Feedback on Live Remote Head to Head Competition

VEX V5 Robotics Competition
22

Imagine how seniors would feel if this happens. I was a senior last season and it was a horrible experience for me.
Imagine you worked on something for 15 hours a day, when it finally worked and when you were cheering, you were told that you wasted your time and the goal you aimed for no longer exists.

23

I think a big problem with an idea like this is that most students wonā€™t be that interested. People compete in VEX mostly because they enjoy it. Could you find people willing to put in the work to solve problems like those? Maybe, but I would expect that by now, most kids who would want to try and help are already doing so.

24

RECF could re-imagine a set of mini-challenges that do not involve head-to-head competition but instead are judged or defined by metrics.

They donā€™t even have to be COVID related. Just designed to be played alone.

25

like a ā€¦ skills challenge?

26

Yeah but designed from the ground up to be played alone unlike the current game. The reality is that there isnā€™t time to re-engineer a game, spin up a kit and get it out there. So the ā€œsolve a problemā€ approach where no kit needs developed makes more sense to me.

27

the current game is a sad attempt at a season

match play is gone and irrelevant
least they can do is give us a skills challenge that actually requires some thought

28

Arenā€™t skills each year designed for just one robot?

Like Iā€™m not against the idea of RECF releasing challenges designed for just one robot, but that is literally what skills is

29

Yes but they should develop skills more this year

30

maybe the best solution at this point is to design a better and more difficult skills challenge. But even skills challenge would be boring since itā€™s so easy to get a simple basic program to work consistently on your own field.

31

Or you could actually use the new 2v2 to instead of competing, you can use it to improve on skills and scout enemy strategies.

33

I think that having 2 sets of rules for 2 different versions of the game is too much. Thereā€™s no way to design an optimal robot to do both. And then the fact that everything you do is dependent on your alliance and opponent is frustrating. Itā€™s not really possible to be able to do much on your own, and are entirely dependent on what the other 3 teams do. There will be too much luck involved imo

34

Facts press f for wall bots

35

:frowning: Sarah op :cry:

36

what could be done to make skills a real engineering challenge?

we could:

  • play skills for Tower Takeover. while I didnā€™t like tower takeover in matches so much, I think it was a fantastic game for skills. I honestly would enjoy another season of TT for skills over change up skills.
  • redesign change up in a way that makes it a difficult, non-swing game. probably the most realistic option, but might be difficult given the super easy nature of putting balls in goals.
  • bring out a completely new game (next years maybe) to use in skills. but this wonā€™t happen for many reasons so itā€™s a bad idea.

thoughts?

37

I can not parse if you are being dismissive here. But to build on Codyā€™s remark - perhaps determine a format the actually allows multiple robots being on the same field controlled remotely, yes communication latency is a thing, and positing of robots is outside your control. It would only require 1 field but yet let multiple teams figure out object positioning outside ones control.

THis format proposed by GDC means four fields running at same time - not viable for other school systems. It seems to be a synchronous four skills runs at same timeā€¦ is that really good?

Why not think of a format that allows for teams to drop off their robots at a location and then they control the robots remotely as they navigate a single field.

Or, the new VEX Link working with V5 systems - why not propose a challenge that allow two teams to develop a skills solution where a robot is acting a manager for a challenge with a helper robot on the field. So for sophisticated teams they determine how their robots collaborate in such a format.

It will be interesting to see how teams adopt the format put forth by GDC/RECF/VEX.

38

Yes.

39

this is an interesting ideaā€¦ is this possible/realistic? it requires a lot of work on the side of the event partner, and you still need to have volunteers in close contact so it might not be super safe like a virtual skills event would be.

40

that makes it fun - but yes it is possible - think about how you do remote programming - why not have remote game controllers afar controlling the robots on the field that would be connected to a server controlling four radios (controllers or not) connected to robots on the field

41

I think that it is a bad idea. I know recf and vex are under a lot of pressure, but I think that a back and forth game just doesnā€™t work remote. Teams should be able to build a robot that can do everything in 2:00 and maybe even build an ā€œoctobotā€ (a robot that leaves piece over the field to make sure it touches all towers at the end). Perhaps we should just accept that this season is a mess.

42
  • Play Tower Takeover for skills
  • Completely overhaul change up to somehow make it harder (in a good way, not an annoying and bad way like shortening matches or lowering possession limits) without needing any new game pieces. And then play skills matches in this hypothetical better change up.
  • This new system is fine
  • Who cares
0 voters