Week 1 Observations

[Mike Copioli]

Some recommendations after week 1 SFR (south Florida Regional). Below are a list of observed issues. These are in order of most common to least common

1. Update your DS software, PDP and PCM firmware to the required versions.

1. Check the seating depth of your PDP fuses, I cannot stress this enough. A good rule of thumb for this; If you can remove the fuse by hand, without the use of pliers, then it is NOT properly seated.

2. Robot Wiring - Teams should pull test every connection on the robot, specifically the Weidmuller connectors (push-in-type connector on PCM/VRM/PDP). Try to pull the wire out, you do not need to be gentle. If the wire can be removed without pressing the white button you should re-strip and re-seat as necessary. Also check the main battery, breaker and PDP terminals. Make sure these connections are not loose. You should not be able to move these connections without the use of tools.

3. Driver Station Computer - Disable all power management features of your DS computer. Specifically sleep and hibernate features. This can affect connectivity to the field as hibernate and sleep disable network connection and sometimes do not re-enable properly upon wake.

4. Disable all firewall and antivirus software. This can also affect field connectivity. A few teams had this issue.

5. Battery Quality - Not all SLA batteries are created equally. Some brands of batteries contain more pure lead, more consistent chemistry and lower internal resistance than others. From my experience, the MK and Genesis batteries seem to perform the best. They have a much lower internal resistance than some of the other brands out there. Having said that, all lead acid batteries degrade over time and use, so it is a good practice to test your batteries regularly.

6. PERFORM A COMPLETE ROBOT SYSTEMS CHECK BEFORE EACH MATCH!!!
If you are not doing this you are inviting failure. Catch issues before they cost your team and your alliance partners a match.

These are my observation made by both myself and Ken Gardner while CSAing at SFR.

[idahorobot]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

+1

How it was done today in Dallas




No box. They just eyeballed the vertical planes of the box, not my preferred method of checking this rule. If you happen to be off by 1/4" or 1/2" you would likely get away with it especially if it was higher up on the robot.

Really no Plexiglas box like in the past? Is this how it is at all competitions?

[thatprogrammer]

Originally Posted by idahorobot

Really no Plexiglas box like in the past? Is this how it is at all competitions?

It was like that at South Florida too.

[Drakxii]

I hate this game. Hopefully next year game will be better.

[mrnoble]

I've seen a lot of games since 2004. This one is a very interesting technical challenge for my team, and I like the solutions they came up with a lot, though they don't really approach 148, 624, et al. I look forward to our chance to be on the field in Utah week three. Still, I don't think this game is going to be as much fun to watch as 2013 or 2014, even as the weeks go by and teams dial in their strategies. I speculate that the nature of the game was driven by:

1. a reaction against last year's heavy defense
2. a reaction against the sense in the community that FRC meant "sport" only (which I know I've contributed to)
3. a desire to give the new RoboRio and peripherals a low speed test run

I'm still optimistic, but I also am one of those that liked Lunacy, so...

[Boltman]

Great game whats needed are better designed robots.... not easy to be effective and to be badly designed.... this game points out those flaws for all to see. Also driver abilities have a huge impact.

What works:

HP loaders up to 6 tall with RC
Versatile robots that can do it all
Wall stacker coop

What doesn't all else

[PVCpirate]

Some observations:

Auto stacks are massive, if a team can make one consistently they will be a game changer the entire competition. At both of this weekend's New England district events, the 1 seed and winning alliance captain had auto stacks.

Having one robot make tall stacks and another cap the stacks with RCs is a great strategy if neither robot can do both quickly. 1519 and 95 at Granite State employed this for a dominant win, with 1519 making stacks of 4 from the landfill and 95 capping them.

Throwing noodles CAN be a viable strategy if the human players can get them across consistently, especially in elims where you won't mess up coopertition. I saw and heard about advancement in elims being decided by noodles a few times.

[Zach101]

Originally Posted by Drakxii

I hate this game. Hopefully next year game will be better.

I see the downsides of this game compared to years past but I am not disappointed and in ways I love the strategy this year when trying to pick robots for elimination rounds. I think people are disappointed the most about this game because they are so used to it being a shooting game and now that there isn't a shooting aspect people are like, 'What now?', because this game is so different. I know this isn't the only reason why they are disappointed(most people at least). This game is great. Of course I wish one rule was this way and things like that but no game is perfect and sometimes we need to adjust to these new rules/game.

[Drakxii]

Originally Posted by Zach101

I see the downsides of this game compared to years past but I am not disappointed and in ways I love the strategy this year when trying to pick robots for elimination rounds. I think people are disappointed the most about this game because they are so used to it being a shooting game and now that there isn't a shooting aspect people are like, 'What now?', because this game is so different. I know this isn't the only reason why they are disappointed(most people at least). This game is great. Of course I wish one rule was this way and things like that but no game is perfect and sometimes we need to adjust to these new rules/game.

My problem with the game has nothing to do with it being a manipulation game. Logo Motion was a manipulation game and I mostly like that game.

I have a lot of problems with this game. I just can't find a good way to say them without rambling. But my main problems in line with rules that don't support weak teams and allow superstar teams to do everything on the field without any need for teamwork on the alliance. (Staying out of each other's way isn't very good "teamwork" imo)

[Sperkowsky]

I don't like this game because it's less exciting for spectators. Getting sponsors and parents to come is a lot easier when it's a fast paced shooting game

[dradel]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

It was interesting sitting at home and watching different alliance compositions compete.

Dallas was the battle of the superpowers, with 148-987 and 118-624. These two alliances mostly competed as individuals, with each robot doing their own thing. However, sometimes in eliminations, 987 would grab a stack from Robin while Batman was out to get a quick score toward the end. 3rd picks only really came in to play when they needed to come in clutch and keep up average scores.

These two alliances also showed that a less crowded field can be better, often putting up high scores despite having only 1 or 2 robots on the field.



At Hatboro-Horsham, you also had the top two robots working alone, but their third picks were tremendously important, with the third robots of the finalist alliances working to grab containers from the step during teleop. The winning alliance had major help from 5407, who had an interesting mechanism for grabbing containers.



At Waterbury, the number one seed and eventual champion alliance worked as separate systems for the most part, but the other finalist alliance was much more interesting. The alliance of 237-558-4557 worked as an amazing team. The alliance hinged on having all the recycling containers due to 237's auto. 237 and 4557 would make short stacks of 2-3, and 558 would work to add noodles to cans and cap the stacks. Most of their successful matches would end with 4-6 stacks of 1-3 that were capped with RC's. They took the winners to 3 with this fascinating strategy.



The first seed and finalists at Indianapolis had similar teamwork, with 5188 and 1024 working to make stacks, and then 1024 would cap all of them.



Most successful robots and high seeds took primarily from the feeder station, but a few of the competitive machines, like 987, 118, and 230 all took to the landfill, and a few alliances making short stacks also took from the landfill.



Stacks of 5 and 6 seemed interchangeable at most events, but the shorter the stacks being made, the more important litter became to success.



Matches in eliminations at most events were sometimes decided by which alliance more effectively threw litter.



Lastly, most people's crazy score predictions were way off, and a very competitive machine is one that can make one full stack per match.

High scores at most regionals were around 100.

Was amazing being part of the Waterbury district final! Seeing 237, 558, and 4557 develop and implement their strategy made this mentor proud.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

As much as I would love this, it makes the rarely used but still existing "processing litter" mechanic hard to execute. I'd prefer if they go ahead and "recycle" all of the noodles tomorrow morning, though.

With regards to the numbering on robots, I can't tell you how surprised I wasn't how the numbering turned out. Bonus points to robots at Palmetto with vertical and split numbering, as well as teams just throwing on the number plate they get in the pits and rolling out to the field with them (this actually happened).

With regards to the game being hard to understand, I really don't know how the GDC expected it to be easy to understand. I know hindsight is 20/20 but to improve the understandability of the game, I would have done this:

1) Get rid of Litter
2) Divide all remaining point values by 2 (not really necessary, but it helps later)
3) Instead of gratuitously stamping the FIRST logo on every game piece even though the banners, scoring overlay, and logos on the field walls apparently aren't enough, and replace every logo with the point value stamped on to the object. Every tote has a big white "1" printed on each side and each can has each FIRST logo replaced by a big white "x3" stamped around the cylinders.
3-a) Change auto point values so we don't see the most useless auto period since 2010. Tote set is worth 6, robot set is worth 4, and stack set is 12, but the containers are x3 to your auto score for both consistency but also to encourage better auto play.
4) Replace the gold totes on the field at the start of the match with gray totes, or a different color. Keep gold totes off the field. Allow the new totes in the staging zone to be scored on the bumps. Stamp the +1 on those
5) Replace the vision targets no one uses with the "grabsomefeet" co-op logo on the cans. On each side of the step have a display that shows the current point value of the co-op stack. In eliminations, have the display show the seeds playing in the matches.
6) Maybe have displays on top of each backstop showing how many points currently sit on each backstop.
7) (Totally optional and a little crazy) Somehow get the bumps to illuminate where a scored stack is placed

If I had no clue what this game was when I saw it, I would wonder why teams are throwing scoring objects to the other alliance, why teams are delivering yellow totes to a center object in qualification matches for a lot of points but don't ever touch them in eliminations (when points matter more, right!), why a stack of 6 totes tall is not worth any more than 6 totes laying alone on the bumps, and understand exactly how much cans help.

I'm pretty sure as much as 11 years ago FIRST had scoring object values printed on the objects (Frenzy, right?). This way I could look at the field and figure out exactly what was happening. You count "1, 1, 1, 1, x3... that's 12 points!" You see the co-op display and know how much that is worth.

Post-match overlay could be really good if some thought was put into it. One idea I have at 2:30 AM is this:

1) Take a screenshot of the field before the field gets the green lights.
2) Have the first overlay take up the lower third, like the small one we see in the playoffs, while you see the field screenshot.
3) After that screen, move to a screen that shows the final score of the match as well as a sample of the standings. Have 16 slots to show at once. You get the top 10 + the 6 robots in the last match on the screen showing their rank and change arrow, QA and change arrow, Co-Op score, and Next Match. The teams not in the match are not highlighted while the ones from the match are highlighted in their alliance colors. If one of the teams from the last match are in the top 10, you show the 11th place team, 2 means you show up to 12th, and so on.

One concerning thing I have gotten out of this game so far has nothing to do with FRC the program. FRC is a product. A game like this is hard to sell as a product to potential sponsors, volunteers, media partners, schools, etc.

I agree with most of what you said but keep those vision targets we use them.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by frasnow

My life got too busy to continue mentoring, so I've been relegated to the position of robotics fan. The past few years I've really enjoyed cheering on my favorite teams via the webcasts. Based on week 1, I don't think I'll watch much this year. It's not an exciting game.

Every team's playoff strategy: Score the most points in the manner we can, and don't mess up. Maybe try to get the recycling containers in the middle if necessary.

If all the robots are functioning well, as everyone desires in a robotics competition, most of the playoff matches are a forgone conclusion. If it wasn't for mistakes (and robots getting disabled), the top alliance (seeding format pushes the best to the top) should win the majority of regionals and districts. Who wants to cheer for teams to make mistakes or breakdown? Defending against an opponent's strategy should be an important part of every FIRST competition.

Though, I must say I enjoy watching gymnastics and golf, which don't have defense, but usually have very close matches. Perhaps I'll like this game on Einstein.

Random but I noticed gymnastics and figured I'd have to mention im a competitive gymnast. Very few people actually purposely watch gymnastics so it's interesting when I find people out in the while who actually enjoy it.

[David8696]

I think we discovered from finals at places like Dallas and Inland Empire that this game can actually be quite exciting when played well in a competitive setting (that catch of the falling stack by Code Orange in the last match though...). So my question is, why remove that competition from all but two or three matches a competition? Is the goal to encourage gracious professionalism, because the competitive element encourages taking of sides? Because if so, then it fails: I found myself on more than one occasion actually rooting for both alliances to play badly, so we could have a chance to move on. It's a shame that FIRST feels that this is the best way to handle nearly all the matches at a competition.

[MrForbes]

One rule change in the Team Update today....

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...ated-documents

3.2.2 Pre-MATCH and Post-MATCH
G14 ROBOTS will not be re-enabled after the conclusion of the MATCH, nor will Teams be permitted to tether to the ROBOT except in exceptional circumstances (e.g. during TIMEOUTS, after Opening Ceremonies, etc.) and with express permiession from the FTA or a Referee.