This is a brutal game.

FIRST General Forum
#1

Does anyone else agree? We took some of the most incredible hits with no penalties whatsoever on the offenders. I like a little bit of fighting in FIRST games, but it’s getting pretty brutal out there. We severely cracked and bent the faceplate of a small CIM motor. Somehow wrecked a big CIM motor (we think due to somebody repeatedly hitting us when we were already flipped over.) We bent 1x1x1/8" wall box tubing beyond belief.

And remember, this is coming from the person who said “If you don’t like contact, your robot is not built well enough” And I still think our robot is built well enough.

Is this game being played rough at your regionals? Are ramming or destructional strategy penalties being given? I haven’t seen a single one.

#2

Does your team have bumpers? I think FIRST added the bumper idea so that robots can better protect themselves from contact. Granted they are optional, but it was just another option that teams have to keep their robot from being damaged.

#3

It is definitely more rough-and-tumble than last year, but I loved playing and loved watching it. Maybe Portland was “nicer” than some other regionals, but I saw a lot of shoving, nudging, and leaning, but only a very few cases of brutal ramming. Frankly, I saw more high-speed ramming last year than this, and last year no one had big, cushy bumpers to protect themselves. I want to run this game again – I wish there were off-season events in the northwest.

#4

Our bot had aluminum square tubing as a crash bar protecting our front roller and we bent 3 of them. We tried extruded fiberglass, but it bent too easily (we destroyed our bottom roller and it prevented us from being fully operational for 2 rounds until we could get it fixed), and then we put some angled steel across the front, and even bent that. Tis a physical game.

#5

Most definitely this is the roughest FIRST games ever and I’m sure they’ll be alot of people screaming “(The Robot Competition That Shall Not Be Named)” but it’s not like that at all. The goal of The Robot Competition That Shall Not Be Named is to absolutely destroy the opponent and nothing else. The rough play is due to very tough defense to keep good offensive bot from scoring. If all they do is defense they can still lose if they slip up and the offensive bots can score (that’s what happened to us at FLR when 229 got away and put three balls in late). Good defense can help you win but you still have to score somehow.
There’s rough play in hockey but no one starts calling it Ultimate Fighting because things get rough. Let’s not go too crazy here neither.

#6

The front of our bot was a 4x4 piece of 6061T6 with 3/16" walls. Strangely, it went undamaged. The piece of Kitbot chassis rail across the back opening (where our ball sweeper is installed) was bent slightly, though. The game certainly rewarded robust construction and the bumpers were a huge help (although we left them off the front of our bot to make ramp climbing easier).

#7

You should start one.

#8

Yeah, thought of that. We could use my uncle’s barn, and my aunt can sew costumes!

#9

It is not too bad last year in Long Island our bot was ramed from about 15 feet twice until we fliped nothing was ever called.

utc 009 (Small).jpg


utc 009 (Small).jpg

#10

I have been to both BAE and UTC and I don’t think the robot interaction too hard. The bumpers are a must have.
IMHO the referees are calling great matches. If there is too much ramming or excessive pinning it’s being called.

#11

Maybe it’s just because I come from a bygone era of FIRST, but I don’t really think that this year’s competition is more violent than anything I’ve seen in the past. 2002, in particular, continues to represent a high water wark of physical robot interaction in my experience and Aim High stands no chance of approaching it.

Our robot was battered and bruised considerably during the event, though it never once stopped functioning. We saw bent omniwheels, repeatedly bent 3/16" Al plate, sheared 1/4" stainless steel bolts, and our entire chassis was nearly cracked in half. I designed for less contact than the machine saw in competition, but it was by no means the worst damage I’ve seen to a FIRST machine. We fixed it and moved on.

Strategically, we were focused on scoring and probably saw less contact with other machines overall than did some of our alliance partners. We were never tasked with playing defense, though our drivers certainly didn’t avoid a fight, either.

To me, it seems on par with previous years and nowhere near as bad as it has been in the past – not that I felt 2002’s level of contact was excessive, mind you – and imagine there are some rather easily ratified solutions for the increased celebrity the topic has seen recently.

Obviously, there are more people participating now than ever before and so there are more voices crying about even the most inconsequential of topics. Also, I’d not be surprised to learn that as FIRST continues to grow and veteran teams vanish from the landscape, the median level of experience across all FIRST teams is decreasing. As a result, we’re likely to continue seeing machines that are designed by teams with less practical experience in the FIRST arena.

As an aside, I’ve given some thought to starting a proper off-season event in the Seattle region. Because I like to do things bigger and better than anyone else when I can, I’ve been trying to find a venue outside a school gymnasium. Pacific Science Center is a leading candidate in my mind, but I think there’s some concern in that the Ackerley Family Gallery exhibit space is entirely enclosed in glass :slight_smile:

#12

We were one of the robots at the florida regional who focused mainly on defense. This wasn’t our original strategy, we had designed and built a shooter independant of the harvesting system, but beacuse of weight issues we had to scrap it. Onto the point - The threat of the opposing alliance having a robot that can easily punch 5+ balls into the center goal is enough to bring about a little push-and-shove to knock them off target. We may have been too brutal at times in the eyes of other teams, but for the most part, a lot of the shoving we did with our robot was needed to help win the match. One thing that was nice about having a very robust frame for this year’s game was if a team on your alliance could score, but even the slightest hit would ruin their chances, you could play bodyguard for them. A little more of a feeling of teamwork came from that kind of play… Overall, yes this was a more brutal game, but I was happy to see much less flipping than I noticed last year.

#13

Portland was most likely just as rough as other regionals. I believe that the reason it’s more rough is due to the time factor. With short scoring periods, a simple 10 seconds of time for a reliable top goal shooter is enough to seal a game. Therefore teams are realizing that they need to have active and constant defense, otherwise the other team can win without contest.

As to robots being damaged, we personally experienced this in the finals. Our bot had flipped (the first and only time it flipped) near the other team’s ramp, and they were going to try and climb their ramp, However, the only way that they could do that was to move our bot. However, their choice of moving methods wasn’t the nicest. (they repeatedly ramed us, not pushed) The result of this was a breaking of two welds, and a shearing of multiple bolts. I now point out that this was while we were ON THE GROUND.

I’m not complaining about the amount of contact, I actually like how it requires us to design stronger bots. FIRST is giving us more challenges every year, and it seems that this is one of those.

#14

You guys have pics of the damage? Sounds like its pretty brutal out there?

Kirk

#15

I would reccomend starting out small and grow from there. The main goal is to get the off season started ( and do it early so you can get enough teams to come). You can seek bigger venues afterwards (theough cost would then become a concern as well. High school gyms are usually free. Professional venues are not).

#16

It’s a tough, defense-oriented game with lots of pushing, and due to high shooters causing high COGs, lots of tipping. Since there’s a period devoted entirely to defense, it’s only to be expected that tough - occasionally excessive, but I didn’t see that too much at Pitt - defense will be a norm.

I personally love the interaction this game provides. There are so many aspects to focus on, and defense is highlighted more this year than last year. I can’t speak for any other year since this is only my team’s second year in FIRST, but I love the pushing and shoving.

#17

I’m not sure, but doesn’t fiberglass just shatter?

We also had destroyed a small cim motor from competition and tweaked our chassis. The front 1/8" 6061 T6 (I believe) aluminum tubing that protected the collector got bent and that tweaked well…the rest of the chassis. It had also made the chain for our collector lose its tension and become loose enough to come off during a match. Besides that, the rest of the support members weren’t square any more and so pretty much, all in all, our bot was tweaked, but still could drive and collect, so I’m happy for the most part.:slight_smile: Nothing really all that major.

The defensive plays of hitting other robots and pushing them around, whether it be around the field or even on the ramp, are all legitimate plays to prevent robots from getting balls into the center or corner goals. I remember during the semifinals and finals, the game play was getting pretty rough and there were a lot of parts that teams had been dropping around the field like sidepanels and even chain. I heard about a team losing a motor.

There weren’t any penalties being given at BAE for unnecessary roughness, but there is one new rule in update #15 about hitting robots while they are dumping balls into the corner goals.

#18

My answer to this question is plain and simple no. The defense seen is this game is something that has been missing for a long long time. Defense is something you have to be ready for, and no matter how tough your robot is you are going to take some hits, your robot is going to get hurt. I think that FIRST went out of their way this year to implore teams to build tough robots, with bumpers, etc, etc. I think that no secret was made of the fact that this was going to be a rougher game. I mean they created a dynamic which encourages teams to play defense (thank you FIRST). The matches (especially finals) I’ve witnessed this year are some of the best I have seen since the pre-2000 era largely because teams are playing defense this year and they can do so without fear of 30 point penalty, a DQ, or some controversy for flipping. I also think that truly blatant things are getting called for the most part I have witnessed some well founded penalties for teams that basically ram another robot from the other side of the field these penalties are justified as far as I am concerned. Being and old-schooler I am glad to see a return to a dynamic where defense is excepted and can again be a viable strategy.

To this end I’ll just offer a little advice. First be prepared for defense, if you have a great robot and a great shooter you are going to get d’ed up hard…be ready for it. Also be weary of all offensive strategies. I saw a few alliances at UTC who put together three stellar shooters. They lost to an alliance with really defensive style of play. Proving that perhaps in this year’s game “the best offense is a good defense” is not necessarily the case. Lastly loosing to a defensive alliance is a different experience. It stings a little more because with an offensive loss it was for the most part under your control. In the case of loosing because you got d’ed up by two robots that is perhaps something you have less control over. I think it is a different feeling.

So in conclusion I love the new style of play, be ready, and GOOD LUCK!!!

Justin

#19

Quote

Originally posted by M. Krass
Obviously, there are more people participating now than ever before and so there are more voices crying about even the most inconsequential of topics. Also, I’d not be surprised to learn that as FIRST continues to grow and veteran teams vanish from the landscape, the median level of experience across all FIRST teams is decreasing. As a result, we’re likely to continue seeing machines that are designed by teams with less practical experience in the FIRST arena.

Interesting point on the older teams vanishing from the landscape. While I’m on a veteran team now, the older engineers aren’t doing the program anymore, but the younger engineers now are FIRST alumni from 5-6 years ago. On this years machine a large portion of the design and integration was handled by FIRST alumni, who were on our team back when they were in High school. I myself was on this team(177) as a high schooler(96-99) and am back when i started working for the parent company again, and there are at least 3 others as well in the same situation.

To get somewhere and make a point, I’m curious how many of the FIRST ‘experience’ is actually now coming from people who are alumni of the student portion. So as some of the older teams vanish, the actual students come back as mentors with all the experience they had for the rookie teams, giving stronger rookie teams. Just a thought from what I see on our team.

As to rough play we definitely planned on this being a vicious game and built towards it accordingly making sure we had a solid frame that wouldn’t bend/break easily which was a mistake made once wayyy back. The thing is though making a rugged frame requires a lot of initial thought as to where to put the wheels, the mounts, material, how too keep the weight in the right positions and we had to re-do parts 3-4 times in some places in order to get it right when we noticed a problem. It definitely paid off but this is a rough game, but that might be what makes it exciting as people off the street, while not understanding all the rules, can always appreciate the game from heavy hits to balls flying all over when a robot is hit while shooting.

#20

Remember this—

Re: Bumpers vs Frame which is better
I see bumpers as a failure point. If they rip or fall off or something, they can get caught in your drive system.

I guess you should have used the bumpers… hmmm.

WC