2015 HINT DISCUSSION

[crollison]

Maybe putting too much thought into the recycle bin. Maybe he's just throwing out the 2014 manual. If he put the manual in just a trash can that would be considered irresponsible to just throw out paper instead of recycling. So, maybe just emphasizing that the game will be totally different from last year.

[SGK]

BUZZ THINKS

HOCKEY RELATED GAME

1. Some thinks its hockey related due to size of one of the kit of parts box dimensions
2. When I heard recycle, I googled hockey and recycle --> http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=706747 --> “NHL Green first launched the "Recycle the Game" program with non-profit Restore Hockey in 2012”.
3. http://www.nhl.com/ice/blogpost.htm?id=18744 -- “As part of the League’s ongoing initiative with Restore Hockey, NHL Green asks all fans attending the 2013 NHL Draft to help us recycle the game!”
4. Hockey teams change sides after each period -- NEW TO FIRST GAMES

[g_sawchuk]

Originally Posted by SGK

BUZZ THINKS

HOCKEY RELATED GAME

1. Some thinks its hockey related due to size of one of the kit of parts box dimensions
2. When I heard recycle, I googled hockey and recycle --> http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=706747 --> “NHL Green first launched the "Recycle the Game" program with non-profit Restore Hockey in 2012”.
3. http://www.nhl.com/ice/blogpost.htm?id=18744 -- “As part of the League’s ongoing initiative with Restore Hockey, NHL Green asks all fans attending the 2013 NHL Draft to help us recycle the game!”
4. Hockey teams change sides after each period -- NEW TO FIRST GAMES

Interesting thoughts. Don't agree with 3, because you can look up a lot of things with "recycle", but it provided some nice insight.

[Evan W]

Originally Posted by SGK

1. When I heard recycle, I googled hockey and recycle --> http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=706747 --> “NHL Green first launched the "Recycle the Game" program with non-profit Restore Hockey in 2012”.
2. http://www.nhl.com/ice/blogpost.htm?id=18744 -- “As part of the League’s ongoing initiative with Restore Hockey, NHL Green asks all fans attending the 2013 NHL Draft to help us recycle the game!”

You, my friend, are a genius.

[dellagd]

It seems like lots of people keep arguing that, if a game were to be reused heavily, that younger teams would not be at a disadvantage despite not experiencing the game that a new game is based on. I just can't see how this could possibly be the case.

The first reason stated is that with the proliferation of match video and team video archive online, any team should be able to go online and check out the mechanisms that worked in the past. Well, of course that is true, but there is a very distinct difference between quickly seeing a low quality video of a mechanism and actually remembering all the development process of it and what traps need to be avoided. You might even actually have your past CAD models of your own mechanisms, or the old robot! This is a huge advantage over any younger team who never did any of this.

Another argument is that, well, since you have to re-make you robot every year, those past mechanisms wont help anyway. I mean, lets look at drive trains for example. Teams develop over time designs that they like to use on their robot and may parallels can be drawn on the drive systems of teams year in and out. I'd reckon many of them do some CAD equivalent copy-and-pasting too.

Veteran teams are VETERANS. They have experience in FRC from their past years of competition. They will always have an advantage over very young teams, and making a game very similar to one in the past just heightens this advantage.

From previous years games its apparent that FIRST likes bringing up the rookies by providing easy scoring opportunities. 5 points for drive in auto for example. They want this to continue, so to reuse many game manipulation elements or game pieces are fundamentally not in their interest.

This game will be new in the physical realm, but I suspect the recycling will be of the rules and not the physical elements. He did recycle the manual after all, not a deflated excessive ball or Frisbee.

[MrForbes]

Originally Posted by crollison

Maybe putting too much thought into the recycle bin. Maybe he's just throwing out the 2014 manual. If he put the manual in just a trash can that would be considered irresponsible to just throw out paper instead of recycling. So, maybe just emphasizing that the game will be totally different from last year.

I tend to agree....although I don't think it's the game, as much as it is the rules. The old rule book is getting tossed into the bin, so we get to start with a completely different (hopefully much thinner) rulebook in 2015.

[JB987]

If we indeed are recycling maybe this will be part of the game...https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...907614&fref=nf

[K-Dawg157]

Usually, the hint is something about the name. It almost never (if ever) has been about the game itself.

I believe the name has to do something with change. Delta sounds cool, and change would be obvious. It's usually Alliterative, (Aerial Assist, Toroid Terror, Diabolical Dynamics) or at least sounds it (Ultimate Ascent) so maybe something that starts with Ch- or sh- for change or starts with "D" for Delta?

I don't think recycling the manual has to do a lot with the game, more about getting rid of last year and starting a new one (like we do every year). The bin maybe significant, but everyone is promoting recycling lately, FIRST will probably start this year as well.

The only thing I can't think of a reason for is skipping 1997 and showing 1999 twice in the clip...

We won't know for 10 days, 23 hours, and 55 minutes... make that 54.

[aldaeron]

Originally Posted by K-Dawg157

Usually, the hint is something about the name. It almost never (if ever) has been about the game itself.

While I love the wild and crazy theories thus far, from my fuzzy recollection the game hints have given the name of the game and nothing about how it is played. The most vivid example I recall is Logomotion.

I agree with many that these items will stay the same
- There will still be 6 teams on the field
- There will be two alliances
- The field will still be a rectangle with drivers at each end wall

Originally Posted by The_ShamWOW88

two different gamepieces....

If it is time for a change of a similar magnitude to what was shown in the hint video I think having two game pieces makes a lot of sense.

A more difficult non-spherical object (like a football) worth more points with a limited number on the field to keep veterans from running away with the game. The second piece would be an easier to manipulate piece worth less points.

Perhaps one piece is a shootable piece and one is a heavy stackable piece is the other.

In the 5 years I have been doing FRC there has been one piece (yes logomotion had different shaped tubes, but all were manipulatable with a single mechanism). I believe there will be a move to offer more scoring choices such that you cannot do them all (yes, a few teams will be able to). This was a concept debuted in 2013 with the pyramid vs shooting. I loved the pyramid because it was not really an endgame gimmick - you could start climbing at the first second if you wanted to. The issue was that there was no huge advantage to doing the pyramid, especially given the risk of falling.

Now imagine a shooting game and stacking game going on simultaneously. Both have equal points possibility. To get max points on stacking you get bonuses for stack height, some kind of pattern or the top colored game piece. Shooting has a few goal levels and perhaps some kind of bonus if you score a lot of game pieces. This does not have a cooperative element which I think we will see, but I think two simultaneous mini-games is an interesting idea. Overall it would be interesting to make the game so that you can't do it all and have to make strategic choices in your design and at the competition to win.

I also wouldn't mind seeing some reasonable field obstacles or the multi-level/multi-surface ideas others have thrown out. The biggest thing this does in my mind is reduce full speed collisions.

In any case - I can't wait for the 3rd!!!!!

Please continue nuancing the video. It is entertaining. Perhaps you can look for a message in the pixels somewhere =P

-matto-

[Shifter]

Originally Posted by aldaeron

Perhaps one piece is a shootable piece and one is a heavy stackable piece is the other.

-matto-

Interesting idea...

Three-team red alliance spends first half of the qualification match shooting and scoring balls while the three-team blue alliance stacks and scores tubes. The match pauses at the 60-second mark and the alliances switch roles for the second half of the match. In qualification matches each of the six teams receives the same number of points for each match (no winner, no loser, co-opertition is rewarded). Team rankings for the qualification round are based on total points.

In playoffs, eight three-team alliances take the field one at a time and compete against the clock (no opponent) trying to score the most points possible in the least amount of time. They are free to score any combination of balls and/or tubes. Highest scores advance to the next round.

This lends itself to a six-division Einstein where the top four scoring alliances of the first round move on to semi's.

[Fielding S.]

Originally Posted by aldaeron

Perhaps one piece is a shootable piece and one is a heavy stackable piece is the other.

Hmm... '03 Stack Attack + '12 Rebound rumble = 2015 Game?

[loyal]

I think that the time to control the robot manually will change. That's why we saw the manual go in the trash. Also the long box with the kop could be a beacon or light that changes blue or red to indicate a robot on each alliance will change sides for end game.

[rich2202]

Until wifi technology improves, I don't think you are going to get more than 6 robots on the field.

I think "change" might be a reference to what the robots do. To keep with the recycling motif, I was thinking the robot changed the game piece from "trash" to a usable product. However, that would appear to create a lost of waste (one-time use game pieces).

Another "change" from prior years might be the alliance robots working together to assemble the game pieces into something.

[mandrews281]

Originally Posted by loyal

I think that the time to control the robot manually will change. That's why we saw the manual go in the trash. Also the long box with the kop could be a beacon or light that changes blue or red to indicate a robot on each alliance will change sides for end game.

I like this thought. It explains the long box in the kit of parts since it's something EVERY robot must have. Prediction: the the word "Change" will be in game name, so perhaps one or more robots change sides during the match.

The other thought that went through my mind is that FIRST is trying to figure out how to manage growth. How I could see this happening:
1. 4v4. In Breakaway, one of the driver stations was at the field end and was smaller than the other two, so the current field can accomodate 4 per side.

2. Not only are the robots getting smaller (and lighter); but perhaps the PIT SIZE will decrease from 10'x10' to 8'x8' to accomodate more teams at a venue. The Palmetto regional had to do this several years ago when they were at Clemson. Made things a bit cramped; but it was workable. This is another of those "unchanging rules" that everyone assumes is a given.

OK there's my 2cents (with "change" to spare).

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by mandrews281

I like this thought. It explains the long box in the kit of parts since it's something EVERY robot must have. Prediction: the the word "Change" will be in game name, so perhaps one or more robots change sides during the match.

The other thought that went through my mind is that FIRST is trying to figure out how to manage growth. How I could see this happening:
1. 4v4. In Breakaway, one of the driver stations was at the field end and was smaller than the other two, so the current field can accomodate 4 per side.

2. Not only are the robots getting smaller (and lighter); but perhaps the PIT SIZE will decrease from 10'x10' to 8'x8' to accomodate more teams at a venue. The Palmetto regional had to do this several years ago when they were at Clemson. Made things a bit cramped; but it was workable. This is another of those "unchanging rules" that everyone assumes is a given.

OK there's my 2cents (with "change" to spare).

I don't think we'll see more than 6 teams on the field at once, adding 2 more robots to the field gets really cramped really fast and makes the game much less enjoyable to watch. Nobody wants to see clusters of robots sitting there because there is no room to move.