Robot Diversity

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by WJF2011

I actually disagree with you, the veteran teams and previous year's winners are dominating this year, absolutely. 2007 saw less veteran and usual winners doing well which is why i loved it. Think 1114, 217, 67, 148 and so on.

This was the game that broke Pink's streak and 111 didn't come away with a banner like they usually do.
This game is tough.

[WJF2011]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

This was the game that broke Pink's streak and 111 didn't come away with a banner like they usually do.
This game is tough.

Excellent point, some teams were beaten by it, but i think the general trend is leaning towards veterans, that could be just me.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by WJF2011

Excellent point, some teams were beaten by it, but i think the general trend is leaning towards veterans, that could be just me.

Alot of veterans took to this game like a duck to water.
But those teams that you mentioned do that year after year after year.

[BJC]

Originally Posted by WJF2011

Excellent point, some teams were beaten by it, but i think the general trend is leaning towards veterans, that could be just me.

Sometime veteran teams just have 'not quite as good' seasons. For example last year team 33 built a turreted shooter instead of the much more effective dumper and we just couldn't find our groove.

This year, however, I think we hit the nail on the head with our robot design .

[Chris is me]

Breakaway is one of the least diverse games in terms of functionality, but I enjoy watching it and strategizing for it more than I ever did for Lunacy. I mean, you don't only like sports that have a variety of different looking athletes, right?

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Breakaway is one of the least diverse games in terms of functionality, but I enjoy watching it and strategizing for it more than I ever did for Lunacy. I mean, you don't only like sports that have a variety of different looking athletes, right?

Unless it's Nintendo Hockey.

[Tom Ore]

This year, most teams which considered a looping-bot type of strategy decided not to pursue it becaue of a concern that the GDC would change the rules to make it illegal. The GDC in fact re-inforced the strategy with updates. Too late for most teams to change their design, but I would expect that next year many more teams will be looking for these outside the box solutions and more will be willing to go that way. This may help diversity of bot design in the future.

[AmoryG]

Originally Posted by Tom Ore

This year, most teams which considered a looping-bot type of strategy decided not to pursue it becaue of a concern that the GDC would change the rules to make it illegal. The GDC in fact re-inforced the strategy with updates. Too late for most teams to change their design, but I would expect that next year many more teams will be looking for these outside the box solutions and more will be willing to go that way. This may help diversity of bot design in the future.

469 didn't leave the outcome of their season up to chance, though. They have an amazing bot even when it's not parked in the underpass.

[Tom Ore]

Originally Posted by AmoryG

469 didn't leave the outcome of their season up to chance, though. They have an amazing bot even when it's not parked in the underpass.

Agreed - this also helps diversity of bot design in coming years as teams see this is possible to achieve. This may be the long term impact of 469s 2010 bot - maybe other teams will raise their own expectations. I certainly will spend more time considering the options next year.

[AmoryG]

Originally Posted by Tom Ore

Agreed - this also helps diversity of bot design in coming years as teams see this is possible to achieve. This may be the long term impact of 469s 2010 bot - maybe other teams will raise their own expectations. I certainly will spend more time considering the options next year.

Teams like 469 will certainly inspire teams, but I was pointing out that 469 didn't take a risk at all. They knew that their robot could function in two ways. If 469 didn't have the smarts/resources/people/whatever-you-want-to-call-it to build a robot that performed that many functions so well, I think they might not have risked building the type of bot they did. Perhaps not, 125built a robot that hangs and loops, but not much else. As far as I know, the Nutrons have the only pure loop bot in all of FRC. From what I've seen of the Nutrons, they've always managed to build a robot that does something that no other robot in their regional does. Most teams just can't build a solid robot that does what every other robot does, and more. That's why many teams might not have taken the risks the Nutrons did, and probably won't in the future.

[FIRSTgirl675]

Personally, I feel that this year's game allowed for a lot of diversity, not in the type of robot and what it does, but in the specific design of the mechanism. However, I feel that the GDC didn't think long and hard enough about robots attempting to hang and how teams, especially newer teams, would respond to the challenge. Between SVR and Sacramento, I majority of robots were a chassis with a kicker. Even though teams that did hang made it seem easy, I think that the challenge (which I have to say was great to think about) was harder for teams than they thought it would be, thus the kicker only design. That's my $0.02.

[davidthefat]

I think more diversity can be achieved by a open ended game, so more ways to score like football, can have a reciever, punter, kicker, running back, offensive linemen, quarter back, defensive backs, linebackers, defensive linemen... And waterboy...

but they can be condensed down to Linemen (O/D), Punter/Kicker/QB, Linebacker/Runningback, Reciever/DB... 4 possible types

[WJF2011]

Originally Posted by davidthefat

I think more diversity can be achieved by a open ended game, so more ways to score like football, can have a reciever, punter, kicker, running back, offensive linemen, quarter back, defensive backs, linebackers, defensive linemen... And waterboy...

but they can be condensed down to Linemen (O/D), Punter/Kicker/QB, Linebacker/Runningback, Reciever/DB... 4 possible types

A nice theory, i like how you compared it to football thats interesting, perhaps it could be like baseball too, fielders, pitchers, batters, runners but there would be more subcategories of these things, curveball pitchers, fastbal pitchers, large catchers and small fast ones, fly ball hitters and ground ball hitters, runners would be all different drive trains but definitely the least diverse. and actually there could be a waterboy- a robot whose designated job is to reload the other ones with baseballs.

[davidthefat]

Originally Posted by WJF2011

A nice theory, i like how you compared it to football thats interesting, perhaps it could be like baseball too, fielders, pitchers, batters, runners but there would be more subcategories of these things, curveball pitchers, fastbal pitchers, large catchers and small fast ones, fly ball hitters and ground ball hitters, runners would be all different drive trains but definitely the least diverse. and actually there could be a waterboy- a robot whose designated job is to reload the other ones with baseballs.

My mind thinks like that, all analogies, I can even make a programming analogy: Inheritances...

[WJF2011]

Anyone else have any ideas on how to diversify the game? I think rules definitely play a factor in it and so does popularizing said game.