what I have seen have multiple levels, this one is just superficial

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by davidthefat

Problem: its too simple for a FIRST game. Most FIRST games from what I have seen have multiple levels, this one is just superficial

Which would be how many? By my count the overwhelming majority have been flat or the levels were "superficial".

2005,2006 (superficial imho since many teams didn't go up it),2007,2008,2009... Flat

2003, pretty much the described game.

2004, robots only needed to go on the step(s) to hang and even that was optional.

[hg273]

Originally Posted by davidthefat

Problem: its too simple for a FIRST game. Most FIRST games from what I have seen have multiple levels, this one is just superficial

I disagree, if anything the last few years have given us simpler and simpler games. Or if not simple, at least ones that were easy to track and follow from a spectator stand point. A game where the audience could instantly tell who won sounds like something that the GDC would strive for.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Which would be how many? By my count the overwhelming majority have been flat or the levels were "superficial".

2005,2006 (superficial imho since many teams didn't go up it),2007,2008,2009... Flat

2003, pretty much the described game.

2004, robots only needed to go on the step(s) to hang and even that was optional.

2003, the ramp. Basic strategy: Attack the stacks, climb the ramp and sit on top. And the ramp was huge...Don't forget the small bar beside it. If you couldn't go to 14" high, you're going over the ramp. Not unlike the described game, except that all the objects started on top and you wanted as many as possible.
2002: Flat.
2001: Flat, except for the bridge (and rail across the field) in the middle. Bridge was used a lot.
2000: Flat, with a ramp and a limbo bar in the middle. Also a hanging bar above said ramp. Ramp got a lot of action, especially at the end or if a non-limboing robot needed to change field sides (happened a lot).
1999: Flat, with a mobile flat surface. Said surface (known as the "Puck") got a lot of robots on top of it at the end of the match.
2004: For many robots, the step was not optional to hang. A few hung from the floor often, but most at least went onto the lower platform. (Some were capable of either.)

There will be a flat base to the field, but what goes on that flat base to make it interesting/non-flat/a challenge can be a major obstacle to design to avoid.