Addressing the scoring pegs

[SteveGPage]

Originally Posted by Bill_B

The NATO phonetic alphabet was developed to aid the transmission of lettered information over noisy radio comms. We have a simpler case to handle, but there are 18 pegs, so we wouldn't run out of letters. Just letter each one and say its name when you need to. Now who gets to set the left-right-left-up-down-column-by-column sequence of names?

Get me a Whiskey Charlie for Kilo!

I've attached the draft Analyst-Coach Communication Guide. Let me know what you think!

Thanks!

Steve

[Bill_B]

That Whiskey will cost you more than a Euro, Charlie. Bravo of you to try, but Foxtrot outta here before I Golf you all the way to India! Whew! is it ever late!

[Bill_B]

Originally Posted by SteveGPage

I've attached the draft Analyst-Coach Communication Guide. Let me know

Looks good, Steve.
What? No elevation for the "O"s? This is of course the "back" view of the scoring grid. I just think going all Cartesian coordinated on us is overkill. Label each spot and be done with it. If you want to start all the same column with a letter that relates to the shape that belongs there, just think up some more names that begin with the same letter as the shapes. "S" "C" "T" and as Tom Bergeron might have said "Circle gets the Square!"

[artdutra04]

Relative to the drivers:

[ Northwest ] [ North ] [ Northeast ]
[ West ] [ Central ] [ East ]
[ Southwest ] [ South ] [ Southeast ]

No need to think about what "high triangle" means, when "northeast" is much more intuitive.

[AppleBacon]

Originally posted by SteveGPage
As for "low/med/high" I agree doesn't have any ambiguity, but is saying "A high" or "b low" or "c medium" clear in the chaotic mess of a match? We tend to hear things like "b low" as "below" or "c medium" as "see medium", and may pause to say "below what?" or "see the what?" - where as "A1", etc ... registers as a matrix location, since it is an alphanumeric combination, rather than phonetic sounds.

If you were to state the elevation before the letters (Low, Mid, and High), then any letter after that would seem nonsensical enough in accompaniment with the elevation that it wouldn't be as easily confused. (LowC, LowB, and LowA sound less like words than CLow, Blow, and ALow, since they start with consonants).

It also would stay in the family of being easily recognizable to the drivers without needing to practice interpreting more complex grid coordinates.

[LAdkins17]

I agree that NW, NE...etc is a good way to address the pegs.

Someone earlier asked if anyone knows the heights of the scoring pegs from the ground. If you compare to the field drawing, the first lines up with the bottom of the tube re-entry window, which would be 45" tall. The middle column is then up to 8 inches above that, so probably around 50-53ish ". You can't tell how far apart the actual pegs are from each other vertically, however, since a dimension is only given for 30" center to center of the support poles at the bottom. (horizontally). If the 30" center to center numbers applied to the scoring pegs as well, and the picture is drawn to scale, the top peg would be about 11 feet tall. :/

Does anyone know actual measurements for re-creating a field...?

[SteveGPage]

Originally Posted by artdutra04

Relative to the drivers:

[ Northwest ] [ North ] [ Northeast ]
[ West ] [ Central ] [ East ]
[ Southwest ] [ South ] [ Southeast ]

No need to think about what "high triangle" means, when "northeast" is much more intuitive.

By no means am I disagreeing with you, but I want you to consider the following scenario:

You are in a loud arena, there is music playing, and 10,000 screaming students. You are the Analyst tasked with helping coordinate the efforts of 3 teams. You are keeping track of every game piece played, and its location. You need to tell the coach of team 1234 that they need to retrieve a white circle from the human player. At this point the coach relays this information to the driver, who then sets their onboard lights to message the human player to pass the white circle through the feeder. At the same time, team 2345 is approaching the scoring area, and needs to be told to place the red triangle in the far right position of the left scoring grid. At the same time, team 3456 is scoring the blue square in the middle row of the right grid.

The analyst, in this scenario, has to do the following:
* anticipate what piece they will need the team to retrieve
* direct a team to the proper approach lane (while, hopefully, not causing a back up of two teams needing the same column)
* and identifying and recording what score just happened.

In some matches, this will be easy - but hopefully - (maybe on Einstein!) they will have to coordinate the accurate placement of 18 tubes in less than 1:45 minutes.

So, while I understand some ways will be less ambiguous than others, an easily learned, shorthand language, needs to be developed that becomes the standard across all teams - since I don't want to learn multiple languages!

"Blue on High A" to "Red to Low F" sounds ok to me too. It needs to be quickly understandable, unambiguous, and quick to say.

Assuming that 3 things are happening back to back, and 10 seconds later it starts all over again, what way do we communicate this info between Analysts, Coachs, Drivers and Human Players?

Steve

[Siri]

Originally Posted by SteveGPage

So, while I understand some ways will be less ambiguous than others, an easily learned, shorthand language, needs to be developed that becomes the standard across all teams - since I don't want to learn multiple languages!

If think you've got this nailed. In line with that sentiment, I really don't think trying to invent an entirely new, no matter how streamlined and unambiguous is the way to go. When I'm in that box, I'd rather have something that everyone knows even if it's a bit less streamlined than something that would work really really well if everyone would just learn it. Thus, my goal here is more to guess what most teams will do naturally than to come up with something clever. I'm willing to bet that'll be numbered or lettered columns and some sort of high/mid/low rows with game pieces identified by color (simply because "circle" is a longer word than "white").

In 2007 (at least where I played), syntax really wasn't important. I doubt I'd notice the difference between "F Top! --uh, Red!" and "Red to Top F" with my drivers screaming at me, human player waving around like crazy for my attention, and alliance partner trying to disentangle their claw from our minibot deployer.

[billbo911]

Color,group,position.

As viewed from the drivers station:

-------Group 1-----------Group 2.
----1----2----3--------1----2----3
----4----5----6--------4----5----6
----7----8----9--------7----8----9

Examples:
A call from the strategist of "Red 26" would indicate that the right hand, middle row needed a triangle. and a "White 12" would be the left, top row needs a triangle.

All that needs to be communicated to the "Feeder" is the tube to hand out. 1,2,3===Red, White, Blue. This is simply done with fingers.

[Bill_B]

There are two feeders, so signal with right and left hands 1,2,3 to get the tubes you want? To be done by analyst, right? feeders must be able to track analyst through the placed tubes and any intervening robot activity. Analyst is not allowed in the opponents' feeder station area. Chose a Tall guy with BIG hands?!?

[billbo911]

Originally Posted by Bill_B

There are two feeders, so signal with right and left hands 1,2,3 to get the tubes you want? To be done by analyst, right? feeders must be able to track analyst through the placed tubes and any intervening robot activity. Analyst is not allowed in the opponents' feeder station area. Chose a Tall guy with BIG hands?!?

And L.......O......N........G arms!!

[Tetraman]

Originally Posted by KrazyCarl92

How about "High Circle Left" or "Low Square Right", assuming u exclusively wish to place pieces where they would help your alliance in completing a logo.

This makes the most sense.

[Triangle 3][Circle 3][Rectangle 3]
[Triangle 2][Circle 2][Rectangle 3]
[Triangle 1][Circle 1][Rectangle 3]

[SteveGPage]

Originally Posted by billbo911

And L.......O......N........G arms!!

Which brings up another good point regarding standardization. Unless we can find a 7 - 8 foot tall basketball player, on every alliance, we just may need to approach this from another angle!

I would propose that each robot have a set of lights that can be used to signal the human player at the feeder station.
Blue light on, feed blue square tube
Red light on, feed red triangle tube
No lights on, feed white circle tube (I figured this would be better than having both lights on, in case one light was obstructed and the feeder fed the wrong tube.)

If teams don't read CD (heaven, forbid!), and adopts some standard communication practice, then the analyst would just have to deal with whatever the human player decides and go from there.

Thoughts?

[Jacob Paikoff]

Originally Posted by LAdkins17

I agree that NW, NE...etc is a good way to address the pegs.

Someone earlier asked if anyone knows the heights of the scoring pegs from the ground. If you compare to the field drawing, the first lines up with the bottom of the tube re-entry window, which would be 45" tall. The middle column is then up to 8 inches above that, so probably around 50-53ish ". You can't tell how far apart the actual pegs are from each other vertically, however, since a dimension is only given for 30" center to center of the support poles at the bottom. (horizontally). If the 30" center to center numbers applied to the scoring pegs as well, and the picture is drawn to scale, the top peg would be about 11 feet tall. :/

Does anyone know actual measurements for re-creating a field...?

You could look at the official drawings they have all the measurements.

From looking at them and building the posts in inventor the highest pegs are about 112" and 104" and the lowest pegs are about 40" and 32"

[Tetraman]

Originally Posted by SteveGPage

Which brings up another good point regarding standardization. Unless we can find a 7 - 8 foot tall basketball player, on every alliance, we just may need to approach this from another angle!

I would propose that each robot have a set of lights that can be used to signal the human player at the feeder station.
Blue light on, feed blue square tube
Red light on, feed red triangle tube
No lights on, feed white circle tube (I figured this would be better than having both lights on, in case one light was obstructed and the feeder fed the wrong tube.)

If teams don't read CD (heaven, forbid!), and adopts some standard communication practice, then the analyst would just have to deal with whatever the human player decides and go from there.

Thoughts?

Cut out large shapes out of paper (around 10 inches), and glue them to cardboard/foam core/matte board. Cut out the shapes and attach a wrist band to the back of the board. Analysts can wear the shapes along their arm when not in use. When it's time to contact the Feeder, the Analyst takes off and holds up the right shape for the Feeder to see.

Making sure that the Feeder sees what shape is needed before the robot comes to pick it up will be key.