^^^ exactly. Everyone wants to find a game breaking strat but no one wants to play a broken game. Better to change the rules now than to wait until the pre-worlds update to make a major change like that
Personally to me you are missing the point of vex. We do vex to compete and learn and as fun as winning is its the journey to get to the top that will make it worth it. You might remember fun times at comps but what I will remember the most is dumb things like going to the dollar store to get ramen on a Friday because we hadnât seen eaten al day or hanging out in the McDonaldâs parking lot or even just long hours messing around in the robotics lab. The point of vex is to pose kids a challenge, to give them something to work towards as a team so that they can learn and grow, If the gdc decides that the way the competition is going is not the way they desired it to go they have full ability to change whatever they want. I know it sucks to have spent so much time on something only to have to start again but that is something that is important to learn, in the end the only thing you can control is your own attitude so stop moping around and go win worlds
I think this captures an important point - the game should allow multiple designs and encourage iterations. Teams design process should reset at the end of competition and apply what they learnt from the competition to improve or completely redesign/rebuild their robot (I do not subscribe to the latter in the middle of Worlds - it does not end well).
My definition for season start is when the August manual is out AND referee certification training is available. To have quality events, you need to support the volunteers with the necessary training about rules and their interpretation.
I agree with your point. The final games will surely be boring for advanced teams.
Also, imagine when a rookie team show up with their proud hero bots, then get asked by their partners to just stay away while their partnerâs dump bot clears the floor. Itâs going to be a terrible experience for both the rookies and experienced teams.
However, what Vex IQ GDC could have done better, in addition to designing a more solid game, was better communication when they issued such a âgame-changingâ rule update. I will not be surprised to find clueless teams showing up in actual competitions in November or December. Some will say itâs each teamâ responsibility to keep checking on game manual updates and itâs part of the game. But I think itâs just bad customer service on VEXâs side. How hard can it be to send a curtesy email notification to all the registered coaches or customers who purchased this yearâs game elements? This is an example of lack of customer obsession.
62 tho
Out of curiosity, why was nothing included mentioning the August changes in the September email?
According the the game manual:
So, I guess I should have gone with June 29.
Also, the only tournament to post scores to the World Skills rankings for middle school before the 2.0 update was on 8/26, but there were only 4 teams at that competition.
https://www.robotevents.com/robot-competitions/vex-iq-challenge/RE-VIQC-21-4891.html
You said:
Iâm not sure how thatâs a âfigure of speech.â It seems more like I âread what you wrote.â
Thatâs never been done in August⌠February, March⌠Never August. The customers that provide 99% of RECFâs revenue might not even sign up for a design problem thatâs already been solved.
Didnât passive win worlds?
Yes, and 62A went with an off-meta robot and dominated in their divisional playoffs and in round robin. Although the robot designs converged towards a common meta early on, there was still enough design differences that made the season somewhat more enjoyable (like 6007Xâs pneumatic & lexan internal stacker and 202Zâs OP chain bar mech).
Like a vex latte?
What missing an n can do to ya
Time to close this topic? We have heard from all perspectives, student, coaches, EPs ⌠unless GDC weighs in, pretty sure all have been heard.
@DRow time for closure?
Agreed. Additionally, we have a second topic about this here if anyone wants to continue the discussion.
Going 2-3 isnât dominating the Round Robin. It was an ingenious design and philosophy, but thatâs technically wrong. The genius of 62A was that you had to change up your gameplan and prioritize possessing all your mobile goals immediately to face them, kind of like having a wedge against Tombstone in Battlebots. If you didnât, you were going to lose badly. (I think the two matches they won, their opponents only scored 40ish points?) However, three elite alliances did, including the 5225A, the team with the passive intake.
Toward the end of the season, it took four robots to practically clear a 12 by 12 field in about 100 seconds. Vex IQâs field is a third that size, there are only a fourth of the scoring objects, and instead of having to balance the scoring objects across 10 different targets, thereâs only one central target, and thereâs no opposition for the scoring objects. I expect the VRC to have anticipated that design, but not for it to be so effective, and it would have come down to whether they were going to whether they were going to implement Match Stop Time into the qualification rounds, banning the design, or letting qualifications be a luck of the draw if your opponents didnât have the meta design. They chose the second option, which sucks if you were building such a bot, but itâs a great learning experience.
I think someone was writing a reply earlier based off the post in the memes thread, not sure what happened to that response.
No idea, thatâs a question for RECF.
Now, as requested, time for this topic to expire.