New Game Criticism

As the new game comes out, so do our thoughts and words. I am the most avid supporter of speaking my mind, and I suggest that you do. There is no right or wrong in what you say but the manner in which you speak matters very much.

I speak my mind and everyone knows of it, but the most important thing I can suggest you can do is to provide a follow up response at a later time. I have actually been there and done that and with my experience I have learned thoughts change and grew to love a game I hated so much.

Also when criticizing here is some helpful advice. My old EE prof always said, “on my evaluations please do not write ‘you suck’ or ‘this course sucked’ say ‘this course sucks, because…’”

Pavan Dave

Note: Dave, don’t worry, my response is well on its way!

I miss autonomous period scoring bonuses. They made autonomous period actions so exciting for the team whose robot successfully does what it’s intended to do after so many hours spent making it listen…

Other than that, though, I can’t find anything I dislike right off the bat.

I agree. I think a lot of the rookie teams won’t try to make an autonomous program, seeing as there’s no bonus. Hopefully they do anyways, though.

There is a bonus, …

Overall, I like it.

Dislike:
I dislike the game because of its restrictions. The ball has to stay on the ground, it can’t enter 3" inside the robot frame. It seems like they are making sure teams use a kicker of some sort.

Like: I like the idea of getting to focus on the drive train so much. We can really get nit picky with it and do some things we haven’t done in the past.

Dislike: Yellow Cards for moving the robot over a Bump, and for taking it off a Tower without a ref’s direction/supervision.

I dislike the lack of point bonus for autonomous, but the bots are all lined up so any shot balls can’t be blocked by the opposing team, so that is a bonus (to an extent).

I also dislike the rules about how much the balls can go in to the robot, and the chaining robots idea, but everything else seems really good. Overall, I like the game.

Seconding the autonomous mode dislike. As a programmer, I really liked games like 2006 and 2008 where autonomous was a separately-scored section where a skillfully built robot and control software could score some serious points. The way it is in this game (and 2009 and 2007), the best you can do is get yourself an extra 15 seconds, or 12.5% more play time than your opponents.

However, apart from the relatively low score, this autonomous mode should be pretty good. A well-done robot should be able to score from the far-away section, or at least move the balls into the alliance’s near section. I look forward to champs when 6 balls go flying into the chute in 15 seconds.

Finally (and another like): Unlike last year, there isn’t really any “penalty” for trying in autonomous: if you attempt to kick a ball and fail, it doesn’t really do your team any harm. Last year, if you dumped all your 10 balls in an attack and failed, you lost a LOT of balls and it’d be difficult to recover from that.

Another dislike is the shortage of game pieces. I think 20 would be better, but I assume that the GDC tried it with a variety of game piece counts and found this optimized something, so I’ll just roll with it.

In general, I think I like the game. It should be fairly action-packed: robots precariously navigating bumps, balls flying over bumps, balls falling from the top, it should be good.

Like the game.
Dislike lack of scoring system possibilities.
Like the new ranking system for seedings.
Dislike Yellow card for moving robot, its just asking for accidents to happen. on the plus side= people will be super careful.
All in all it gets a +10

The autonomous period bonus is definitely there! I would expect this to be a relatively low scoring game (as compared to other years). During the autonomous period, you are given the opportunity to score without any defense by the opposing alliance. Also, the fact that the balls should be returned to the playing field before the autonomous period ends, means that when Tele Op begins, you still have the same number of balls available to be used in game play.

Likes: Easy to understand game for spectators, simple scoring methodology, wide variety of types of bots that can play this game, the yellow/red card (during qualification rounds) only effects the offending team - not the whole alliance.

Unsure: Match seeding points … still need to think that one over (But easy enought to track from a scouting perspective.

Dislikes: Not a big fan of the towers - it will probably block some shots, as they bounce off them (and wonder how many will build a 7 foot tall bot for that), number of penalties.

Best regards,

Steve

I like this game because I felt that last year’s game had too much reliance upon human players to make the points. With this, I feel that it is a much larger chance for the robot itself to stand out.

I absolutely am looking forward to this game. After Lunacy, which pretty much had one objective, I am SO glad to think of the variety of robots we’re going to see this year. Right now I feel that there is a LOT more to think about regarding scoring, penalties, robot configurations, etc.

The ONLY criticism I have of this game so far is the same exact thing that StephLee said: I don’t really see very much incentive for teams to create an in-depth autonomous mode. Moving balls into your zone (if you start in the far or middle zones) seems like a smart idea, or maybe scoring the one ball in autonomous mode could work, but I really wish that they did something like double-scoring balls in auton mode, or giving a point for each ball in your zone in the end of auton.

Seeing as the game is less than 12 hours old, I’m not really going to criticize much of the game until it has digested further. And my initial reaction is rather positive to this game, seems like it has a lot of potential.

The one qualm I shall raise is with the new ranking system. While I will reserve judgment as to how it will impact the tournament and rankings, it seems to conflict with the increased emphasis on similarities to sports and viewer friendliness. We got a game that should be easy to keep score with, except the crowd will now have to bust out the calculators to figure out what that actually means for their teams rankings. The W/L/T formula is what all sports fans are familiar with, and is much more viewer friendly.

I agree. It will be hard for some viewers to understand how a team that scored 0 points got as much seeding score as the other team.

Lots to like (imho)

  • Easily the most causal viewer friendly game we’ve had in years (perhaps ever).
  • Can explain the game to Grandma in 10 seconds
  • Favors scoring
  • No descoring
  • 2 places to score and only 1 robot to defend
  • No messing if they tip over
  • No messing with robots when trying to elevate or suspend
  • should be many exciting finishes

Of course, there are things that I am less happy about (may degrade into a penalty fest if teams are stupid) but nothing I can see that is a deal breaker.

I suspect that by the end of the season it will be considered one of the best games FIRST has had in the 1st 20 years.

Joe J.

Unfortunately alot of teams like to take the stupid route instead instead of actually reading the rules and using strategy.

I generally like the game. It’s the best since 2007.

I like how it keeps the familiarity with a game such as soccer. It also gives rookie teams or teams without much machining ability to perform very well.

Some of the rules need some specification. One that stands out is G29. Not descriptive, and seems really harsh if a robot becomes disabled (such as flipped) on the opposing side.

I do like the bonus. It adds pressure to all teams to think of certain ways to grab one another and how to create a strong enough connection to withstand the weight of multiple robots. The bonus can be worth anything from 2 to 8 points from my understanding (2 points for just one robot, 8 points for one robot (2pts), then 2 robots attached to the one hanging (6pts). It adds a lot of points if the teams can work together.

One last thought. I really do like the ramps though. Just a personal favor.

Overall, I like it. I do have a few issues with it though.

First of all, you are pretty limited to what you can do with the robot, in terms of design. It pretty much makes no sense to make a robot higher then 16"-17". I’m also not a fan of how the ball can’t be more then 3" inside your frame.

Plus I’m not sure if I understand the whole seeding thing.

But overall I like it, and it should be a lot of fun as a driver.

Failure to move the 3 balls out of the far zone in autonomous leaves those 3 balls right next to the opponent’s scoring goals. Seems like incentive enough to me. :slight_smile:

I usually hate FIRST games right off the bat, to this I will be honest. (go back to all my treads and see the kind of gripes I’ve made) And yes, I had a bunch of problems with this game once I saw it.

However, after talking about it with a few people and reading over some of the very complicated rules, I am rapidly warming up to this game. I really like it. And the thing I love the most: Scores are in increments of 1. It’s about time we get simple scoring methods in these games.

And really, the things I dislike this year, are rather petty. I can claim that there won’t be much innovation done as all robots effectively need to be are boxes, but I thought of a few interesting ideas once I put those thoughts aside.

I’m going to have to agree. This game has the potential to be as exciting as Aim High.