If YOU were the GDC...

[plnyyanks]

Originally Posted by Peyton Yeung

Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?

We can do better!

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Well, since you asked...

I would have replaced the boulders with totes, the outer defenses with scoring platforms, and the midline with a step.
That's right, more Recycle Rush!!! Most exciting game ever!

jk - I think I would rather watch grass grow.

[Zuelu562]

Jumping off StAxis, I would change Stronghold in the following ways:

1: Crossing the auto line on your side of the field (ie, if you are blue, crossing the auto line on the blue outer works side) becomes the point where a foul is assessed, and any significant (read not extension vs extension contact) beyond the midline is a foul.

Encourages multi-ball/using the center balls in auto, the consequences and end results of current center line penalties (usually a robot heading in the wrong direction nearly contacting an opposing robot [almost] in the outer works) are still covered.

2: Some change to the ranking point system such that wins recieve a static or static + 1 ranking points and losses receive bonuses for doing well, such as outlined earlier (my thoughts - Win: 2 points plus 1 point for Breach AND Capture. Tie score: 1 point for each alliance plus 1 for Breach AND Capture per alliance, Loss: 0 points, plus 1 for Breach, 1 for Capture. Something like that.)

This eliminates teams "Running away" with the standings that have a > 90% capture rate, and doesn't completely disincentivize winning. Week 1 you're going to see a lot of 2 to 0 or 1 RP matches, later at DCMP's you'll see 3 to 2's left, right and center.

3: Get rid of the Audience Selection. Hindsight being 20/20, seeing how many events (my experience at a Week 2, 5 and queueing at NE DCMP) quickly devolved into the same 4 audience selections coming out every time until eliminations (where we saw drastically more Drawbridge, especially come the finals), it barely made sense to have it actually be a choice.

My personal solution would be either FMS random selection from the category per match (which becomes locked in for the match the same time as the alliance selected defenses), or have the teams pick what it is from the predetermined category, but it must be in slot 3. The former option is a lot cleaner from an event perspective, but the restriction on the team's end still gives them choice from the latter.

More might come to mind, but as you can see, a lot of my thoughts on how to improve this game are complete hindsight things that even the most experienced mentors may not have been able to predict would happen given the sheer Monkey-Shakespeare quotient that FRC inherently has. I think this game has the least amount of game grinding failures certainly in my time in FIRST, and one of the fewest all time. It's certainly a game FIRST can look back on and go "How do we recreate the success of Stronghold with this game".

[s_forbes]

MCs should have been required to wear medieval apparel and complete a course in either juggling or fire-breathing.

Everything else was pretty great.

[MaGiC_PiKaChU]

Allow hard defense, make tipping legal. No more complaining about red cards

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by MaGiC_PiKaChU

Allow hard defense, make tipping legal. No more complaining about red cards

Yea, let's just incentivize flipping robots over when you're losing instead of on the fly strategy and smart defense. /s

[Doug Frisk]

Originally Posted by Anupam Goli

Yea, let's just incentivize flipping robots over when you're losing instead of on the fly strategy and smart defense. /s

Eh. Build a robot that doesn't tip. There are bumpers, contact between robots was intended as part of the game. Building a robot that's a bowling ball on top of a stick isn't (or shouldn't be) a good design.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by DareDad

Eh. Build a robot that doesn't tip. There are bumpers, contact between robots was intended as part of the game. Building a robot that's a bowling ball on top of a stick isn't (or shouldn't be) a good design.

There is a difference between building a robot that is difficult to tip over and removing tipping violations that allow robots to actively attempt to tip other robots (ex. a ramp specifically for tipping).

Even building a short robot does not mean that you won't get tipped, look at 836.

[Doug Frisk]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

There is a difference between building a robot that is difficult to tip over and removing tipping violations that allow robots to actively attempt to tip other robots (ex. a ramp specifically for tipping).

Even building a short robot does not mean that you won't get tipped, look at 836.

Building a tall robot doesn't mean you'll be tipped either. There are plenty of examples where it seems the intent was to jostle a robot to mess with its aim, but the robot tipped.

[CloakAndDagger]

Originally Posted by DareDad

Building a tall robot doesn't mean you'll be tipped either. There are plenty of examples where it seems the intent was to jostle a robot to mess with its aim, but the robot tipped.

What would your opinion be on the flip in this video then?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cReB8jw-ccI
We were defending them too hard, and as a result as soon as one robot drove underneath our bumpers and got us up, they both kept hitting us until 3536 made a concerted effort, and we fell over. This was not a result of us being too top heavy, or accidental hits from opponents, but a clear, sustained effort to flip and incapacitate our robot, which irreparably bent our arm, requiring us to punch a new one out before worlds.
I say that it was intentional not only because of what the video shows, but also one of the FTA's claims to have heard their drive coach yelling "Flip them".
We are lucky enough to have great sponsors, one of those being Russels Technical Products, who allows us to get custom-made aluminum and steel parts for reduced prices, but imagine if this had been a new team. Our traveling costs for St Louis are nuts, as are many other team's, and new teams or teams with less sponsors could very well have been permanently crippled because of lack of funds to both make it to competition and make new parts. And you want to make it legal to flip.

This was not an accident, not a misunderstanding, and not in the spirit of FIRST, and it should not be permitted.

[cbale2000]

I like most of the ideas people have posted so far, here's a few of mine:

• Remove the limitation on how many balls robots can carry, and have more balls available on the field (see 2006)
• Remove the limitation on how many balls can be crossed over the defenses at once.
• Limit the bumper-zone range more to prevent wedge/tipping situations while flat on the ground with normal bumper contact.
• Allow attackers to shoot balls from the neutral zone (I have mixed feelings about what this would do to gameplay, but it might be interesting; perhaps just limit shooting in the zone to "passing" balls over defenses, but don't allow them to be scored directly from the neutral zone.)
• Add a defender starting position in each teams secret passage and allow defensive autonomous (maintain existing rules protecting robots crossing defenses though)

Originally Posted by CloakAndDagger

What would your opinion be on the flip in this video then?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cReB8jw-ccI
We were defending them too hard, and as a result as soon as one robot drove underneath our bumpers and got us up, they both kept hitting us until 3536 made a concerted effort, and we fell over. This was not a result of us being too top heavy, or accidental hits from opponents, but a clear, sustained effort to flip and incapacitate our robot, which irreparably bent our arm, requiring us to punch a new one out before worlds.

This is probably the first video I've seen this season that was clearly an intentional tip deserving of a red card. This is the sort of thing that should be penalized, however, there are also many instances of accidental tipping that are penalized far too harshly.
I can understand a foul and maybe a yellow card as a warning to the team, but an automatic red card for a momentary contact tip is overkill. This video is an example of the standard that should be applied to red cards for tipping IMO.

[DanKein]

In order to achieve a breach, there should be two options: 1. cross 4 of the defenses 3 times. 2. cross 5 of the defenses 2 times.
This would incentivize the crossing of a difficult defense.

I also like the idea of a defending robot in their courtyard to be able to shoot balls out of the courtyard. I think this adds more than it detracts.

I think there is a difference between running over a ball and controlling a ball. Penalties being called for running over a ball while controlling one, don't make the game better. Yes, this may allow the occasional ball to enter under the low bar. However, herding or pushing a ball under the low bar, or a strategy of a human player jamming up a low bar should be penalized.

I also think the tower strength should increase from qualifications to eliminations, and with each level of eliminations.

[Citrus Dad]

There might be tweaks like the ones suggested, but the GDC got this one right. Funny after the snoozer last year.

I like that the capture has to happen with all 3 robots in place. I still would like the GDC to send out a notice in September that a game will require that ALL 3 bots will need to accomplish a task to gain significant points. That would encourage teams to work together in the preseason.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

I still would like the GDC to send out a notice in September that a game will require that ALL 3 bots will need to accomplish a task to gain significant points. That would encourage teams to work together in the preseason.

I disagree. If FIRST needs to put out a disclaimer to get teams to work together, there's a culture problem that needs to be addressed. Teams helping each other should be the default.

[BeardyMentor]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

There might be tweaks like the ones suggested, but the GDC got this one right. Funny after the snoozer last year.

I like that the capture has to happen with all 3 robots in place. I still would like the GDC to send out a notice in September that a game will require that ALL 3 bots will need to accomplish a task to gain significant points. That would encourage teams to work together in the preseason.

It has been two consecutive years where 3 robots are required to score some points. I would just assume that next year will be similar. Let's see how long it takes teams to figure out that they should be helping other teams during the preseason.