Defending ROBOT Restriction - Only one opposing ALLIANCE ROBOT is allowed in the opponent’s ZONE. A ROBOT is considered in this ZONE if any part of the ROBOT is in contact with the ZONE’s green carpet. Violation: PENALTY; plus a RED CARD if effort to remedy is not immediate.
Overall I don’t really like this game. It is growing on my as I put more thought into it but, I’m just not a fan.
Likes:
Bumps, they’re pretty awesome seeing as we’ve had flat fields for the last 2 years.
Multiple Scoring Opportunities, it’s nice to finally have another game where there’s more than one major scoring method.
Soccer Balls, and their availability. Anyone, Anywhere, on the Planet can find a Size Five Soccer Ball.
Dislikes:
Restrictive Size Rules, I don’t like how restrictive the size rules are this year. I’d really like to see a robot allowed to expand out to it’s maximum size at anytime during the game.
Steepness of the Bumps, I really foresee at least one match where all 6 machines have tipped by the 60 second mark. (I both Like and Dislike the Bumps)
Restrictive Ball interaction rules, FIRST is basically telling us that we HAVE to “Kick” the ball.
Lack of Autonomous Bonus, I think this may discourage autonomous play.
Guys, you can’t really bash the game yet. The rules are still changing (as they always have within the first week), you haven’t seen it played, and you haven’t had too much time to digest it.
It certainly was interesting to see teams that performed poorly (ie, no wins) in the top 8. Worries me a little. Now, disclaimers. This data is only as accurate as the FRCFMS Twitter feed. We are comparing apples and oranges, last years game played different than this game will likely play and was (I am assuming) higher scoring. The only thing this data shows is that it is a MAJOR change.
Likes
Easy to explain without having to show people the animation
Teams don’t all use the same exact wheels
the field isn’t flat
Ranking can’t be relied upon as much during alliance suggestions
robots look strange (yes, this is a good thing)
requires different ways of thinking to succeed
Dislikes
scoring in auto doesn’t give extra points
The struggle to maintain as small a lead as possible could be stressful
not enough expansion ( I miss robots like swampthing from 2003, 71 from 2002, any robot that didn’t start with its wheels on the ground basically)
Wow! That’s really neat Andrew. Interestingly, a below the radar team (175) had the highest cumulative score, while other favorites (121 & 20) didn’t even make the top 8! Just basing off my memory (I can’t seem to find last years scouting data) it seems that instead of the top 8 consisting of good and exceptionally lucky teams, there are more average robots in the top, with the good ones down farther in the rankings. I assume the GDC is hoping this will even out alliance goodness to make for more exciting eliminations. Regardless, it makes for a very interesting ranking system. I’m anxious to see it play out.
My biggest complaint this year isn’t the game itself, it’s the rules. With the way the size and ball interaction rules are written, many simple, elegant solutions are taken of the picture, leaving only the difficult and complex solutions. This in and of itself runs contrary to the basic idea of engineering, KISS. (Keep it Simple and Stupid). FIRST seems to have undermined their own goals a little bit here.
My team has had a huge discussion about the seeding scoring, and we think it works like this:
First note: Losing alliance gets NO coopertition bonus.
Alliance A (the winning alliance) gets their raw score minus any penalties plus double alliance B’s raw score.
A_final = A_raw - A_penalties + 2*B_raw
Alliance B gets alliance A’s raw score.
B_final = A_raw
With this method, the winning alliance always gets more points (logical), yet close games and not blowing out opponents are encouraged.
To the rest of the game:
Likes: Strategy, easier to understand, many kinds of bots, importance of different scoring types
Dislike: The seeding system! And the complicated nature of a lot of the rules (2 second time limits, same position relative to the robot, etc); they will be hard to keep track of mid-game.
I am more optimistic about this game than I have been about any FIRST game at this point with the possible exception of 2006. This game has flying balls, hanging robots, and non-flat surfaces - all things that add to the “wow” factor. At kickoff, the speakers put it best - football is so popular not because of the 11 men on the field, but because of the 60,000+ people who will pay good money to watch the game. For FRC to experience similar success, you need games that outsiders will find fun to watch. Mission accomplished, IMHO.
To those complaining about seeding points and overall robot restrictions: On the former point, I’d say wait and see. I don’t think things will be as dismal as you may seem to think. On the latter point, we are essentially playing soccer. One of the key rules of soccer is that you can’t manipulate the ball with your hands (e.g. above the bumper zone), and that there is no way to completely possess a ball. Otherwise, the game turns into rugby or football - a big scrumfest. Personally, I had enough scrumming last year.
Personally, my oppinion on the game is a little indifferent. This is because it fits my team perfectly in that the game has various distinct tasks which can be accomplished with different subsystems that do not interact with each other (we have a very large team, so a game like that is best). I dislike how we still have restricted expansion rules and how we have to stay low to the ground when manupulating the ball.
-The 45 degree bump + the 1/2" from the carpet to the bump- I really want to see how many teams choose between going under the tower v over the bump.
Easy to tell who is winning the game
-Less human player scoring
-Higher chance of scoring during auton (especially without interference.
Dislikes:
-The idea of hanging on the tower
-The feeling that a lot of robots have a higher chance of breaking from other robots “kicking” the ball or falling off of the tower and the safety of it all.
This is going to sound a little stupid, but another complaint of mine is that it is going to be extremely hard to make a good looking robot. You can’t match the bumpers with the rest of your robot, and the fact that the bumpers are 10-16" off of the ground. Not to mention the whole hight thing.
9.3.5 CoopertitionTM Bonus
All teams on the winning ALLIANCE will receive a coopertition bonus: a number of seeding points equal to twice the un-penalized score (the score without any assessed penalties) of the losing ALLIANCE.
In the case of a tie, all participating teams will receive a coopertition bonus of a number of seeding points equal to twice their ALLIANCE score (with any assessed penalties).
Andrew- read through 9.3.5 again…the way I read it is that Coopertition is a bonus of SEEDING POINTS and thus factored into your seeding score.
I think one of the big differences is that these “rankings” would punish teams that were very good at avoiding being scored upon. In last year’s game, there was a definite advantage to teams that could outrun and avoid other robots, so a team like 121 that rarely ever had more than a handful of balls in its trailer would get correspondingly fewer Coopertition Points. All that being said, it was a totally different game, and that wasn’t a concern for drivers and coaches last year.
Andrew- when you applied the rankings to last year’s competitions…did you make the same mistake? I posted a thread with my results and some are considerably different than yours.