Do you think its time for 3v3 matches?

I think in the next couple years Vex should implement a change to start doing 3v3 matches. Vex has so many teams competing now that I think they need to do this. It would be a major change for Vex, and I think there is a lot of benefits that can come out of it.

  1. 3 team alliances can return and even 4 team alliances with 1 team rotates like FIRST robotics does some times.

  2. Teams have a possibility to play more matches during a tournament because more teams are involved in matches.

  3. More strategy and robot designs can come out of game designed around a 3v3 match because its a lot more chaotic. Not every robot might be the Meta on the field because a robot that is good as a support bot can compliment the Meta bots and improve the overall alliance.

  4. I think this might help the one match elimination situation because if one robot has on issue during that match its not as bad because the two other robots might be able to pick up the slack. I think a 2v3 has a little better of odds in winning than a 1v2. Or since more teams are playing since the matches are 3v3 them might just get rid of the one match eliminations and go back to 2 out of 3 matches.

A couple things would need to happen for 3v3 matches to work.

  1. The field would definitely need to be increased. Probably to 16’x16’. This means teams with fields would only have to get 4 competition field side panels and 28 anti static field tiles, which would probably be like a estimated $400 to $450 to upgrade the field.

  2. Vex would probably have to update their match system to incorporate the extra teams in a match.

I really don’t see any wrong with this besides having a bigger field which might make teams spend more money and take up more space.

What do you think?

5 Likes

the field is already crowded with 4 robots, adding another 2 would make it even more so.

also alliance selection would be harder, and the current game would be far too easy with 3 robots.

while a 3v3 match is a fun idea, I think 2v2 is still better, and I don’t expect that to change.

31 Likes

^^ I agree with this point. To fit 6 robots comfortably on the field the game field would have to be drastically bigger and that might cause other space issues of keeping the field.

11 Likes

Not to mention adding another team’s worth of drive team members. Implementing 3v3 matches would put even more team members in close proximity with each other, and with COVID being a factor, this may not be the best idea. At least at this time, I think the safer option would be to avoid implementing larger alliances, at least for now.

9 Likes

1 crappy alliance member is enough for qual matches. Let alone 2 crappy alliance members, I’d go bonkers

14 Likes

no .

^

I would probably be wrong about the field size it would probably have to 20’x20’ not 16’x16’ to have a comfortable 3v3 match.

I agree with this as well.

Yes, with the current events going on this wouldn’t happen for awhile.

If the field is 20’ in length, I think 3 alliances would fit in comfortably.

1 Like

That wasn’t my point

the last thing vrc needs is a bigger field. it’s already a struggle to find 12’x12’ of empty space.

10 Likes

Sorry my bad. Getting good and bad teams in qual matches is normal. You would get 2 good sometimes, then 1 good and 1 bad, and then 2 bad some other time. That’s just how it works.

Increasing the field size would be a huge problem for many events. It would ultimately mean:

  • Some venues will become completely unusable, resulting in fewer events.
  • Some events would have to dramatically reduce the number of teams that can attend, meaning less revenue or, more likely, higher prices.
  • Fields would be more costly, again resulting in increased registration fees.

Not to mention the fact that many, many teams barely have enough space for the current 12’ × 12’ field in their workspace.

While this change might improve some competition statistics, it would come at an extreme cost to the accessibility of the program. If you have the means to purchase and store a larger field, and you seek some of the changes you proposed, then FIRST might be a better option for you (you even mentioned it yourself).

15 Likes

additionally, bigger field means more expensive. the field are already pretty pricey, I don’t think anyone wants to pay even more.

2 Likes

I remember in turning point they had 3 team alliances as a little mini event at the us open never went though.

1 Like

A round between 3 alliances would be awsome

Well maybe for spectators, If anyone has ever volunteered or been a referee, its hard to keep track of pinning and rules for 4 robots, imagine 6. It would be chaos as people are pinning each other constantly. Referees aren’t super human, and having having more staff makes it way too hard for event partners.

4 Likes

Having 2 alliance partners makes it even more RNG. With that kind of thing, its a lot less reliant on your team’s skill, since good alliance partners can carry you or bad alliance partners can really hamper you.

2 Likes

No. Good ideas, but no. To be honest, the best game ever was the 1v1 version of clean sweep.

2 Likes

1v1 matches are the best in terms of competitive consistency, but obviously this gets rid of all the teamwork and communication abilities alliances create. So while I sometimes wish we could do 1v1’s like in vexu, I think 2v2 matches are the best all around.

13 Likes

Also Imagine Vex IQ with only 1 team… It’s not the same. Vex IQ teaches kids teamwork as the focus of competition. That leads into VRC where you are in a team, against another team. VRC wants to focus on teamwork and problem solving. Otherwise, would it really be vex without the clawbot destroying alliances?

2 Likes