FIRST Frenzy Opinion Thread

FIRST General Forum
#61

I like the game.
Dislikes:

  1. Everyone gets looser’s score.
  2. to confusing of a qualification match system

Likes:

  1. plenty of variety
  2. no easy domination by teams with powerful drive trains (actually power-drives dont have much use in this game it seems)
  3. strategy seems to be way more important
  4. I like how they combined concepts from 2000 (hang from the bar), 2001 (big balls), 2002 (mobile goals), and 2003 (big central ramp/platform structure)
  5. I like how they made it so robots and human players have to work together
  6. no need for battlebots shoving matches like last year, although the bar might provide some skirmishes
#62

I like the game this year. It puts more emphasis on building a positive machine - a machine that can do something beside devistate the field and push the other bots around

I completely agree with this. For the past 2 years or so i have seen teams building ‘tank’ like robots that just knock everyone out of the way. Of course these designs were the most practical for thier events and produced good results, As we created in our 2002 rookie season. We simply pushed anyone out of our way and robots that had functions and moving componets for ball handling stood no chance. I saw this and i hoped the 2003 game would have a more task oriented game, emlinating the ‘Tanks’. But to no avail.

This year… my hopes are answered. This year it seems that there will most likey be a small amount of contact between robots (maybe a little when hanging on the bar?). The robots this year will most likely have to have special componets for ball handling, hanging, etc. First seems to be getting back to its roots. Thats what its all about.

Thumbs up for this one

Another intersting thing that someone pointed out is the LED lights, instead of the rotating ones. I know that many teams use led lights to light underside of thier robots as many have done in years past. I am wondering if this lighting will possibly confuse some drivers. Maybe first will do away with lighting under robots?

#63

I’m not surprised…more moaning and groaning already. It doesn’t surprise me much anymore and honestly I am sick of it, and I know for a fact most people on these boards are too.

I think this game is great. The concept is brilliant. Take the crazy part of the previous games and put it all into one. The slick steps, 10 foot bar, and multiplier balls are a real stroke of genius. I don’t care if anyone disagrees with me, but I personally like the game (much more then the 2001 game ;)).

-D.J.

Edit:

So basically you don’t like the fact that the total domination factor is gone for qual rounds. What is so hard about the qual system?

#64

this year we can build something that functions like a robot

instead of a radio controlled bulldozer! ::yeah!::

#65

I’m not surprised…more moaning and groaning already. It doesn’t surprise me much anymore and honestly I am sick of it, and I know for a fact most people on these boards are too.

Although it accomplishes nothing to complain, there’s no problem with having a discussion about our likes and dislikes about the game. If you don’t like what other people have to say, don’t complain about their complaining. Offer an argument back.

#66

I think the FIRST Frenzy looks really good. I don’t think reusing the 1999-2002 ideas will really help teams much. With team turnover, fading memories, and advancements in components/designs/techniques I doubt you’ll see many of the mechanisms from the 99 season for gaining the platforms.

Likes:
No descoring - I’ve helped build descoring robots other years, but I can’t say that I’ve ever wanted to build one. In industry or business, you hardly ever have something accomplished that someone else destroys for you. Lawyers and criminals are the only ones I can think of. :wink:

Less Robot Contact - Although there will be skirmishes around the field, and a lot of competition at the bar, it should not be like the pushing matches of the last two years.

Dislikes:
I’d like to be able to score the small balls with the robots.

By the end of the season, my opinions are likely to be different. That seems to be one of the main constants of FIRST games.

I like this years game. But even more, I like the incredible discussion in this thread. Lots of opinions, explained well, with some give and take but overall respect shown for each other. If the forums stay this civilized throughout the season, it can’t help but be a great year.

#67

I like this game overall. The main thing I like about it is that you won’t see too many pure buldozer bots like last year, and you will be able to see lots of interesting and innovative ways to accomplish the different tasks. I think we’ll see some very cool mechanisms for hanging from the bar.

-Pat

#68

Hanging from the bar?

if your gonna do something, do it with STYLE!

swinging from the bar!

doing loop-deloops on the bar!

hang by your teeth and do a victory spin :c)

#69

I just thought that it’s better when winners get their score in QP and loosers get theirs. 1) its easy, 2) if someone does really well in a match, it helps them a lot, instead of just becoming another 2QPs. The 2004 Qualification Rounds system seems a bit too confusing.

#70

I guess I like the game…
Still not convinced though.

My biggest gripes
-Seems as if we will see ALOT of bulldozer bots (herders)
-Too much human importance
-Alot of the “cool” stuff we were gonna pull out of our sleeves was included in the kit. This is a bummer because we now have to work harder to get awards like design and engineering etc. Example, the current sensors, we were gonna use those exact current sensors, we even convinced Allegro to give them to us. sigh
-less robot design intensive
-Also would have liked autanomous longer

Likes
-Should be very stratagy intensive
-Simple robots can be very competitive
-Easy to implement all most all functionalities ie. herder, multiplier, hanger
-Optimum robot design may not be the biggest, heviest, strongest

interesting…

Well good luck everyone!
-Andy

#71

Mike, I do not believe the rules say anything about not descoring the 2X balls. I think you can do whatever you want with those.

#72

Thanks. But I watched the kickoff video again and then it got through my thick head. =P

#73

I love the game personally. It seems very challenging, even for some of the vets. I can only see a real advantage that vets have in the big ball. That 6" step kind of had me worried a little. I say that there will still be ‘boxes’ around that just run around and gather balls, and this isn’t necessarilly a bad approach. But I really would like to see some good hangers. The designing process for that, if a team were to chose it << >> would seem hectic. Some one on my team mention a cherry picker like device that seemed, if not for the wieght problem, like a great idea. The scoring is pretty cool and simplistic. A team would do good to knock both ten point balls in during atonomous mode. That would be pretty smart considering you want both teams to do well. All and all thumbs and big toes go up. The game is great, and rookie teams should still be able to have a chance, many have suprized us before right? :smiley:

#74

I really like the game this year. It really exemplifies what first really is all about

Likes:
As said above, it is what first is about in most ways
Human player importance: The integration of robots and humans will be vital in the future. Each will depened on each other. This is a step in that direction.
Scoring: At LA last year, we were undefeated at the beginning and at one time we were seeded 26th. In the same situation this year we would be around tenth. Also, in the elimination rounds, best 2 of 3 advances, instead of having the team that dominated one match but lost in the other two move on.
Variety: There are many things to do, and it is almost impossible to do it all at once. For example, during autonomous, do you want the 10 point ball or not? Will it really make a difference? In the game, will capping be essential? Will the game come down to the end score as it did last year? Only time will tell.
The new stuff: I like the air-filled tire and the rotational actuator. Those will help a lot.

Dislikes:
Mostly a little too much integration of the past games and not quite enough new stuff (but the stairs were a nice touch)

It looks like it’s going to be a fun competition. Good luck everyone!

Daniel

#75

this year i think the game is very interesting and complex, and i like it. it seems like the challenges from the past 4 years have been put in a blender, and this is what happened. sure its a little different from usual, but thats what makes it great. i like the fact that the robot and the human player are equally important; they form a symiotic relationship that is necissary for your teams success.

also, the human player doesnt have to be a basketball star to make the balls in the goals. they just need a lot of practice, and the knowledge of how to throw a ball in an arch. practice makes perfect!

i look forward to the competitions this year, good luck everyone

#76

First reaction – spooked.

That is a good thing, for as Jimmy says, “If winning was easy, then everybody would be doing it. It’s the hard that makes it great!”

This is our second year; we are old rookies. For the new rookies sake, I am grateful they can shoot hoops and herd balls. It makes it conceivable for them to compete. Heck, I am grateful our team has the possibility of shooting hoops and herding balls.

I believe experienced teams have advantage because they are, well, experienced. From my perspective as team coach, it is unfortunate that so many tough tasks are repeats from preceding years. However, it is an opportunity for our team to reach out to more experienced teams and ask for guidance, war stories, and encouragement.

I extend a challenge and a request to a knowledgeable someone. There is a wealth of experience on little balls, big balls, bars and more. Could someone create a document organizing best of breed solutions from previous competitions where similar problems were posed? Having lots of white papers and discussion groups, a la Delphi, is truly great. However, it is hard to absorb and assess it all. An informed overview would be a wonderful touchstone for old and new rookies. Note: I am prepared to have my ignorance pointed out to me that such a thread already exists; where many someones have already posted their newbie overviews. Being a teacher, I am quite comfortable with my ignorance.

First response – excited.

I like the breadth of both undiscovered strategy and engineering opportunity. As Miguel says, “Only he who attempts the absurd is capable of achieving the impossible.”

#77

I had a neat idea with the hanging bar. Wouldn’t it have been cool if at the beginning of the match the bar was at 1 foot off the platform or something and as the game progressed, it got higher and higher…so that if you went for the bar early, you wouldn’t have to have as long of a arm or whatever. I thought that is what they were going to do when I saw that the bar moved…

I’m liking this game more and more because I can’t find a clear single strategy to win.

#78

Likes:
-Very strategy intesive
-Stationary & moving goals
-Stairs
-Hanging bar

Dislikes:
-No robot de-scoring
-Not enough scoring possabilities for robots
-BALLS. Too many balls…

#79

frankly, i think its a great idea to put all the more challenging aspects from the previous games in. though it seem a bit repetitive, its something we, in entirety, havent quite worked with. my only problem might be that there is so much emphasis on previoud experience to get you through this game.

#80

FACT:

  1. The win, loss, tie way of qualifying was an idea taken from this forum last year (the one where everyone’s opinions were asked).

OPINIONS:

  1. This game is way more complex than we think. There are many, many ways to win.

  2. We (the CD community) had some complaints the last few years about the human player not having any real impact. That has changed. By the way, I will take a soccer player over a basketball player. Did you see how the goals reacted? The trajectory looks more like a throw in than a shot into a basket.

  3. There are many defensive strategies, but there are just as many offensive strategies. This means more diversity.

  4. The win-loss-tie method is the best way to do qualifying. Don’t get too wrapped up in the tie breaker. I’ll explain. In football a win is a win and the fans can understand that. But what happens when there is a tie for the last playoff spot? The tie breakers are confusing for the average fan, but that is O.K. Most of the time if you win, you are in. The spectators can now understand the game during qualifying. If they see a team win every time the team is on the field, they know the team will be on top (research how many teams actually go undefeated at regionals). The wins and losses are just like hockey: 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, and 0 for a loss. FIRST will never let go of the coopertition idea and having everyone get the loser’s score for a tie breaker seems to accomplish that. There will be very few teams that actually get hurt by the tie breaker.

  5. The elimination rounds are going to be awesome! A tie is a tie and we replay. If each team has one win and they tie in the third round, then they get to play again. The rules cap it at 4 games total, but I think 2 ties in a row is very unlikely. This will bring great excitement to the eliminations.

  6. I think the game is great. I think the people who are unsure of this game will like it when the first regionals start.