I agree with @Gigahertz.t , your response to my post was incorrect, and here is my thoughts on the whole game manual Do we have to have a conversation about this game being a “cash grab”? - #10 by 6842A-APOLLO
It wasn’t entirely incorrect. I was listing one of the intents of the rule which was not the main intent.
If we find out there’s no chance of the rule ever being changed back, I guess the only things I can think of that teams can do to not waste the parts is use them for something that won’t be on the current robot (such as keeping a past robot around longer or building a battery holder or pit decoration), or give/sell them to someone else (if their organization/school board allows them, which some might not), such as past students whose robots have been taken apart and who might want to keep the parts from their robot (or equivalents) as a souvenir or even to try to rebuild the robot. (There might also be ways to use the metal without keeping the pieces intact, though that wouldn’t be the same as reusing the part as it’s currently constructed. There might also be other solutions I didn’t think of.)
For any robots with colored parts whose teams would have otherwise taken them apart, maybe some portions of the robot could be kept intact to serve as inspiration for future students, while maybe reusing the currently-legal electronic components (or the whole thing can be kept intact to serve as an even more accurate demonstration of what that robot was like in the past).
In past years, the GDC has explicitly stated that colored c-channels are not considered mimicking game elements.
??? What do you mean? Im confused on the context.
can you provide a source or image?
Look, before you go around accusing me of spreading “unconfirmed information” to users like @Toxin , maybe you should actually look at the hierarchy of the rules you’re quoting. You are correct that clause “d” of the visual decoration rules specifically prohibits decorations that mimic Field Elements or Scoring Objects. However, the note in clause “a” for High Stakes creates a separate, blanket prohibition: as of October 1, 2024, anodizing or color changing of official VEX parts is strictly “no longer allowed in events in mainland China”.[1]
Regarding your claim that this was a “punishment” for illegal c-channels being masked by paint—that information is not in any of the official Game Manuals. If that’s your “research,” it’s coming from a Google search, provide a source. The Push Back manual actually state that if a component’s legality cannot be “easily/intuitively discerned,” teams should expect additional scrutiny[2]. Furthermore, the GDC has clarified that an important focus is “preventing Teams from building Robots that could interfere with sensors” and ensuring that “all Teams can rely on their sensors to work as expected”[3].
Finally, if you’re going to lecture me on the “intent” of the rules, you should notice that in the Override manual, clause “a” has been updated to state that anodizing, painting, or color changing of any legal VEX part is now prohibited globally, with no mention of mimicking game elements in that specific sub-clause[4]. If you want to argue about “99.9999%” of parts, take it up with the GDC, not me. Take me off the watch list.
(High Stakes) Note: As of October 1, 2024, anodizing or color changing of official VEX Robotics parts (such as painting, etc., which changes the original appearance of parts) is no longer allowed in events in mainland China. ↩︎
(Push Back) . If a component’s legality cannot be easily/intuitively discerned by the Robot rules as written, then Teams should expect additional scrutiny during inspection. This especially applies to those rules which govern non-VEX com-ponents (e.g. , , , etc). There is a difference between “creativity” and “lawyering.” Basically, if there’s not a rule that makes a Robot part legal, it’s not allowed. ↩︎
(Override) In addition, Robot rules will continue to be reviewed to make sure the game stays fair throughout the season. One important focus is preventing Teams from building Robots that could interfere with sensors in unfair ways like intentionally trying to confuse sensors or adding parts that look like Field Elements. (page 28) ↩︎
(Override) a. Anodizing, painting, dyeing or changing the color of any legal VEX part is prohibited. b. Small cameras are permitted as non-functional decorations, provided that any transmitting functions or ↩︎
Bro I actually thought you were being fr for a second
Is colored plastic allowed?
Can we still 3d print our own license plates? I want to do that since I lose my team’s license plate to often
Me too. I wondered why there were so many likes.
Yes, as long as you bought it from VEX already that color.
Ok, kkaiden, this is getting out of pocket.
I don’t know what your intent is of judging others in this forum about being concerned.
It is very very clear that vex has made some mistakes, and has not given any reason for their choices, other than ‘we can’t be bothered figuring out a way to inspect the colored parts. So we’ll just ban them instead.’
Teams have a right to be angry and upset, and it is clear why.
Whether you’re part of vex game design or something, an avid Vex and GDC fan, or just a member of a team that doesn’t like looking at more creative robots but loves buying overpriced sensors, you’re clearly on the GDC’s side and I respect that. Just stay out of people’s concerns.
Yes cus its not a vex product
After doing more research
The false positive rate of apriltag detection can be as low as 0.000044%
Even though I thought that the reasoning for no recoloring of VEX parting being Apriltag detection earlier, it seems like the systems in place are so robust for the Apriltag software.
Therefore, I believe you are correct that the most likely reason is because of teams abusing the coloring rule to hide illegal/stronger 3rd party metal components.
It seems like things are getting a bit heated.
The individual is new. and I feel like despite that they seem to be learning quite quickly about topics on this forum. Way better than me when I started, to be honest.
I would prefer the criticism on myself instead, for not verifying the information and taking my general understanding of vision systems at face value.
Seriously? You yourself have highlighted the “intent” of the rules.
Nothing from the previous seasons matters one bit. The current rules are the current rules.
Except for that one really really red robot at worlds (I think it was 5013X), almost all robots will not interfere with the sensors. In fact, if they do, the sensor using team needs to reconsider how they are using the sensors. Should the blue alliance be penelized if a distance-reset from the red alliance fails because it sees the other robot? No! Then why should the same apply to the other sensors like the colour sensor?? There are hurdles you need to overcome with using any sensor. Arbitratily removing these doesn’t increase students creativtiy and problem solving skills. It makes it easier for them, and makes the sensors more worth the price (which isn’t nesscarily a bad thing if they wern’t 50-100 dollars)
3D printing license plates for V5 has been illegal since last year sadly. Very disappointed at the time, but now this overshadows that by far.
Oh ok I forgot that it was banned last year and didn’t know that it continues, but thank you so much!
Exactly. This is why this rule makes no sense. Sensors have always been a “use at your own risk” type of thing