Is anyone concerned about the metal screws that go all the way through the playing field floor? I have kids knock field elements off frequently, and it’s rarely a problem because the plastic pins don’t do any damage when they are jerked out. But if a kid kicks this tower and it comes loose, that’s up to four field tiles that are irreparably damaged.
I think it’ll be fine. V5RC regularly has middle school competitions (like IQ) and those fields aren’t really damaged much (at least from my experience). They se metal screws to hold stuff down
In V5RC the screws are screwed into decently heavy metal plates
1 Like
A few things.
- Last year, Bailey was the hero, he created a design that came apart and tucked into a tile / pizza bag. This made the entire game very portable. All of the 12 schools / library that I work with were super happy on the portability. Since each org takes their elements to 4-5 events, it made it easy.
I’ll guess that Bailey wasn’t the designer this year, he would have come out with some VEXIQ parts only design that was easily moved / mounted / dismounted.
-
We invested in the Robosource risers that have the tiles screwed down. Now those need to come off and the center added. And I’m worried about the post sticking out when the field is upright, it screams HANG ON ME .
-
I think they have hurt the Build it all with IQ mind set. Now there will be a campaign to allow nuts and bolts to the robot.
4 Likes
Coming from a V5RC Event Partner perspective, we’ve gone to RECF with concerns about fragility of components and the fields and have gotten verification of possible solutions for our concerns. The biggest thing that a colleague did was get them to approve the use of Nano Double Sided Gel Tape to hold the fields and element plates to the floor.
You might be able to get confirmation/approval about using some type of backing plate or even fender washers to prevent what, I agree, your concerned with.
1 Like
welp - I fooled ya… the IQ game was my baby this year.
We had engineering concerns with a structure that robots will drive towards and into in the center of the field, and that structure didn’t have a large footprint to support itself.
In testing, we found that in light use, IQ Pins (*Fun Fact) seemed to hold up, but it was possible in extreme circumstances to break a pin or knock the standoff goal up and out of its snaps. It was determined that it would be beneficial to allow customers to choose their assembly method, screws or pins. Some would prefer to disassemble between uses, and they might choose pins. Some would prefer to use the stronger assembly method, as their field my have to service multiple events over the course of the season.
The customer that is purchasing and using a field for practice for their single team is much different than the event partner that has to support 15+ events each season, and we didn’t want to sacrifice one’s experience for the other.
I do hear the concerns about the lack of reusability of parts in the kit, as there is not a lot of IQ parts in the kit. It’s really my only regret about this game…
This was both intentional to allow us to commit a larger portion of the budget to the game pieces, and sort of a product of the game design. The game doesn’t really “need” many large or complex elements. It was our hope that cooler, well-finished game pieces would offset this disappointment.
As for packing, all of the assemblies are small. We decided that we didn’t need to commit as much effort into repackaging the assemblies into each other this year as opposed to the goal wall from last year. We just assumed most teams/EPs would use old IQ Totes, random cardboard boxes, etc.
*Fun Fact: “2-by” pins (0x2, 1x2, 2x2, etc.) have a slightly stronger snap geometry than “1-by” pins. This is why you will see “2-by” pins used in the field assembly in a few places where they’re seemingly not necessary, like mounting to field tiles, as it creates a slightly more rigid assembly.
11 Likes
From page 17 of the Game Manual:
Standoff Goal - The orange plastic structure mounted to the center of the Field with IQ pins or
screws.
1 Like
Yep, that’s why one of my favorite setups is a 2x2 pin with spacers locking things in place.
I’m going to go with using pins this year to hold the base in place. We can field fault the (anticipated) few times it snaps off. For the final event, I’ll bolt all 12 fields.
Thanks for the insight on how it all works.
(Looking forward to next season where there is only a few game elements, but there is 500+ parts to the field elments)
4 Likes
We literally didn’t even notice the option to use pins to secure the standoff goal but will probably now be using this with maybe two secured screws for our practice fields that occasionally need to move. Did we miss this in a design doc somewhere?
And we’ve definitely taken note of the IQ pin geometry differences- our teams regularly use this in their builds. It’s in a pretty long list of “build masterclass” topics that we share with kids. It’d be super cool to see a nerd-out session with some designers talking about their own design decisions with VEX parts- our kids would eat that up.
Given that usually we’re all online-forum-critical of everything (myself included), I really appreciate the careful thought that goes into things- from the disassembly of last years fields in IQ and VRC to the struggle to balance reusable VEX pieces vs. making the game engaging. We’re a cash-strapped public schools program, but if we have a few parts we can’t reuse and that’s the tradeoff for the kids having fun and everything working better, it’s 100% worth it. As our IQ state championship had reverse-built purple dispenser gearing in Slapshot and not-pushed-into-the-field goals in Rapid Relay, hopefully that will also be one less source of frustration.
Relatedly, while we loved the ease of reset for Rapid Relay, the “after the match” scoring for Mix and Match is worth the hassle of resetting things.
I would note here that some “how we designed the game and the tradeoffs we made” would also be super interesting to our kids and probably lots of adults, too. As critical as many are, I think it’s some sense of folks making snap decisions (though usually unfounded) that results in most communication challenges.
2 Likes
I don’t think so. You’re probably right that it can be more obvious…
Thanks for this feedback, I’ll work with the team to find a way to get this more apparent.
Sounds fun! Maybe I’ll work some of this into the Hero Bot videos that we are preparing to tape in the next couple of weeks.
Most of the time, we feel similarly. We try to reuse parts where possible and will find as many ways we can to reduce the cost of the field and the impact of single-use parts, but we feel strongly that these are sometimes necessary to ensure we are releasing the best product.
The game pieces this year are another great example of this. They are the most important parts of Mix & Match, and the aesthetic concept behind them is, in my humble opinion, pretty cool. We maximized the “cool factor” of those game pieces as much as we could, as we thought teams, students, etc would LOVE these game pieces.
They have ample re-usability as team giveaways, trophies, momentos, etc., though, so that might help offset the single-game usability.
This commitment to the game pieces meant that other elements of the game were much simpler in comparison to previous games. The budget just was not there for complex field element builds AND these game pieces. Hey, at least the IQ Builds in MIx & Match are a bit easier to stomach than last year’s goal wall!
The Mix & Match kit also includes Colored 0x2 Pins to match the game pieces. These can be used similarly to the pins in Full Volume to aid in field reset, as the field itself turns into the “Layout Map”.
Probably another detail we should document better… I’ll note this one too.
This is something we have identified as an area of improvement to focus on for about the past year. We (the GDC) are making effort wherever possible to try and make our decision making process more clear. Whether that be in how we answer questions on Robot Events, writing the statement we did in relation to Plastic and License Plates, participating in more conversation in the community, we want to be a bit more transparent.
I come from a background of being a competitor, being a coach, volunteering at events, etc. We have experts on the GDC in many of the perspectives found at competitions. As much as decisions can seem “snappy” or “not thought out”, we don’t make any decisions lightly.
But having that perspective of being on the other side, I can understand why it may appear that way, sometimes.
When decisions are being made for the betterment of the competition as a whole, those motivations can and will be different than the motivations of many of our users.
I would also say that its not a bad thing for people in this community to be passionate and critical. One of the hardest parts about game design is living in a “Horse Blindered” world for however long the game is in development, where a small handful of people are able to contribute thoughts and opinions, only to turn around and release it to thousands of eyes and brains in an instant.
In a way, we have to rely on that passionate & critical community to help us find the ways to improve, isolate problems, and explore solutions. We can’t catch everything, we know we are imperfect, and we can only hope to continue to improve as we move forward. We’ll only improve if the community keeps the passion.
13 Likes