Next season and the year in review.

[archiver]

Posted by Michael at 04/20/2001 10:31 AM EST


College Student on team #271, Mechanical Marauders, from Bay Shore High School and Verizon.



Hey there,

There's been lots of talk about what FIRST should do to bring more interest and media attention to the game, and a lot of people have commented on bringing 2 vs. 2 back, and simplifying scoring and all sorts of other things that we've heard before.

Personally, I like the variety of rules and playing fields and strategy that the switch from competition to alliances has made. But, I'd also like to see that variety go on, with a new system of play next year.

Here are some of my thoughts . . .

Competition in the game makes it much more media friendly, quite obviously. This season, there was no clear winner or loser during any single match. It was a lot more cerebral in that spectators could not watch a single match to understand how well a team operated. They would *need* to spend the entire day watching all of the matches so they would know the average scoring and what seed a team was. I don't know if my explanation was very clear, but I think the lack of a clear and immediate winner and loser was a big drawback to this year's game. . . at least, from the spectator's point of view.

Also, there's something that needs to be said about having lots of similar robots. Innovation is important and good, but it's also practically important to be able to develop a mechanical or electrical system that is decidely more efficient and reliable than someone else. That's what makes money in this world, and it's important not to overlook the implications of steering the competition toward many simple designs of similar style. Personally, I say, who cares about efficiency? . . . let's build cool, unique robots that make people say, "I never thought of that" or, "I didn't think that could be done".

As far as the playing field is concerned. . . it's going to stay pretty simple. You've got to remember that there are teams out there (mine included) that don't have the space and/or money to construct a really elaborate playing field on any kind of permanent basis.

Finally, a few suggestions about possibilities for the game. . . just some things to think about, I guess.

1 - Rather than a tradition 2 on 2 match, why not look into the possibilities of 3 on 1, or something like that. Then, the playing field could be designed in such a way as to greatly advantage the lone robot. Perhaps the single robot team needs to protect something while the others try to infiltrate it's domain and steal it. . . or vice versa. Or maybe there could be multiple objects to take, and each is more or less hard to obtain and worth a corresponding point value.

2 - I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but I'd be surprised if it hasn't. Just a bit like above, why not have a big game of CAPTURE THE FLAG!! I think that would exceedingly simple to explain, and yet allow for a lot of possibilities. There could be quick, agile robot thiefs, big defensive machines. . . pick pocket machines that take the flag back. And it doesn't need to be a flag, exactly. Maybe balls or something. I could go on and on about the possibilities of this one. Think about it a bit, and I think you'll agree that it's certainly promising, and it's possible to introduce a lot of little elements into the game that complicate things a bit, but still hold true to an easy to understand game that most people are familiar with.

3 - TAG . . . another offshoot of the 3 vs. 1 or Capture the Flag system of play. One robot is given a special device or object. . .again, maybe a ball . . . which designates them as it. . . And the longer they hold the object, the more points they score. Meanwhile, other robots try to steal the object from the robot to stop it from scoring high. As soon as one robot manages to steal the object, it becomes the lone player, and the other robots go against it. . . That's exciting and dynamic. Alliances still exist, but shift unpredictably and on the fly, and there's room for offense and defense. It still encourages working together, though maybe at the expense of another robot. This, slightly changed, could also work in a two on two format.

4 - Finally, introduce some staff or AI controlled 'bots into the game. Imagine .. . floppies that run away from your robot. And then, the 4 machines can work together to corral as many objects as possible! That would be neat, too.

Of course, there are play balance issues with all of these suggestions that need examination. But, it's just a starting point for further discussion.

~ Michael