Game Idea

[archiver]

Posted by Andrew Keisic.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]


Student on team #217, Team Macomb Royal Fusion, from Florida Institute of Technology and Ford Motor Company.

Posted on 7/27/2000 11:32 PM MST



I want to see a challenging playing field for upcoming competitions, as well as more robots. I thought for a while on an idea and this is what I came up with. (sit back-its lengthy)

Setup:
For each match six robots would compete at a time with two alliances of three (less fields and more teams). The field should be divided up into three sections with a 'moat' between each section, and a scoring 'chute' in the center (like that of Ladder Logic [i think]). The chute would allow transfer of balls from one section to the next, but giving anyone access (the center of the chute would have an upsidedown cone to direct balls). I'm thinking of a large hexagonal field. Each section will have two goals-One red, one blue-and each section will use the same goals. All sections will use the same type of scoring unit. The scoring units would have a particular staring section. Exapmle: section 1 would have yellow balls, 2-green, and 3-red. At the start one robot of each alliance will start in each section, and labeled with that section. Section 1 would have robots 'RED 1' and 'BLUE 1,' 2; 'RED 2' and 'BLUE 2'; etc. There would be two control stations per section-one red one blue. The alliances would have radios to communicate to each other.


The 'moat':

The moat is designed to make crossing very difficult unless teamwork is used. In my idea the 'moat' would be a set of rollers on the floor designed on a slight incline (no more than 10 degrees) to trap wheels of robots and spin continuously for tank treads. This way robots can get trapped in the 'moat.' The incline would keep balls in their respective sections.

This will bring competition between alliances as each might try to push the other into the 'moat.' This also permits more defensive robots.

Game Play:

Each round would last three minutes, to allow for more complicated tasks. There are numerous ways to score points.

Ball Placement;
1. Place balls of your section into your sections goal. (minimal point value)
2. Place balls of one section into the goal of another section. (increased point value)
3. Place balls into the 'chute.' This would be the community point place. All the points accumulated in the 'chute' would be credited to all six teams. (minimal point value)

Robot Placement;
4. Receive points for remaining in your starting section (not having any part of the robot in the 'moat')(minimal point value)
5. Alliance moves one robot from one section to another. (great point value-I think a multiplier)
6. Alliance moves two robots into different section. (greater multiplier)
7. Alliance moves all three robots into a different section (greatest multiplier)
8. No points awarded to teams with part of their robot in the 'moat'


Scoring:

Teams would receive two scores-one for their alliance and one for themself. Individual points would be counted by the number of balls placed in their goal in their section, and multiplied if the moved to another section. Alliance points would be the sum of all the balls in the alliance's goals multiplied by the appropriate factor plus the points in the community 'chute.' This way exceptional robots can excel, but at the same time teamwork is essential (for 2000, good robots could often fall near the bottom if they received poor alliances).

Posibilities:

*Brutal interaction between robots to force them into the 'moat.'
*Stealing points out of opposite alliance goal as they move to other sections.
*Steal balls place in the 'chute' by other alliance
*Build robots to pass balls over the 'moat.'
*Build robots to 'walk' over the 'moat'
*Lots of action


Check out the link below- it has a pic of my field idea.

Thoughts?
Andrew

[archiver]

Posted by Andy Grady.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]


Other on team in limbo from in limbo sponsored by in limbo.

Posted on 7/28/2000 2:58 PM MST


In Reply to: Game Idea posted by Andrew Keisic on 7/27/2000 11:32 PM MST:



Wow, I must say I am very impressed. I would love to see this game, or some variation of it in the future. I am especially liking the idea of the moats (very interesting twist on agressive play), and I think you may have hit something with the point system (awarding individual and team points may be an excelent way to do things). The only suggestions i would have would involve game pieces (this would be a great game to use footballs in...hint hint to FIRST) Awsome idea Andrew.
Peace out,
Andy Grady

[archiver]

Posted by Lora Knepper.

Student on team #69, HYPER (Helping Youth Pursue Engineering & Robotics), from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.

Posted on 7/30/2000 11:05 AM MST


In Reply to: Re: Game Idea posted by Andy Grady on 7/28/2000 2:58 PM MST:



I have to agree with Andy on this one! This is a game that I know I'd love to play...the stategies and the challenges are interesting to think about! Though footballs? Nah, not a big fan of those (sorry Andy!)...though something with an odd shape maybe..

Nice job Andrew, I would love to play in your game if FIRST picks up the idea!

Lora

[archiver]

Posted by Ian Mackenzie.

Student on team #188, Woburn Robotics, from Woburn C.I..

Posted on 8/9/2000 4:45 PM MST


In Reply to: Game Idea posted by Andrew Keisic on 7/27/2000 11:32 PM MST:



Your game is surprisingly similar to the 1997 Canada FIRST competition. It had four quadrants separated by ramps with one goal in the middle for each quadrant plus one higher goal in the very centre for doubling, and more points for scoring your own colour balls, most of which were in the other quadrants.

My team (Team 188 from Toronto, Canada) has been in U.S. FIRST for the last three years but before that we were in Canada FIRST...1997 was my first year.

Then main problem with the game (and how we got screwed over) was that the goal was in a corner...it was therefore pretty easy to block. One team that made it to the quarterfinals with us decided to just block us the entire round because they knew perfectly well there was no way they could win the match (each match had four robots in it). You might want to design your field for easy access to the goals. Check out this site for a brief description of the game:

www.canadafirst.org/english/9699events/tower.htm

-Ian Mackenzie
Team 188
www.team188.com