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'.
Add new comment
198 comments
really? because all we're doing is using the available data to set rider values, like we did last year. the only difference being this time we're using *actual* data, rather than data in our heads.
Not really... If I had to guess, I'd say the odds are less than 1/22, because the way you're looking at it, you could only choose 22 different teams of 9 - to cover all 198 riders... One team would have bibs 1-9, another team another nine riders, but in reality there are more than 22 different combinations, many more, so I figure the odds are less than 1/22... I may be wrong, but I wish we had a statistician on the forum...
I'm wondering what criteria you'll use to determine if a rider is a Star. How many points they scored in a competititon? If they were Top 10 in GC or Top 10 in a Classics race? How many points they scored in the previous race they rode?... Take Westra, for example, Got 3nd in GC at Paris-Nice 2012, had 3rd highest point total in the Roadcc competition, I think, what would you do with him for Paris-Nice next year?...
I still think the amount of Star Riders per competition should be cut down and that the Star Rider criteria, having 4 of them, should be set as an upper limit, not as a requirement, of filling 4 slots, only with Stars...
Dave already explained earlier how the value system for riders works.
My dad and probably numerous others have said "if it aint broken, why try and fix it".
This can be said of the game at the mo. Everyone has ideas but until something within the game blatantly doesnt work why change it. Its easy for newcomers to get to grips with and the more you pour into the game the more complicated it gets thus ruling out a probable large majority of users. You just have to look at the scores in the leagues, teams from pages 24 to 28 have zero points (thats a 1000 users) and if you make the game more complicated these numbers are just going to increase.
I was trying to keep it simple, because to work out multiple combinations would take me months, working out who you can and cannot afford in your team and then only have two from each team.......
You can pick 9 riders from 198, so VERY basic calculations without going into the 2 from each team, transfer budgets and everything like that.
Before you break it down, the chances of picking a straight out winner would be 1 in 22
If you added everything else in, The chances would go up, because you'd limit your choices, giving yourself less of a chance to pick the winner. It could be up in the 1000's.
Without budget for the Olympics lets say, where you could pick ANYONE, lets say there were 198 riders. That makes I THINK, with my calculations, 1541984268762850 different combinations of 9
Yeah, I guess I'm looking for more clarity on, not the value of a rider, but whether he becomes a Star Rider or a DS... and whether the 4 Stars per team requirement is up for discussion or whether it'll pretty much stay the same...
I wonder if the statistics is right in this... Could it be right to think that the odds would be 1/198 + 1/197 + 1/196 + 1/195 + 1/194 + 1/193 + 1/192 + 1/191 + 1/190, more or less 4.7%, slightly less than 1/20, so very close to your 1/22... I have nothing else to do, obviously...
I don't think this is all you're doing, because you are also anticipating how the race is going to go... especially when you say, I quote, "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".
This is where you're practically gonna organize the riders (weighting in their current form and abilities on the specific terrain) according to price, and we're gonna be left pretty much with randomly picking a set of 9 from the pre-organized (according to winning chances) rider list. It sounds to me like you're willing to organize the rider list for a race like the betting odds lists before a race. And that already indicates the riders who have the largest chances of winning and also forces the participants in the game to take chances (lucky ones, basically) if they want to win much more than now, I think...
Another one of the skills is knowing when to dump guaranteed GC/KOM/Sprint/Young points for possible break points.For example in the latter part of the Tour De France I believe Voeckler and Kessiakoff were up there in terms of popularity with Wiggo,Froome and Nibali?
So you think that by organising the riders values by how well they did LAST season and depending on the type of race, Small tour, Classic, Grand tour. Then Dave and the people behind the game are some how indicating who has a chance of winning the race??
You know when riders line up, they all want to win and there are no guaranteed winners in cycling. So by setting the values depending on their performance from the year previous means nothing. Just look at Gilbert this season. He couldn't do what he did in 2011
you go with picking your riders randomly and i'll go with attempting to pick a squad i think will score well, and we'll see how that pans out.
one thing i've learned from three years running the game is that some people are really good at it. the rules might change a bit from year to year but it definitely takes skill to win, and that'll be the case next year too.
Something I have learnt from playing for 2.5 years. Skill = lots of time to researching the riders and race route, understanding the rules and scoring system, planning well ahead and making the right decisions.
Personally I do not see the need for "Oh crap, picked the wrong DSs for a GT, I need a magic bullet to fix it and be competitive"
This was my starting line up for the TDF
Peter Sagan
Fabian Cancellara
Edvald Boasson Hagen
Samuel Dumoulin
Daryl Impey
Julien Simon
Jonathan Cantwell
Gustav Erik Larsson
Kris Boeckmans
I made some bad transfers during week 1, and was outside the top 100. I improved after that, finishing 3rd, I did not win the TdF comp because I picked Pierre Rolland over Thomas Voeckler on Stage 16.
I do not want to see a change to only bank transfers for one day or lose them. It has caused me problems in the past and will in the future, but it makes you study the race route and plan ahead. Otherwise you reward lazy players with stage wins.
I would like to see the artificial 4 star 5 DS rule removed because:
1. It makes the game a little more complex;
2: Gives players far more options in team strategy and make up.
3. There have been times I would of preferred 3 stars and a couple of high value DSs, but could not as I need to spend points on a 4th cheap star to fill out the roster. Other times, I could afford 5 or even 6 stars.
Happy to see the points value of riders change throughout the season, as long as the point cost distribution remains the same.
Personally I would prefer it if all the riders in a race was magically ranked behind the scenes (so we can't complain and the top rider in a race cost 40 (note all these numbers are just plucked out of the air)) , the 2nd ranked rider 39, the 3rd 38 so on, until in the case of the TDF 179th to 188th ranked riders cost 3.2 and the 189th to 198th ranked riders cost 3 or something similar.
So some unknown 180th ranked DS worth 3 points rides stunning Tour of Qatar wins a stage, has a couple of top 10 places and then is ranked 30th in a weak field in the Tour of Oman and costs 15 points. Does not do anything special in the Tour of Oman, next is Tour of Flanders, and the field is stronger and the rider is now ranked 90th in the race and cost 6 points. Disastrous classic campaign, overall ranking falls and by the time of the Giro is ranked 130th in the race and worth 4 points.
Love the idea of a KOM and Points jersey comp for the GT (GC is a bit naff, rewards the safe players, the KOM is for the risk takers and points if awarded in Giro/Vuelta style is for the consistent picker of stage wins, ignoring the safer jersey points and team bonuses etc).
Not a fan of the 2 riders per team limitation, but see it as necessary evil for TTTs.
Agree with nickobec in some respects regarding the 4 star/5 DS split, perfect example was in the Tour of bejing, had Bos worth 10.7 and no other non-sprinters anywhere near in value, yet couldnt transfer him out for the last stage, ideally id have picked a similar priced DS that may have scored, but ultimately couldnt because of the rule.
I guess its not so much the rule, its more if you have that rule then you shouldnt have an overlap in values, as imo a rider shouldnt be classed as a star if they are valued at less then a DS as it defeats the object of the split in the first place
that's addressed for 2013; the star riders are the most expensive ones for any given tour.
What I'm saying is that if you organize the rider prices according to their CURRENT form (not last year's form) and especially according to their chances of winning IN THAT PARTICULAR RACE (WITH THAT PARTICULAR PROFILE), we're going to play more against you than against other players. It's like when you bet, where you have two possibilities: a) you bet against the house because you think they've misjudged one rider's odds; b) you play safe by taking one of the the favourites.
So, basically you're going to make the game easier for everyone by indicating the favourites for that particular race, and you're going to force those who think they know better to take much more chances if they want to beat those who just go with the designated (by you) favorites.
The idea is precisely that I DON'T want to pick my team randomly (I was 6th in the overall table this year, so I hope my teams weren't picked randomly...). Of course, this is just my impression, it might not be confirmed when this system is actually tested, with actually implemented prices per rider and with the obligation to pick 9 riders effectively taking part in that race...
I do want to see a change. I like the flexiblity of using them when you want to, after they've been earmed. I do like the way we accrue them, I just think once you earn them, they should be used at will...
I'd be ok with removing this rule. I mean, you have to deal with the consequences of having them in your roster later... Why not go up to 3 per team?...
I do think it's the rule... I think there comes a point in every Grand Tour when your Stars won't be the guys scoring the most points and to have to choose 4 Stars hampers you and may prevent you from catching up to the competition leaders, who may be playing it safe at that point in the Tour...
Sometimes you have to resort to picking someone who will provide you with the certainty of GC points, for example, because you have to have 4 Stars... but as TER says above, you'd have gladly put in a DS...
I wish, again, that if it's going to be a requirement to have Stars, that the requirement be brought down to 3 Stars or even 2, but I still prefer the flexibility of having the Star restriction be an upper limit and not a requirement...
Dave, what are your thoughts on the number of Stars for next year? Are you inclined to keep the 4 Star requirement? Can you drop it down to 3 Star Riders, if they're going to be required to be filled? ...
Yeah, I see your point... Anyone can have a pretty decent team if they choose the higher valued riders...
Then again, you still have to choose your DS's...
You know, but if that is the case, then I feel more strongly towards limiting the Stars to just 2 or 3... 'Cause it forces, or might force, much more diferent teams than if we have to pick 4 Stars...
i don't think you're quite understanding how it would work. for a start the values will be based on a year of form to the date of the race, not just last year's race. And although the prices will be weighted according to what kind of stages are in the race, neither that nor the year's form will be a perfect indicator of race form. there'll still be bargains, and expensive flops.
Also, i'm not sure why you think that the riders most likely to win shouldn't be the most expensive? yes you could do okay just picking favourites, but it's not going to get you the win, and anyway you won't be able to just pick all the favourites because you'll run out of cash. the four most expensive stars for a race would likely use up all your budget.
i'm inclined to drop the split altogether and let everyone pick who they like. the new rider values system will give a more even spread of values so i think more flexibility in who you pick will be necessary. also looking at upping the riders from a single team from 2 to 3
Can we start the 2013 season now??? I am missing it already.
As long as it doesnt become too easy to pick the top nine riders , and few peopled pick similar squads it will be good.
I liked the way this season it helped if you picked the random riders who won a stage or broke away and just picking the top six in the gc was not always best.
Regarding the values, I think what Dave is saying regarding the profile of a stage when weighting the values comes more into play for a classic, for example if Cav was riding Amstel then his value would be lower than that of his TDF value, based on the fact it is an uphill finish and thus virtually wont figure in winning, so a value of 40 wouldnt be justified for him in such a race (would you agree cgipryan?). I dont think that is trying to point out the winner but merely being reflective of fair values for the race.
Am I right?
yes TER, except currently the spring classics are lumped together as a competition so there wouldn't be a specific value for amstel, rather for the whole comp. but you could expect cav to be dearer for the tour of qatar than for the dauphine, for example
How soon before a race can I pick a rider. Could I pick cav for the tdf whilst the dauphine is on and he is cheap. Or will there be a date when rider values are fixed for the tdf, say a week before it starts and we have a week to pick our squads from scratch???
I think Dave said above somewhere. The races will only be open one at a time and only a bit before the races, so that startlists and things can be verified, so you don't have to keep going and changing your team
Ahgood makes sense. I didnt have all day to read the whole thread...i only managed a weeks worth.
Can I start of by saying thanks to all those that run this, over the years this has increased my enjoyment( and knowledge) of pro cycling no end.
My only suggestion is a visual one, when races overlap could we see both on the screen at the same time? I think I missed a couple of starts due to forgetting the race had kicked off. Or maybe an improvement in navigation, could the races be on a tabbed header, with live races green or amber if they are about to start?
I liked the sound of a nominated captain per race or even having to choose a single purist rider for the whole season.
the races won't be open one at a time, but they will have a defined opening date, probably a few weeks from the start of the race. at the point they open we'll just have the full roster of every participating team in the start list, then it'll get narrowed down as the start nears.
yes, we'll look into that
Dave, what are your thoughts on transfers and the penalty fees?...
Dave, I love riders that can be gotten for less than 3 points, just so you can have some flexibility to stack your team a little, and so we don't have people resorting to picking riders at 2.3, 2.4 or 2.5 points that aren't riding, and are grayed out... How about giving us a few of these in each race? Surely there'll be no-name domestiques we can afford to do this with... Huh?
not sure i understand. the point of the 3 credit minimum is that there'll be no point picking greyed-out riders as there won't be any cheaper riders not participating. it could easily be 2.5, or 2, or whatever
Pages