Lunacy Review

FIRST General Forum
1

Now that this year is officially over and 67, 111, and 971 have been crowned world champions, what did people think of this years game and also what do you hope to see different in future years. How would you compare it to other games in the past? Here are my personal thoughts, but only my 2nd year involved so I dont have that much to base it on:

Likes

Great quick action, and one big score could swing the match
Fun, penalty free action that allowed some big but non harmful robot hits
All goals could move so there was never an easy target but there were 3, thus matches never played out the same every time
Super cells allowed for some last second action, and became an important part of strategy
Defense was just as important as offense
Scoring happened throughout the match and there was always something going on

Dislikes

The floor/wheels really lessened drive train creativity
Auto mode ended up fairly boring, and there was no incentive to score
Too much human player involvement, I think that humans should not be allowed to score points in future games, maybe humans should have been allowed to only score moon rocks in auto mode and then super cells?
Teams seemed to have lots of similar designs, I felt as if last year every design was fairly unique and different. I feel as part of this problem comes from teams not being allowed to expand outside of starting dimensions. I hope next years game will allow that.
There seemed to be a bigger luck factor in this game, but dont really have a solution besides maybe playing on carpet… But then I could see some robots getting demolished in the teleop period…

So what are your likes and dislikes??? And congrats to all teams on a great season. Overall I had much more fun this year than last.

2

i think that this year more than any game since 2003 the game has been hated from the start. everyone has said that it was boring. anyone who watched the matches in Atlanta this year i think will argue against this. when no one can score in a match no matter what the game it is never fun, but when the big teams played this year in Atlanta this game was very exciting.

i think this is one of the best games ever because of how important driving and strategy were every match. also the GDC did a great job making it so all the elements of the game allowed for good game play. this specifically refers to the use of the slippery floor. if not for this it would have allowed for a 71 from 02 like team to arise this year and that kind of thing while amazing makes competition boring. because of the slippery floor every team was even going into the competition going into build drive train wise. everyone would have the same traction and it made the game manipulator focused while making the driving of the drive train more important than ever before.

i think that this year was more exciting than last year because in essence last year was basically team picks up ball they hurdle it then they pick up then they hurdle it. this year teams are running empty cells picking up balls and trying to catch up to trailers to score trying to score super cells last second dumps. this year had so many elements of excitement but a lot of people were convinced it was boring and didn’t bother looking.

one thing i didn’t like about this year was that it was not a difficult mechanical challenge. you had to pick up these balls and score them on trailers that were lower than the bot and you couldn’t go outside initial dimensions. it made things pretty restricted and it made making a mechanically difficult to make system pointless.

3

I think strategy was hugely important in qualifiers because defnse was required when you didn’t have 3 scoring robots. However, when you have 3 scoring robots for eliminations, strategy was score score score, because who can play defense on 3 scoring robots. I liked that the GDC made autonomous a challenge for those teams returning, to score, however, kept it simple, considering any rookie trying for traction control would already be up to their heads in programming. The autonomous mode also required some strategy to be productive and their were many succesful ones. I feel that the moving targets added to drivers requiring pratice and skill, another reason why 3 (maybe more) of the Michign teams were in Einstein finals. I know of 217, 68, and 67 all having a multitude of practice because of this, please correct me if I’m wrong.

EDIT: I’m probably thinking a lot more, however, I’m too tired to remeber because of the Atlant insomnia.

4

In my opinion this was the second best game in the history of FIRST only to Aim High, at first I was skeptic of the game but once we really got into it I realized how great it was, it was such a great game because of all the strategy that went into it and how quickly one dump or supercell could change the outcome of the game. I could not have asked for a better game to go out on as a senior and my kudos to the GDC on this one, they hit the nail right on the head. Oh and by the way there were four teams representing the mitten in the final match. Da Bears 247 was also from Michigan. Daa Truck Town Chickens were a completely Michigan alliance.

5

Thank You! You must feel really happy with 2 wins and 3 finals in your high school career. I got 3 more years of high school, I might be able to pull one off, who knows, maybe even two (I can dream, can’t I? :rolleyes: ).

6

I liked some things about this game, and some that didn’t.

I liked how much strategy was involved in this game, more so than previous years.

I liked how you could NOT win easily with just one good robot, and two mediocre robots. It is quite a change, where last year one super efficent, fast, effective robot destroyed the competition.

I liked how a rookie team made it to Einstein.

I didn’t like how limiting this game was programming wise and design wise. All the robots did the same thing in Autonomous, and all the robots were fridges on wheels. As a programmer, I was hoping for a really big programming challenge with the new control system.

I didn’t like that you played all weekend on a worn down field, and you got to Einstein’s pristine, perfect surface. The very first matches were pretty sloppy, and got marginally better throughout the finals.

I didn’t like that Mark Leon made all of Archimedes lose the game :P…

Oh crap, I lost.

7

Honestly I loved every part of this game. Lunacy is eaisly my second favorite game right next to Aim High (GDC good luck topping that one). For the first time there was a game that every team from top to bottom could compete in (as long as there was a working robot on the field).

Strategy was more important than the quality of robots on your alliance and when done right it could defeat powerhouse teams. Unlike in previous games I looked forward to working with a team that was a simple box that could drive on the field because with strategy, my team could make it compete. Who doesn’t like full speed rams and 2 minute pins?

8

It was better than Overdrive but it certainly wasn’t a FIRST Frenzy by any shot of the imagination.

9

Agreed, I want another FIRST Frenzy, because I wasn’t in high school then and it looked like the best game in FIRST, but then again, I don’t know all of them.

10

One thing I noticed was that a lot of the great teams had pretty much the same design. Some sort of input, a hopper and then a dumper. There wasn’t a lot of change in design or autonomous since there was really no reason to score.

Having human players was nice since it got more students involved on the field, but then the strategy focused less on robots and more on humans. That’s kinda nice if it was in the real world with human robot interaction except you just spent 6 weeks on a robot and then you only use your human player… Doesn’t make a lot of sense to me…

11

I can say without a doubt that this is the best FRC game I’ve ever played, but that’s misleading as it’s my only year in FRC :smiley:

Anyhow, this game was amazing.

Likes:
The rule prohibiting robots from having manipulators extending past the bumpers. Not that I disliked the ability for robots to do so in other years, but stuff like this and the limited wheels made teams have to think hard about their designs. Also how hard would it be to just have a sheet of Plexiglas fold down over your goal?

Allowing pinning and ramming was a brilliant GDC move. In an already extremely strategy oriented game, being able to not have to count to 5 and let off a robot helped teams be able to outplay other robots that had the technical edge. I guess the robot version of “brain before brawn”?

Dislikes:
The field was too small. I realize part of this is to fit in a high school gym (though honestly i prefer the larger-than-life feel of a stadium but I digress), and part of this is to make nowhere to hide, but it seems like there were a lot of mechanisms that did not get to see the light of day simply because a robot was always a second or two away ready to mess you up. In particular, 1986 had an extremely innovative, oddball robot that achieved a 33 and a half foot empty cell delivery. I always have a soft spot for a truly unique robot that does something better than everyone else even if it’s easily messed up, and I’m glad they got to go to Atlanta so more teams could have a look.

Well, “some sort of input”, “a hopper”, and “a dumper” varied dramatically between teams. Look at say 1625 versus 217. You could probably say that all robots in 2007 other than pure lifters had an arm that grabbed and placed tubes.

Having human players was nice since it got more students involved on the field, but then the strategy focused less on robots and more on humans. That’s kinda nice if it was in the real world with human robot interaction except you just spent 6 weeks on a robot and then you only use your human player… Doesn’t make a lot of sense to me…

If you’re only using or primarily using your human player, at least when you got to Atlanta, you’re not going to win the match. The farther up the chain competition went, the emphasis grew more and more on the robot itself, to the point where in the final match half of the human players just loaded robots.

12

I’d rather play Overdrive or any other game with the exception of Stack Attack than Lunacy.

13

Human players could put up some biiiig points without even requiring a good robot. I don’t like this, the game should favor good robots.

14

Agreed.

15

the thing is that the better performing bots won in the match no matter how good the human players. that is what made the game work out.

16

Also the best teams tended to be the ones like 217 and 111 who rather than use their human players ablity to shoot just had them fill hoppers up for the robot to score.

Still, I do agree human players where too involved in the game.

17

I was not really a big fan of Lunacy. Of the four games I’ve personally witnessed I would rank them, from highest to lowest:

2007
2008
2009
2006

Likes:
Trailers- Having to score on a moving target was pretty cool, and made for more energetic matches, generally.

Different Surface- I think changing it up is always a good thing, though I would have found an uneven surface to be even cooler.

Easy to Do, Hard to Do Well- I think this needs to be the mantra for the GDC when it comes to the primary scoring device. It should be easy to score and participate, but hard to do it well. Most teams could score, even if it was only the first 7 balls or a couple more, but not many teams could deliver game changing dumps like 67, 148, 0r 1625.

Dislikes:
No secondary scoring method- This especially applies to the end game. I just think having the end game being different from the rest of the scoring period seems somehow more impressive. Climbing the ramps at the end of 2006 or 2007 was always a high tension moment as you never knew who would fall off or just barely make it. The super cells tended to just come out of nowhere and didn’t really build as much tension, except maybe when a bot would deliver them.

G14- I don’t think much needs to be said. I personally think this is the worst rule I’ve seen in my four years of FIRST. No one should ever be punished for doing well. Each robot and team should be given the chance to perform to the best of it’s abilities, with no arbitrary limitations. I think it’s ten times worse then the G22 last year, despite having less of an effect.

Flat Field- Flat fields seem more boring. Stairs, ramps, platforms, and bridges all really add to a game and make it more interesting.

HP scoring- I’ve always thought of the human player as someone who helps the robot score somehow, such as by loading them up. I’d prefer not to see the human player be able to directly score, except in rare circumstances.

Overly protective bumper rules- Am I the only one who felt this way? Isn’t it up to the teams to make a robot that can handle the the contact you get with these robots? What was so bad about the pre-bumper era? Were robots being destroyed left and right?

Confusing rules at first- Many of the rules seemed very confusing at first, like the not extending beyond the box. For example, they continued to refer to the “starting box” if I remember correctly, which initially led me to believe that you could extend outside of said starting box. How many people review the rules before the game is released? I’d suggest always running the game past a diverse group of people, maybe even people not even involved in FIRST, and see if they can understand the rules.

18

My favorite part about this year’s game was the absence of questionable referee calls. It was great how matches with penalties were somewhat rare, as opposed to last year where penalties played a role in almost every match.

19

At Archimedes, one of the color commentators called autonomous “a programmer’s dream”. But unfortunately, this year, there was no inspiration to code.

Our robot picked up two regional wins this year with code that does nothing but mapping buttons to motors and has an autonomous that moves forward.

Hopefully next year, scoring in autonomous will be an important part of strategy to the extent of Aim High.

Otherwise, I though Lunacy was an amazing game and would love to see more open-ended games in the future.

20

I have the opposite take on this. This is the worst year EVER for top robots.

In every other year I’ve seen since 2001 an elite robot could win matches all by itself, or with minimal help from alliance partners. This year having sub par alliance partners was the kiss of death. Particularly your third partner in the eliminations. If your third partner couldn’t contribute and not get loaded up with 30 balls in their trailer, it doesn’t matter if you have the best robot in FIRST. You’re still going to lose.

Human players for an alliance could easily score 70 points alone. The best robots could only average 15-19 balls per match. When the humans can score nearly as much, or outright outscore the very best robots, something is not right.