Expansion limit, yay or nay

#21

I like the expansion limit to prevent crazy defense bots like 127X in Tossup, but I wish it was a little bigger. Maybe 48" instead?

0 Likes

#22

Depends on the rules of the particular year. There’s a reason that we have <G12a> in the current game. I don’t remember what the non-destruction wording was for Toss Up.

1 Like

#23

So why would we need to prevent crazy defense bots like 127x if they didn’t do too well at worlds. I don’t see a problem with them being allowed in the game.

0 Likes

#24

If I am not mistaken, the reference was to the match during Skyrise when VEX-U QCC2 teams were faced with VCAT blocking off most of the field with a wallbot. QCC2 robots both drove across VCAT wallbot and snapped it (depending on accounts, metal broke, or screws unscrewed), the result was that QCC had access to the rest of the field. I came to the field right after, seeing it on the stream at Worlds, it was really impressive. It was a move in which QCC2 was maneuvering to access more objects to score… QCC2 took VEX-U World Championship that year.

0 Likes

#25

Do you have a video of this game?
That sounds very dramatic!
Thank you.

0 Likes

#26

This:

1 Like

#27

Wow! That was interesting to watch. Thank you!

0 Likes

#28

We are fortunate to have both Skyrise QCC2 robots in our lab - nothing more inspiring than this duo of robots. VCAT was pretty awesome designing a robot to thwart their opponents. It was impressive engineering on all fronts, and great to see in competition.

5 Likes

#29

There are two rules in question here. I think that game-specific expansion rules like the vertical expansion rules in NBN and TP are ok and necessary, although they do limit the innovation a little bit. However, I think the 36" horizontal expansion rule is too limiting. Although a very well-constructed wallbot could potentially be game-breaking, I think that we’re losing a lot of interesting concepts like tetherbots, more stationary bots that expanded a lot like you see in FTC Rover Ruckus, etc.

0 Likes

#30

FTC games have almost become like glorified skills challenges without a lot of robot interaction.

You could probably find a way of breaking every game with a wallbot if you wanted to. In this game a wallbot would enable you to effectively close off a route to the flags.

4 Likes

#31

Fair about FTC, I just think the bot designs can be interesting. But something people don’t always remember is that wallbots aren’t easy to build. If you look at sack attack wallbots or Apophis from toss up, they were incredibly complicated machines that deserved to do well. And there was counterplay to those, I’m sure there would be counterplay to most wallbots, as well as new rules to regulate them.

1 Like

#32

I think that the expansion limit is in place partially to keep our robot designs in check, imagine fighting for the center with robots that could go as high as they please. I personally do not like it because of this, it would be more fun and work really diversify the pool of robots seen in compositions, virtually every robot at my last competition was a simple flipper or ball launcher, and I would love to see what people could come up with without that restriction (and I am all for the size limit, that just keeps things fair). The rule for unlimited horizontal expansion though is odd though because that would interfere with the games more than vertical height would. In short, I believe that those rules need to be reviewed and instituted on a game-by-game basis, rather than as a general rule for all VEX games.

1 Like