What elements would you like to see in next year’s game? Vote for up to three of the options above and comment below.
I see no options. You did not include a poll.
EDIT: Poll was added after this comment was posted.
It’s been updated. Maybe the thread was shown before the poll was finished?
I really liked how clean sweep didnt have any “goals”. The game was original in my mind.
i was thinking about this last week sometime… it’d be really cool for something like a “tug of war”. come up with a mechanism that the 2 robots competing would temporarily attach to kinda like a ball hitch for a trailer except under a certain amount of strain release as to not damage the motors. but as im typing this, it seems more like a classroom competition thing…
I would really like to see some more challenging stuff like hanging, goal lifting ect come back that really makes people think about how they can achieve ALL of the goals in the game effectively - maybe im jumping the gun here, but there isnt a lot to gateway (physically with the robots) only a couple of extra things i can think of which are actually fairly easy to achieve… what i would not like to see is a game that can be finished in 1min again, sure its good fun do drive around and do whatever you like (until doublers and negators are released) but a game like roundup which just keeps going would be good (score, descore, score, dump goals, hang ect)
I agree that Round Up was probably the best game so far in VeX. Initially I was a little skeptical but looking back i feel like it was so much more satisfying to place the tubes over the goals, and the fact that the game was constantly going until the end made it action packed.
Definitely agreed. There was a lot more of versatility in Round Up.
Just so everyone know, GDC have already met and mostly if not fully designed next season’s game, because they’ve usually done most of it by about August.
http://blog.iamjvn.com/2010/08/vex-game-design-august-2010-meeting.html
One question is “should the games keep getting harder?”. The issue here is that existing students, perhaps high school seniors who have played previous games, want more of a challenge, however, new students may be overwhelmed. Although many members of this forum seem to have successful designs, I am still seeing teams who are only scoring a couple of points in this years game.
I would like to see de-scoring brought back, I think would that would have allowed for more creative designs in gateway.
I would like to see more diverse shapes for the game objects, perhaps something harder to pick up such as a cone, with different point values for the objects.
agreed, i still dont know why descroing was illegal this year, the game could have evolved even more…
or objects that had a huge size difference
(6" balls, vs 2" barrels)
even though there were different shapes this year, they were still approximately the same size so the average, “roller” can still pick up both objects with only minor tweaking needed
Another opportunity to remind you that the Online Challenge VRC Game Design Animation Challenge is still open for entries until January 10!
Whoah, thanks. I thought it was just design another animation for gateway. I definitely might do this.
Besides the fact that the next game has probably already been designed…
Tiny game objects (~2") would be fun, just to change things up, although it does mean quite a lot of hassle to score and do field reset. A bit like clean sweep, where there were so many objects that scoring took a while.
Descoring! Must have descoring. Descoring was one of the most interesting and dynamic elements of Round Up, requiring not just object acquisition and scoring, but field space control too. It also ensured that the game is always playable, no matter what point during the 2:20. The way the game is played changes dynamically throughout the match, but there should never be a definitive start and stop as it is this year. How can you be sure that no team will ever end up scoring too fast and finish the game before it should be? Round Up felt a bit homogeneous in some matches (not all) when there was just constant scoring and descoring, but that’s still better than the alternative.
What makes a game harder? Is it a matter of how high it has to lift to score objects? (>30" goals) What about something that involves truly innovative mechanical design to accomplish effectively? (Green Eggs, hanging, imagine descoring in Elevation, etc) Obviously, these aren’t mutually exclusive; it does take a certain level of skill to build a robot that can reach such a high height, but that’s just another example of a design parameter. Round up needed precision to score on the goals and Clean Sweep needed capacity and the ability to lift a whole bunch of footballs.
What happens if, instead of intaking objects and lifting them to a certain scored position, we do something different?
This is Cody Smith’s entry to the design a game challenge a few years back, and it revolves around pushing tetrahedrons on the ground to score.
Also, field elements (walls, ladder, gates). Really big set pieces are fun and distinguish a game from other ones. Of course, there has to be a reason for it to be there, but nobody wants to play on an empty square field. Even Bridge Battle had a giant trough.
Having played Elevation, Clean Sweep, Round Up, and Gateway, I would say Round Up was definitely the best Vex game so far. It had so many different strategies and ways to play the game that you actually had to design your robot accordingly. This year, it is basically just design a robot that can intake objects quickly and effectively and lift to 30 inches (with some exceptions).
In my opinion Gateway is way too easy. Even though we haven’t uncovered every strategy yet, there are not as many possibilities as Round Up. Though as jpearman said, as a high school senior, I am looking for a huge challenge while others may not be at that level.
But anyway, I would say that for next year (even though I won’t be competing), they should definitely add a completely new element, have an interactive element, and bring back movable goals because those were incredibly hard but fun to create strategies around.
Because no-one has said it yet, Water game 
the coast guard academy dose that every year (i believe in Boston) where they attach vex parts to foam and complete tasks with there makeshift boats
More comments
Revert back to a “real” autonomous. This year feels like “point the robot and drive it straight”, with the coach being able to manipulate buttons and reposition I feel the programming skill has been somewhat lost. I’m not saying that our team has been any more successful but so far I’ve not noticed much line following or use of sensors (other than perhaps encoders) during autonomous. Keep the ability to “fix” the robot but limit it to specific things such as plugging in the battery.
Simplify the rules. The rules are more involved this year and I have seen rules being broken and ignored by the refs and also confusion by the teams on what they are and are not able to do. As many refs are volunteers and (I have been told) sometimes learn the game on the day of the tournament, there have been some questionable calls. Perhaps I’m wrong but last year it just seemed more straightforward. Reminds me of the “offside” rule in soccer, everyone sort of knows what it is but it can be really confusing.
I like the involved strategy that comes with doublers and negators. You have to carefully plan in order to maximize your score and minimize your opponenet’s. That being said, BRING BACK DESCORING. At worlds, our entire team went “Awwww” when we were reading the manual and it said there was no descoring.
I also like the doublers and negators but don’t like that the drivers/coaches introduce them. Remove the possibility of students introducing them illegally. Perhaps they could have been introduced by automatic release or something at the 30 second mark by the field controller or by the robot hitting a release button or something.