- Yes, it seems simpler
- No, it has the same complexity of previous games
0 voters
0 voters
Everything seems really easy except climbing, which seems really hard
Yes… but so far for me it seems to be simpler in a good way. Seems like there are a lot of approachable challenges that young/inexperienced teams can do while maintaining some really challenging stuff for the top end teams.
G23 on page 51
I wish there was a bot or something that just replied with what that is, so I didn’t have to check the rules
Where’s Marvin when you need him
There are just as many if not more things to do on the field as previous years. What I think is different is that the scoring is so simple. Outside the RP stuff, each element scores one amount and that’s it. An exact opposite game would be Arial Assist, which had only one game piece, but 5 ways to score points with it. (low goal, high goal, assist, truss, catch)
They also have consistent point values through the entire game (auton/sandstorm scoring doesn’t net more points)
Both. Yes, it seems simpler, but then, every year since 2013 has seemed simpler on day one - and proven to provide a new challenge. I’m wild-guessing that the hatch covers are going to be harder to manipulate than they seem, and that defense will somehow prove more important than most teams realize at this point, probably because there’s a pretty solid top limit to points.
Capabilities for defence too seem very limited. G9 means that only one robot on an alliance can be on the opposing alliance’s side of the field, and G10 means that everything must be within the frame-perimeter (minus bumpers obviously) of the robot on the opposing side of the field.
G9: One (1) defender at a time. No more than one ROBOT may be positioned such that its BUMPERS break the plane defined by or are completely beyond the opponent’s CARGO SHIP LINE .
G10: On defense, rein it in. No part of a ROBOT , except its BUMPERS, may be outside its FRAME PER IMETER if its BUMPERS are completely beyond its opponent’s CARGO SHIP LINE .
Yes, defense is very limited. But as points are also capped, defense will become increasingly important at higher levels of play.
Understatement. It’s been 20 years since the last time a game piece had Velcro on it as a method of manipulation. There’s a reason for that (the other part of the reason being the REST of the game piece in question being foam peanuts and ripstop nylon or something like that).
As I commented to my team: The dodgeball is a long-solved challenge (though only for folks around way back then: 2004, 2001, 2000, and earlier). The Hatch Cover is a completely different animal, with similarities to 2013, 2017, and 1999, and tough to use any of those as a direct comparison.
Eric, I totally get most of that post, even though beyond my experience. Still trying to figure out this one:
In what way is the 2016 STRONGHOLD (closed cell foam) dodgeball so much different from the 2019 Deep Space (inflatable) dodgeball that the experience from 2016 and 2014 (with a much larger inflatable ball) won’t help with 2019?
I think simpler scoring can be confused with a simple game. I can explain to a 6 year old that you deliver plastic circles for 2 points, balls for 3, and can climb for between 3 and 12 points. That is simple, low values, and easy to understand.
However, as previous replies have mentioned, it is not that simple. I don’t have much analysis to add there other than to say that easily understanding a game’s concept does not make the challenge itself simple. The idea of a car is simple - 4 wheels, engine, point A to point B, etc. - but that doesn’t mean it is easy to build one.
For starters, the 2016 and 2014 balls tended to stay round, or very nearly so. This is not necessarily the case for the dodgeballs from 2004 etc., to put it mildly. Additionally, the early dodgeballs are rather stickier than the boulders or the 2014 balls–from my memory this one is a pretty reasonable match for those (last used when I was a freshman in HS by the way*). I don’t think the Depots will be as easy to bust up as folks think. 2004’s mass of balls was best compared to a herd of cats; this one should be relatively tamer as there are a lot fewer of them.
That’s what jumps out at me right away. That, and the fact that nobody in FRC has SHOT dodgeballs of this general type before (dumped, yes, moved, yes, but shot like in 2016 or 2014, nope), unless it was in another competition. Shooting was first legal in 2006 (with some very minor exceptions in some prior years).
*As I recall, between the supply shortages and the inability to maintain a round shape, FIRST went to build-your-own and foam basketballs for the next two years, the latter being subject to shortages as well.
@EricH , Thanks for all the heads up!
Given that hatch covers practically have to be intentionally placed at similar altitudes, I was thinking that teams would “feed them out” of an elevated intake on the same lift/arm/whatever rather than “shoot” them.
Oh, absolutely on the feed-out. But, I would not count out a robot or two doing shooting. Thinking of a couple bots last year… Not that we’d try anything like that this year.
@EricH This game has some tie backs to 2004, the kickballs and the multi-tier platform mainly. As those who were around then will remember teams who thought about manipulating a kickball with a gripper mechanism either failed miserably or spent way too much time of the match to do it. Trying to bring a non-uniform kickball six feet into the air quickly and with dexterity is a much harder task than it appears.
Also I think mechanisms which “latched” onto the top of the 2003 ramp will be useful ideas to prototype “grasping” the hatch panels with. Trying to use the small amount of loop fastening tape to control the hatch panel with is depending on that loop to be new every time.
Well all really get our first ideas of the simplicity of the game once we start prototyping. I’m sure we’ll find some real difficult stuff.
Yes, this difficulty was brought up at dinner this evening. Hook and loop is good for several dozen place/remove cycles, but is likely to fail in the hundreds.