Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Suggestions for the 2013 season

It's early, I know, but with the revival of the old suggestion thread it seems people are full of ideas on how they'd like the game to be "improved" next year!

Obviously, this is all stuff that we'd like to see, wishful thinking really, but road.cc and Dave have always listened to what people think and have implemented good suggestions in the past (regional leagues, premium membership, the removal of the varying player values etc) so if you've got an idea post it below. Think of this as the place to make your request/suggestion so that Dave can see it easily. Also, tell everyone what you think works too rather than just complaining!

Firstly off, I'd like to thank Dave for the game and strides they've made over the last few years to improve it into what is an excellent competition. I think that this years game is the best yet, the 4/5 split is a massive improvement over the old 1 GC, 1 AR ,1 KM, 1 PC and 5 DS split and allows for much more interesting team selections, likewise I think the constant rider values is something that should be kept next year as I haven't missed the old system at all.

My suggestions? Nothing major...

1) Remove the 4/5 split altogether - I'd be happy if the current system was kept but would like to see complete flexibility, the limited budgets will restrict players from having a particularly unbalanced team and it will allow for even more creative team selections, especially where there are lots of cheap stars in a race (like this years classics). For example, pretty much all the top Vuelta teams will still have 3 of Contador, Rodriguez, Froome and Valverde so the 150 credit cap will restrict the makeup of the rest of their team. However, I guess the 4/5 split does give structure and makes the game easier to get your head around when starting out (my dad really struggled when he joined for the TdF but the 4/5 split made things easier).

2) Expand on the premium membership with extra features such as combined purist team on the same account and stuff like that. I will probably pay for premium membership next year but I'd like to see some extra features being included for my money, not just extra races (which have been a bit shambolic this year and are very hard to follow).

3) Teams of teams - another possible premium feature, 9 players band together into one team of players, their scores are combined in some way (straight sum of scores, average of all 9 or maybe lose the highest and lowest and sum/average what's left) and they compete against other teams for a prize (Grand tours only maybe?). Should be fun and unpredictable, also, good for getting people to get involved on the forum.

4) Fantasy jersey competitions - another thing to aim for when playing the grand tours, a selection of jerseys awarded to winners of particular comps:
- a GC jersey awarded for whoever finishes 1st overall along with the bike, a black jersey possibly something road.cc themed.
- a points jersey based on sprint stages or combined sprint points, either whichever teams gets the most intermediate sprint and flat finish line points over a race or maybe whoever scores highest just on flat stages, based on intermediate sprints would keep it interesting throughout though as you have to keep up with breaks in the mountains.
- a mountains jersey like the points but for KoM points/mountain stages

ideally these would be biased to make it very difficult to win them whilst still playing for overall placing, ie base it heavily on breakaway points (the KoM in particular) so that you need to pick the breaks and possibly suffer in the overall as a result, that'd make it something entirely separate to aim for like the riders aim for the KoM comp sacrificing their overall standings. Moreover, these aren't big cost prizes and are just for fun/pride.

5) Reduce the penalty for making additional transfers. I like the fact that there is a penalty but 20 points is very heavy, you basically need to place in the top 4 to overcome that. 10 points might bring in more tactical use of this facility and not be so penal if someone cocks up their team and needs to sort it out.

That's mine, just to be going on with. Also, a booby prize for whoever first mentions the 'reset button'.

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

198 comments

Avatar
James Warrener | 11 years ago
0 likes

Sounds a good idea...

Avatar
enrique replied to drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

As a compromise to all the suggestions (10 point penalty transfers, more banking of transfers etc) how about we just make stage 1 (or the prologue) effectively a rest day? 4 transfers for the first stage... the rest of us will be trying to fix our teams.

I'd go for BOTH 4 transfers after the 1st stage AND being able to bank transfers till the end of the competiton...

Hell. I'd say you should be able to bank transfers all season long!  1 If you did that!, I'd have no problem with not being able to buy any extra transfers at all!  1

I know STEVESPRO is right, in that it'll end up with people having more similar scores, but therein the challenge... It'll give you more uncertainty in that if you get a huge day from one from your DS's you can't sit back and enjoy your haul too long because other teams can adapt more quickly and erase the deficit faster than they can right now... if you play your cards right and have luck on your side!  3

Avatar
enrique | 11 years ago
0 likes

I used to like something about the old game - having to have a GC guy and a PC guy. I'd be ok if for next year, insteade of Star Riders, you were required to have 1 GC guy, 1 PC guy and one KM rider.

Just playing around with the idea  1

Another option I thought about was to eliminate the GC, KM and PC points, except for the riders you had on your team that were chosen for the GC, KM and PC slots.

Maybe the GC, KM and PC slots could be filled with any rider you choose, not those designated by the game as KM, PC or GC guys,l but whoever you wanted in those slots.

For example, at the start of the Tour I could choose Cancellara to fill the GC slot, Cavendish the PC slot and a DS to fill in the KM slot. Only thoes guys I chose would get the extra points for GC, KM and PC points. The rest my team, the other 6, would just get Finsih Line Points and PC and KM points along the way.

I guess what I like about it is that most teams have someone who pursues the GC, or at least the yellow jersey, a sprinter and a climber or breakaway guy. I guess I like the idea of requiring a GC guy, a PC guy and a KM rider from last year. I guess I'd just like to choose who those guys are and not have to choose from a designated list like we used to.

Just playing aroud with ideas...  1

Avatar
TERatcliffe26 | 11 years ago
0 likes

Not sure we will see that rule come back, especially with the extra races. Some of these premium races we have struggled with a good enough choice of star riders as it is, so that rule would make it almost impossible for some races

Avatar
Stumps | 11 years ago
0 likes

What happens though when you get, for instance, Il Lombardia when you have to have a sprinter but know that it wont be a sprint finish so you've wasted a slot ?

Or like Tour Down Under / Tour of Beijing where every stage is a sprint and you need a KM rider in ?

I like where your coming from but not every race is the same.

Personally i would like to see, like the ToB, just pick 9 riders regardless of stars for the classics because anyone on their day can win one of the classics but when it comes to the stage races and GT's we have team leaders who the teams work for and unless something miraculous happens a domestique isnt going to win a GT.

Avatar
Gkam84 | 11 years ago
0 likes

Yeah, i'd like to see more like the ToB, even for the big tours. ANY 9 riders within budget. I think Beijing might be the same.

But there is really NO need to change much for next season.

I know the riders value's with be different and changeable. So thats going to be interesting.

Avatar
Stumps | 11 years ago
0 likes

The value of stars has been gone over a few times. Some are way over valued IMHO but its the same for all of us.

I can see Henao being into the late 20's possibly early 30's after the year he has had and the emergence of some of the younger sprinters.

It would be interesting to see how the team work out the rider points system.  39

Avatar
enrique replied to Stumps | 11 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

What happens... when you have to have a sprinter but know that it wont be a sprint finish so you've wasted a slot?

Yeah, I know what you mean... I guess I'd like to see this only for the Grand Tours... Just 'cause I think it mirrors real teams... It's probably too complicated to roll it out just for the Grand Tours, but there's something about the concept that I really like...

Avatar
enrique replied to TERatcliffe26 | 11 years ago
0 likes
TERatcliffe26 wrote:

... Some of these premium races we have struggled with a good enough choice of star riders as it is, so that rule would make it almost impossible for some races

I see what you mean... What I was thinking was that we do away with the GC, AR, DS, KM and PC designations completely. The riders themselves would not be classified as such, as they are now.

You would have a GC slot, a PC slot, and a KM slot, which you could fill with ANY rider (assuming we do away with all the designations) and ONLY those riders that you slot into the GC, KM, and PC slots, and maybe YR slot, would get points for those competitions. The rest would only get Finish Line points and breakaway points. I know it's complicated.

For example, for the second day of a tour, assuming the first day was a prologue, my ideal team might be:

GC Fabian Cancellara
PC Mark Cavendish
KM Michael Morkov
YR Taylor Phinney

and 5 other riders...

ONLY Cancellara, Sagan, Morkov and Talansky could get points for their standing in the different competitions...

Cancellara would get 10 points for GC, if he had the yellow jersey at the end of Day 2, Mark Cavendish would get 35 Finish Line Points and 5 PC points, assuming he won the 2nd stage, Morkov will get breakaway points and 5 points for the KM jersey, if he nabbed the most KM points that day and Phinney would get 5 points for the YR jersey and having finsished in the bunch.

Your other riders would get just Finish Line Points and Intermediate KM and PC points, not anything else for the classifications .

I know it sounds complicated but I like the requirement that you have to have a designated sprinter, a designated KM guy and a GC guy, and when it exists, a YR rider on your team... It makes me feel like it mirrors a real team... Though I'm aware someone could argue that RadioShack will bring no sprinters to the Tour or Vacansoleil may not have a real GC guy, etc... I just liked having designated sprinters, KM guys and GC riders on last year's teams... I didn't care much for the AR designation, though...

I can't think of any other way to require a sprinter, a GC guy and a KM guy... but I like the idea of requiring one of each...

Avatar
drheaton replied to Stumps | 11 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

The value of stars has been gone over a few times. Some are way over valued IMHO but its the same for all of us.

I can see Henao being into the late 20's possibly early 30's after the year he has had and the emergence of some of the younger sprinters.

It would be interesting to see how the team work out the rider points system.  39

Yeah, I'm curious to see how next year's prices work. This year, with the prices being fixed at the start of the year, there have been a few prices that have looked odd once we've gotten to the back end of the season. Henao, Bouhanni, Talansky are a few but who would have expected them to come through so well at the start of the year? Not me. So I completely see why everyone was priced as they were and it made sense, it also increased the enjoyment for me having to monitor which cheap riders were coming into form and trying to use them to get the edge over others. Also, don't forget for every rider increasing in value (Henao, Hesjedal, Sagan, Bouhanni, Froome, Valverde) there will be a corresponding drop in value for others (Cobo, Renshaw, Rojas, Siutsou, Taaramae, Rujano... etc) and there will always be riders coming into form who were cheap, it just means that the great deals from this year will be replaced by different ones next year.

I'm not sure that setting prices per event (which I think is what Dave was suggesting) will be as much fun. At the moment prices are set for the year as a whole with riders like Terpstra being relatively cheap because across the year they're not going to score loads of points. Next year though he might be really expensive for the classics and dirt cheap for the grand tours. In theory that better reflects where he's going to be scoring points but I can see it ending up in a situation where you have to pick 4 or 5 riders that you think will do well then just fill the rest of the slots with whoever's cheap because anyone with half a chance of scoring well has been priced too high.

If each rider has a 'base value' worked out in the same way as this year but with a 'race adjustment' of maybe 10-20% of their value (so a 10 credit DS who is ace at classics and crap at week long tours may cost up to 12 or down to 8) then that might work but if you're completely changing rider values per race that could get confusing and annoying.

Anyway, fingers crossed whatever changes that are made work and improve the game, I'm looking forward to next year already.

Avatar
Stumps | 11 years ago
0 likes

It would be to complicated for us if the values kept changing for every race. Keep it as it is with values set at the start of the year. At least you know where you are.

Avatar
giff77 | 11 years ago
0 likes

Pretty happy with the game as a whole. How about including a couple of the womens' races as well. Or could run parrallel to the mens season?

Avatar
drheaton replied to dave atkinson | 11 years ago
0 likes

Stumps:

dave_atkinson wrote:

next year the rider values will work on a different basis and a rider's value will change between competitions, rather than being set at the start of the year. also, there'll be a more consistent base value for DSs

from above.

I agree, if the values are wildly different it might get confusing and messy but if it's broadly consistent with a limited amount of change (either limited by %age or by a few credits) then it might be ok.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Avatar
noddy69 | 11 years ago
0 likes

I was thinking of where I have made a complete muck up of a team in a grand tour which left me with no chance from the off. One solution which could be taken from F Football is one complete reshuffle of a team in any one competition per season.
This would obviously come into play in the grand tours, but only one of them. It gives everyone a fair shot if they have screwed up and also if they need a tactical reshuffle, but only once in the season.(if it has already been suggested apologies but alot of posts to go through)

So in essence its a one off wild card to be used at one point whenever you so choose.

Avatar
drheaton replied to noddy69 | 11 years ago
0 likes
noddy69 wrote:

I was thinking of where I have made a complete muck up of a team in a grand tour which left me with no chance from the off. One solution which could be taken from F Football is one complete reshuffle of a team in any one competition per season.
This would obviously come into play in the grand tours, but only one of them. It gives everyone a fair shot if they have screwed up and also if they need a tactical reshuffle, but only once in the season.(if it has already been suggested apologies but alot of posts to go through)

So in essence its a one off wild card to be used at one point whenever you so choose.

Yeah, wildcards, double transfers for stage one, cheaper penalty transfers or any number of other things to help you if you made a mess of your team for stage one have all been raised but sadly they seem to be shouted down by those who don't want the game "dumbing down".

I can see both sides and as I've said previously I'd quite like some system where you can retrieve a complete cock up because picking 2 or 3 wrong DSs at the start of a race can keep coming back to bite you throughout the whole race.

On the other hand it makes your first team even more important to get right and makes the game harder, it also means that those players who get it right have an advantage.

I'd like something implemented but I don't expect anything to change in this regard.

Avatar
noddy69 replied to drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes

I dont like the idea of a lesser penalty as it makes the using any penalty points a tough decision and quite tactical. It would make tactical decisions a lot easier with less of a penalty and I am not convinced.
Getting it right from the start is something that is part and parcel of the game but I am with you in that it can leave alot of players stranded in a three week competition right from the start. With only one wild card per season it gives everyone one chance only to change this, it also does not only benefit those left behind but can be an advantage to everyone if used cleverly and I believe a good option for all players which is a must to be implemented.And as it can only be used once in a season it makes it all the more reasonable ,in my mind anyway.

Avatar
Stumps | 11 years ago
0 likes

I play the F Footie game and the wildcard is used by a lot of players due to injuries etc.
If it was brought in here then i agree only once per season.
I dont see how anyone can complain about "dumbing down the game" as if you've already mucked up your team your already on the back foot so not gaining anything by it in terms of the overall.

However it will make your own game that much more enjoyable as you have the chance of stage wins etc without virtually waiting a full week (2 transfers per day) to change your team about.

For instance i have already stated above i missed the first week of the Vuelta and by then i was literally 300+ points behind the leader. The next week was spent trying to get my team back together and as such falling further behind. In the end the race wasn't much fun as i had no chance of winning and virtually no chance of a stage win.

Its a thumbs up from me for the wild card.

Avatar
noddy69 | 11 years ago
0 likes

Another suggestion involves a roster of cyclists for a season long purist game. You pick at the start of the season your roster, could possibly be only 9, that you think will score the most points over the season and the game runs season long.
As the game would be run alongside the main game it really makes no odds if riders get injured or are out as you still have the main game to focus on and its tough luck if your team is depleted.

However if you were given say 3 transfers which could be used at any point in the season that may help, although not necessary really.
Not sure of the validity of this one but thought I would suggest it anyway.
If a wild card was implemented I would say it cannot be used in this competition.

Avatar
drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes

I think elsewhere someone suggested a game where you pick your 'squad' of 25 riders or so at the start of the season based on a budget (although this wouldn't work if rider values change throughout the year...) and you choose nine riders from your squad for each race.

No transfers, no changes, just your 25 guys for the whole season much like the pro setup and you play each race purist.

I really like the idea and the ways you could extend it (having a 'draft' style system to choose your riders so no team in a mini-league has the same riders, having a keeper league where you keep your riders each year making transfers in the off-season etc) but it's a totally different game really to the main game and would be a big departure. Possibly something to look at outside of the game (like on the forum) but again, it'd be a lot of work.

Avatar
noddy69 replied to drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes

Thats why I was suggesting a very simple 9 man team, three transfers , season long side game. It could be made complicated but as you said thats a different game, this would just be an added extra that people could use to add to the enjoyment of an already addictive game not a complicated new type of system at all.

Avatar
dave atkinson replied to drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

Stumps:

dave_atkinson wrote:

next year the rider values will work on a different basis and a rider's value will change between competitions, rather than being set at the start of the year. also, there'll be a more consistent base value for DSs

from above.

I agree, if the values are wildly different it might get confusing and messy but if it's broadly consistent with a limited amount of change (either limited by %age or by a few credits) then it might be ok.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

here's how it'll basically work:

1) there's a maximum rider value of 40 and a minimum rider value of 3, more or less as there is now

2) individual competitions will be turned on as they approach, ie you won't be able to pick your tour of beijing team in january. generally the competitions will be opened when we know which teams are participating

3)at the point at which the competition is turned on the rider values will be calculated. They'll be calculated based on a rider's performance in the year preceding that date; ie all races up to one year in the past will be considered

4) the scores of each rider will be totted up to generate averages for each type of stage; they'll be weighted according to the importance of the race, and how many of each kind of stage features in the upcoming race

5) based on that, each rider will be given a value, and the highest-ranked riders will be star riders. so a rider won't necessarily stay a star if they do badly over a season, and the reverse is also true.

What will it mean for rider values?

1) It'll mean that the values of riders for the start of the 2013 season will be pretty wildly different to their 2012 values. but you'd expect that

2) It'll mean that a DS who does particularly well in a race might see his value jump considerably, but the values of star riders who've already amassed a lot of points in 2012 will change less radically from one race to the next

3) It'll mean that rider values will be weighted towards the riders that will do well on certain types of terrain; if a race is all flat stages then sprinters will be more expensive, and so on;

4) It'll mean that riders will be valued according to their ability to score in the game. true sprinters won't be as expensive as GC riders, because they generally don't score as many points even though they win as many stages

alles klar?

Avatar
dave atkinson replied to drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

I think elsewhere someone suggested a game where you pick your 'squad' of 25 riders or so at the start of the season based on a budget (although this wouldn't work if rider values change throughout the year...) and you choose nine riders from your squad for each race.

No transfers, no changes, just your 25 guys for the whole season much like the pro setup and you play each race purist.

I really like the idea and the ways you could extend it (having a 'draft' style system to choose your riders so no team in a mini-league has the same riders, having a keeper league where you keep your riders each year making transfers in the off-season etc) but it's a totally different game really to the main game and would be a big departure. Possibly something to look at outside of the game (like on the forum) but again, it'd be a lot of work.

the whole squad/draft thing we're not really considering, for two reasons:

1) it's very different to what we're doing now and a lot of work to implement
2) cycling's not like football; people dip in and out over the course of a season. the game needs to reflect that in order to be inclusive. i know everyone on this thread will most likely be getting stuck in from the tour down under onwards, but the majority don't sign up until at least the spring classics. any game structure that requires doing anything at the start of the season is out, as far as we're concerned, for the main game. no reason it couldn't be done as a forum game though.

Avatar
drheaton replied to dave atkinson | 11 years ago
0 likes
dave_atkinson wrote:

the whole squad/draft thing we're not really considering, for two reasons:

1) it's very different to what we're doing now and a lot of work to implement
2) cycling's not like football; people dip in and out over the course of a season. the game needs to reflect that in order to be inclusive. i know everyone on this thread will most likely be getting stuck in from the tour down under onwards, but the majority don't sign up until at least the spring classics. any game structure that requires doing anything at the start of the season is out, as far as we're concerned, for the main game. no reason it couldn't be done as a forum game though.

Yeah, I can imagine it'd be a huge project. I'm not suggesting it really as something to run alongside the main game for the kinds of people who'll just compete in the TdF, but I can see it being a fun addition for those people who want to compete all year in as many races as they can ie those players who sign up for the premium game.

That would be my only bugbear actually, that the premium game is just a few extra races that, for me at least, aren't as fun as the ones we get for free. Adding some extra features just for premium users which don't unbalance the game would make me sign up for premium membership gladly next year rather than being the only way to have a chance at the bike  4 Just extra league types, race types or something like that, something for the more involved player, would make it a bargain at £10 a year.

I'd happily run a squad based game as a forum game but it'd be a massive amount of work to manage 10+ 25 man squads, make sure no-one uses riders they don't have 'under contract' and keep to the rules. The variable rider values would make it complicated too as they wouldn't be 'set' at the start of the year as they are now. In theory the game engine as it stands would do a lot of the work but the 150 credit cap would heavily impact on the rules you'd have to run the game on.

Any plans on releasing an API so someone could pull the scores directly off the net through the API and feed them into an external site or program? Either that or any way of making the scores available in a format that's easier to just drop into a spreadsheet? Just one sheet, a list of riders down the rows (with a unique id) and stages across the top, that'd make it much easier. Or even just adding a 'rider id' to the stages pages might help.

Avatar
dave atkinson replied to drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

Any plans on releasing an API so someone could pull the scores directly off the net through the API and feed them into an external site or program? Either that or any way of making the scores available in a format that's easier to just drop into a spreadsheet? Just one sheet, a list of riders down the rows (with a unique id) and stages across the top, that'd make it much easier. Or even just adding a 'rider id' to the stages pages might help.

mebbe. we can chat about that...

Avatar
TERatcliffe26 replied to drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:
dave_atkinson wrote:

the whole squad/draft thing we're not really considering, for two reasons:

1) it's very different to what we're doing now and a lot of work to implement
2) cycling's not like football; people dip in and out over the course of a season. the game needs to reflect that in order to be inclusive. i know everyone on this thread will most likely be getting stuck in from the tour down under onwards, but the majority don't sign up until at least the spring classics. any game structure that requires doing anything at the start of the season is out, as far as we're concerned, for the main game. no reason it couldn't be done as a forum game though.

Yeah, I can imagine it'd be a huge project. I'm not suggesting it really as something to run alongside the main game for the kinds of people who'll just compete in the TdF, but I can see it being a fun addition for those people who want to compete all year in as many races as they can ie those players who sign up for the premium game.

That would be my only bugbear actually, that the premium game is just a few extra races that, for me at least, aren't as fun as the ones we get for free. Adding some extra features just for premium users which don't unbalance the game would make me sign up for premium membership gladly next year rather than being the only way to have a chance at the bike  4 Just extra league types, race types or something like that, something for the more involved player, would make it a bargain at £10 a year.

I'd happily run a squad based game as a forum game but it'd be a massive amount of work to manage 10+ 25 man squads, make sure no-one uses riders they don't have 'under contract' and keep to the rules. The variable rider values would make it complicated too as they wouldn't be 'set' at the start of the year as they are now. In theory the game engine as it stands would do a lot of the work but the 150 credit cap would heavily impact on the rules you'd have to run the game on.

Any plans on releasing an API so someone could pull the scores directly off the net through the API and feed them into an external site or program? Either that or any way of making the scores available in a format that's easier to just drop into a spreadsheet? Just one sheet, a list of riders down the rows (with a unique id) and stages across the top, that'd make it much easier. Or even just adding a 'rider id' to the stages pages might help.

Im likely to have some time on my hands to at least be able to assist in some forum type game like that. Ive found stuff ok to do when its about 10 teams, however was a lot of hard work when it got up to 20 odd for one of the week races. But like you said any form of assistance Dave could add would help

Avatar
Stumps replied to dave atkinson | 11 years ago
0 likes
dave_atkinson wrote:
drheaton wrote:

Stumps:

dave_atkinson wrote:

next year the rider values will work on a different basis and a rider's value will change between competitions, rather than being set at the start of the year. also, there'll be a more consistent base value for DSs

from above.

I agree, if the values are wildly different it might get confusing and messy but if it's broadly consistent with a limited amount of change (either limited by %age or by a few credits) then it might be ok.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

here's how it'll basically work:

1) there's a maximum rider value of 40 and a minimum rider value of 3, more or less as there is now

2) individual competitions will be turned on as they approach, ie you won't be able to pick your tour of beijing team in january. generally the competitions will be opened when we know which teams are participating

3)at the point at which the competition is turned on the rider values will be calculated. They'll be calculated based on a rider's performance in the year preceding that date; ie all races up to one year in the past will be considered

4) the scores of each rider will be totted up to generate averages for each type of stage; they'll be weighted according to the importance of the race, and how many of each kind of stage features in the upcoming race

5) based on that, each rider will be given a value, and the highest-ranked riders will be star riders. so a rider won't necessarily stay a star if they do badly over a season, and the reverse is also true.

What will it mean for rider values?

1) It'll mean that the values of riders for the start of the 2013 season will be pretty wildly different to their 2012 values. but you'd expect that

2) It'll mean that a DS who does particularly well in a race might see his value jump considerably, but the values of star riders who've already amassed a lot of points in 2012 will change less radically from one race to the next

3) It'll mean that rider values will be weighted towards the riders that will do well on certain types of terrain; if a race is all flat stages then sprinters will be more expensive, and so on;

4) It'll mean that riders will be valued according to their ability to score in the game. true sprinters won't be as expensive as GC riders, because they generally don't score as many points even though they win as many stages

alles klar?

Ah, right, so thats how its done  7

Avatar
drheaton | 11 years ago
0 likes

Yeah, the key here would be that it'd run parallel to the normal game on proper events like the Giro, Paris-Roubaix or Tour so you could use the official scores rather than having to score each rider yourself, that'd make a huge difference, especially if the scores had some form of rider id attached to them which you could refer to in excel.

The only minor problems with the riders page as it is are that riders who abandoned don't show up in the list and that you have to pull each stage off individually and then try and sort the riders by name, then pull off their scores into some kind of table.

Having the full set of scores/riders for a whole race come off from one page would be ideal.

Avatar
Alan Tullett replied to giff77 | 11 years ago
0 likes
giff77 wrote:

Pretty happy with the game as a whole. How about including a couple of the womens' races as well. Or could run parrallel to the mens season?

Would second that. Good way to build interest in their races. Their main races could be in the premium season with a few (world champs) part of the main season.

Avatar
Alan Tullett replied to dave atkinson | 11 years ago
0 likes

here's how it'll basically work:

1) there's a maximum rider value of 40 and a minimum rider value of 3, more or less as there is now

2) individual competitions will be turned on as they approach, ie you won't be able to pick your tour of beijing team in january. generally the competitions will be opened when we know which teams are participating

3)at the point at which the competition is turned on the rider values will be calculated. They'll be calculated based on a rider's performance in the year preceding that date; ie all races up to one year in the past will be considered

4) the scores of each rider will be totted up to generate averages for each type of stage; they'll be weighted according to the importance of the race, and how many of each kind of stage features in the upcoming race

5) based on that, each rider will be given a value, and the highest-ranked riders will be star riders. so a rider won't necessarily stay a star if they do badly over a season, and the reverse is also true.

What will it mean for rider values?

1) It'll mean that the values of riders for the start of the 2013 season will be pretty wildly different to their 2012 values. but you'd expect that

2) It'll mean that a DS who does particularly well in a race might see his value jump considerably, but the values of star riders who've already amassed a lot of points in 2012 will change less radically from one race to the next

3) It'll mean that rider values will be weighted towards the riders that will do well on certain types of terrain; if a race is all flat stages then sprinters will be more expensive, and so on;

4) It'll mean that riders will be valued according to their ability to score in the game. true sprinters won't be as expensive as GC riders, because they generally don't score as many points even though they win as many stages

alles klar?

OK, that's interesting. Only problem is with only 150 points it'll be difficult to get more than 4 or 5 riders scoring if all the ones who are likely to score are expensive. I see quite a lot of cheap 'dead wood' to afford riders who'll score. Would be better if we had 175 points as before to get a more balanced team so you can afford to take a few risks with potential breakaway riders who are moderately expensive DSs.

The other option which I've thought of to get more varied teams is to keep the star/DS distinction but make it more meaningful by having a point cap on the stars. If we had 150 points then you can only use 100 for stars and 50 for DSs. This would restrict the use of high-value stars and force people to make more choices as was necessary when we had 1GC, 1PC etc. This would lead to more varied teams (I'm thinking of the Vuelta especially, but it applied to some extent in all the main Grand Tours when the GC settled down and it was obvious who was going to do well.)

This wouldn't be a big change and would keep most of the good aspects of this year's game and add some elements from the previous year which have been lost.

Avatar
drheaton replied to Alan Tullett | 11 years ago
0 likes
Alan Tullett wrote:

OK, that's interesting. Only problem is with only 150 points it'll be difficult to get more than 4 or 5 riders scoring if all the ones who are likely to score are expensive. I see quite a lot of cheap 'dead wood' to afford riders who'll score. Would be better if we had 175 points as before to get a more balanced team so you can afford to take a few risks with potential breakaway riders who are moderately expensive DSs.

Totally agree, I'm worried that we'll all resort to picking 4 or 5 'scoring' riders then load up on junk riders just to get a team in budget. For races like the Vuelta that'd mean we pretty much all had exactly the same riders because we'd all have picked Rodriguez, Contador, Valverde +1 then 5 cheap crap DSs who are seriously unlikely to score anything.

Pages

Latest Comments