There was recently some discussion in another thread about how many VEX IQ game elements (like the structures in the Pitching In or Slapshot games) are built from standard IQ beams and pins that can be recycled into robot parts after the season ends. This got me thinking: when has this been the case for VRC?
Aside from the occasional standoff, screws, or polycarbonate from platforms, most VRC field elements seem to be custom-molded parts with no legal use on a robot once the season concludes. My question is, what would be the best VEX part to incorporate into a new game element? The best ones I can think of are wheels or chain, but I’m not the most creative person, so I want to hear other perspectives from the community.
I’d also love to know if there has ever been internal discussion about designing VRC fields with more reusable components to reduce waste and provide more value to programs. Tagging @bkahl for any insight.
Having a blank slate such that we can design anything we want allows for better field elements that are designed to take a competition season’s worth of a beating.
I guess some of the motion stuff may be viable in a sense, but the constraint of using VEX Parts, especially structure, to design a V5RC field would result in a drastic decrease in quality and experience, in my opinion.
That is pretty much what I expected, but I’m glad I asked anyway. I do want to mention how happy I am with the quality of this year’s game elements. I remember the amount of game-affecting damage there was in Tipping Point and Spin Up, with how often the bridges/rollers/discs would get broken. So far in Push Back, despite being a game with some of the roughest robot interactions I’ve seen, the pieces are still usable even with the occasional crack, scratch, or puncture. In fact, in my state, the only part that ever got fully broken was a park zone.
Now, my poor portable field perimeters, on the other hand…
If it’s possible to connect V5 sensors to the tournament V5 Brain, the GDC can have a season with more interactivity in games with things that light up, changing its current scoring potential of the element, or even automatically tally scores.
And the great part about this is that the sensors are reusable for future seasons, including competition use. Minimal cost yet adds much more to the game itself.
If VEX incorporates $15 to add two of V5 switches, then the game gets much more depth than just “move object x to y.“
Honestly, if VEX uses V5 parts for game elements, such as C-Channels for poles and towers, it could reduce the price season by season for teams who already have the parts in stock.
Do you notice something in common with these events?
The 2.375" PVC Pipe.
I personally think that this is one of the best forms of re-use by VEX. However, I do prefer the more creative game designs recently made from the GDC.
I absolutely LOVED the PVC pipe, specifically because it allowed teams to use off-the-shelf parts to help in their design/build without having to do all work on the field. Being able to iterate at the work bench with a field-element proxy and then move to the field to do more testing made the engineering design process feel much more akin to what students are going to see in the “real world”.
From my experience, even outside of the point @bkahl made, V5 parts would be flimsy in the long term for making fields. On my first bot of the season, which saw four months of action, basically every c channel on it was bent when we took it apart. Its a guaruntee that game elements will experience large amounts of collisions from robots, and I fail to see how they would stay pristine over the whole season.
Although I would personally propose the opposite, where game elements ONLY from the previous season could be allowed as building components. This allows for some fun and unique building styles between seasons and doesn’t give too much advantage to older teams, since it gives newer teams time to obtain hand-me down elements from retiring teams.
I’m going to say “Sure, they can use V5 parts, and it will need to be a zero defense game and penalty points for damage to field elements.”
VIQ works because there isn’t defense, there isn’t enough momentum built up to damage a field element. I ran 11 VIQ events, with the center tower held in place by 0x3 pins. Zero breakage during transport or game play. One held to the tiles by screws, an errant drop, and two of the tiles broke with the force.
But what would be a win is for V5 and VIQ game elements to swap around. V5 Play Mix and Match with those pins. VIQ play with any of the V5 games elements.
Engineering costs consist of one time cost ( Non Recurring Engineering like game element design, injection design, packaging, etc. ) If you can reduce that it’s great. But even better is spreading those one time costs across more. Why are Tesla’s expensive, they make a million a year, GM may make that same car 2-3 million times. Longer product runs, NRE gets spread.
There are some good things. The huge plates, hard to make, expensive to ship are a once and done. The plastic fields are fun, but the metal ones last longer. Mine have been able to vote for a few years now. (In fact I have a pair looking for new teams in Delmarva)
