Gravity Vehicle 20-21

[Lorant]

I know there is still a major debate over what aspects of the rules are being kept next year, but I'm still interested in hearing what others would like to see in this event next year, if the rules were to change.

Personally, I think a really interesting and fun rule change could be a target line for a bonus and then a vehicle target behind it. The layout could be similar to Mousetrap two years ago, where teams have to cross a line, in this case most likely a photogates, for a bonus, and in doing so store enough potential energy in something like a rubber band, that the vehicle would begin to roll backwards and hit a vehicle target as usual. Since most competitions used photogates this year, they are likely to be even more common next year especially at major comps, testing the vehicle would be a lot more interesting and it would carry on the loose tradition of 2nd year builds incorporating a bonus.

That is my though for possible rules changes, I am not particularly fond of the curving proposal because I think it's a bit boring, but I am interested in hearing others thoughs on this topic.

[sciolyperson1]

As many teams have extra time (no winding mousetraps, no setting up a launcher, no batteries) it would be interesting to have more than 1 target points - perhaps three. Teams would be given the same time (8 minutes) to complete 3 runs. The distances can be chosen between 9m-12m vertically, but in addition, plus/minus 0.5 meters to either side. This emphasizes aiming over luck. This, competitors can use the same ramp and car as they did last year, but will need to learn how to angle the ramp.

The score could be the sum of the best two scoring runs.

[Lorant]

As many teams have extra time (no winding mousetraps, no setting up a launcher, no batteries) it would be interesting to have more than 1 target points - perhaps three. Teams would be given the same time (8 minutes) to complete 3 runs. The distances can be chosen between 9m-12m vertically, but in addition, plus/minus 0.5 meters to either side. This emphasizes aiming over luck. This, competitors can use the same ramp and car as they did last year, but will need to learn how to angle the ramp.

The score could be the sum of the best two scoring runs.

That sounds really interesting, perhaps requiring 3 runs, aimed at 3 different targets and taking the average of the two best runs, thus allowing for the margin which is always present in vehicle events. But we have to bear in mind that thant teams could just move their ramps to the side +-0.5m, which is legal under the present rules, unless there are changes made to prevent that.

Do you have any ideas for bonuses because 2nd year build often include some fun bonus.

[vehicleguy]

As many teams have extra time (no winding mousetraps, no setting up a launcher, no batteries) it would be interesting to have more than 1 target points - perhaps three. Teams would be given the same time (8 minutes) to complete 3 runs. The distances can be chosen between 9m-12m vertically, but in addition, plus/minus 0.5 meters to either side. This emphasizes aiming over luck. This, competitors can use the same ramp and car as they did last year, but will need to learn how to angle the ramp.

The score could be the sum of the best two scoring runs.

That sounds really interesting, perhaps requiring 3 runs, aimed at 3 different targets and taking the average of the two best runs, thus allowing for the margin which is always present in vehicle events. But we have to bear in mind that thant teams could just move their ramps to the side +-0.5m, which is legal under the present rules, unless there are changes made to prevent that.

Do you have any ideas for bonuses because 2nd year build often include some fun bonus.

Moving ramps does not help and is not accurate.

A potential bonus could be getting the car within 15cm to the target for all three runs. Perhaps, it could be setting up a launch and launching within 2 minutes of the beginning of the timer. It could also be an optional fourth target which could be done if the team has time.

Run Score = 2 x (distance in cm) + time (seconds)
Lowest two scores out of the three runs.
Bonus: (20-distance in cm).
Total Score = Best Run Score + 2nd Best Run Score - Bonus

Ex.
Run 1: 5 cm off, 3 seconds.
Run 2: 7 cm off, 3 seconds.
Run 3. 1 cm off, 3 seconds.
Bonus: 8 cm off.

Run 1 score: 13
Run 2 score: 17
Run 3 score: 5

Total Score = 5 + 13 - 8 = 10.

This eliminates much of the luck-based aspects of the event, and allows teams to fully test their car to its potential. Teams will easily have enough time to get 3 launches done. The bonus is a fun addition that will benefit those which test their devices well enough.

[Lorant]

Well this is just great. I typed up a whole multi paragraph length response, accidentally reloaded the page, and in frantically trying to reload all the page and submit, i lost all my text and ended up posting yours three times. This is me giving up typing my idea up. Very sorry for those three posts, the forum is not letting me delete or edit them.

[windu34]

As many teams have extra time (no winding mousetraps, no setting up a launcher, no batteries) it would be interesting to have more than 1 target points - perhaps three. Teams would be given the same time (8 minutes) to complete 3 runs. The distances can be chosen between 9m-12m vertically, but in addition, plus/minus 0.5 meters to either side. This emphasizes aiming over luck. This, competitors can use the same ramp and car as they did last year, but will need to learn how to angle the ramp.

The score could be the sum of the best two scoring runs.

This may be true at invitational and state tournaments, but I have definitely seen some regionals where teams ran out of time doing 2 runs. It is extremely unlikely the rules will shift to allowing more than 2 runs.

I think the most likely bonus is either a curve or adding a bonus for having a lighter vehicle (certain number of bonus points per gram under the max)

[Lorant]

As many teams have extra time (no winding mousetraps, no setting up a launcher, no batteries) it would be interesting to have more than 1 target points - perhaps three. Teams would be given the same time (8 minutes) to complete 3 runs. The distances can be chosen between 9m-12m vertically, but in addition, plus/minus 0.5 meters to either side. This emphasizes aiming over luck. This, competitors can use the same ramp and car as they did last year, but will need to learn how to angle the ramp.

The score could be the sum of the best two scoring runs.

This may be true at invitational and state tournaments, but I have definitely seen some regionals where teams ran out of time doing 2 runs. It is extremely unlikely the rules will shift to allowing more than 2 runs.

I think the most likely bonus is either a curve or adding a bonus for having a lighter vehicle (certain number of bonus points per gram under the max)

What do you think about giving a bonus for crossing a photogate that is past the vehicle target point, forcing elite teams to build advanced vehicles that can change direction (with a rubber band for example) but not penalizing more novice teams that only have the resources to build one directional vehicle

[mnoga]

As many teams have extra time (no winding mousetraps, no setting up a launcher, no batteries) it would be interesting to have more than 1 target points - perhaps three. Teams would be given the same time (8 minutes) to complete 3 runs. The distances can be chosen between 9m-12m vertically, but in addition, plus/minus 0.5 meters to either side. This emphasizes aiming over luck. This, competitors can use the same ramp and car as they did last year, but will need to learn how to angle the ramp.

The score could be the sum of the best two scoring runs.

This may be true at invitational and state tournaments, but I have definitely seen some regionals where teams ran out of time doing 2 runs. It is extremely unlikely the rules will shift to allowing more than 2 runs.

I think the most likely bonus is either a curve or adding a bonus for having a lighter vehicle (certain number of bonus points per gram under the max)

What do you think about giving a bonus for crossing a photogate that is past the vehicle target point, forcing elite teams to build advanced vehicles that can change direction (with a rubber band for example) but not penalizing more novice teams that only have the resources to build one directional vehicle

Probably too radical of a change to current rules and vehicles, although ramps would be ok IMO.

[MoMoney$$$;)0)]

This may be true at invitational and state tournaments, but I have definitely seen some regionals where teams ran out of time doing 2 runs. It is extremely unlikely the rules will shift to allowing more than 2 runs.

I think the most likely bonus is either a curve or adding a bonus for having a lighter vehicle (certain number of bonus points per gram under the max)

What do you think about giving a bonus for crossing a photogate that is past the vehicle target point, forcing elite teams to build advanced vehicles that can change direction (with a rubber band for example) but not penalizing more novice teams that only have the resources to build one directional vehicle

Probably too radical of a change to current rules and vehicles, although ramps would be ok IMO.

I guess on every situation in depends, regarding on whether or not you have ever made such a vehicle or not, since if you've not done it; it looks tricky but once you understand the tricks it can also become easy. However, it will be the national ES's decision on what to do for the event for next year, since they're supposed to stay the same.

[MTV<=>Operator]

I like the sound of all of the above ideas, but in reality considering nothing was supposed to be changed in the first place, if they do make a change it likely wouldn't be something as radical as reversing or angled runs. I could see a ramp height bonus, a bonus run, or maybe curving because those things would likely only require small modifications to the already existing devices.