preferred-google-button
log in
register

Suggestions for the 2013 season

  • Creator
    Topic
  • September 3, 2012 at 11:01 am #16723
    drheaton

    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’.

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 15 replies - 91 through 105 (of 198 total)
1 2 3 … 6 7 8 … 12 13 14
  • Author
    Replies
  • October 10, 2012 at 5:44 pm #698139
    0
    enrique

    Gkam84 wrote:So 20 Star

    Gkam84 wrote:
    So 20 Star riders? Are you mad, they you would HAVE to scrap the 4/5 spilt as most of the time you’d be lucky to have half of the 20 racing at the same time.

    Well, I must be, but like I said above, I would only keep the Star Rider distinction for Grand Tours and only limit the amount of GC guys you can have on your team…

    I’m pretty sure we could always adjust the split, as I explained above, to 2/7 or 3/6, which would force different teams.

    And most of all the guys on that list, except for Boonen, Gerrans, Sagan and Boassen Hagen, would probably be Top 10 or 15 in any Grand Tour they participate in…

    All other races I would do away with the Star Rider/DS distinction. Anyways, I like limiting the Star Riders idea more than alloting a particular part of your budget to Stars or DS’s… It sounds too complicated…

    October 10, 2012 at 5:23 pm #698137
    0
    enrique

    Gkam84 wrote:1, The game is

    Gkam84 wrote:
    1, The game is not based on salaries. The new values will be based on the last 12 months performances in various races. Ones they have done well in, they might be a bit more expensive. If they haven’t competed or didn’t do well. They might be less expensive.

    You’re right, but I’d still like set values, maybe based or anchored around UCI or IG points for 2012. That way they don’t change from competition to competition. I guess it makes sense to me that guys like Boonen, Rodriguez, etc… be high priced and the others be less priced. I don’t think they should shift from race to race. It’s too complicated and I kind of like that a rider who’s a nobody this year and next year is great can be had for a low price.

    If it was up to me, if we were to keep the 4/5 system, I would designate as Star Riders only the Top 20 in the WorldTour points system. So for next year the list would maybe just consist of:

    1 Joaquim Rodriguez
    2 Bradley Wiggins
    3 Tom Boonen
    4 Vincenzo Nibali
    5 Alejandro Valverde
    6 Simon Gerrans
    7 Chris Froome
    8 Peter Sagan
    9 Samuel Sanchez
    10 Rui Da Costa
    11 Alberto Contador
    12 Edvald Boasson Hagen
    13 Ryder Hesjedal
    14 Jurgen Van Den Broeck
    15 Rigoberto Uran
    16 Michael Rogers
    17 Bauke Mollema
    18 Sergio Henao
    19 Roman Kreuziger
    20 Damiano Cunego

    This would be pretty cool because there wouldn’t be a glut of Star Riders and these pretty much are your GC guys for the Grand Tours, anyways.

    At any rate, I’ve always thought we have too many riders as Star Riders and I think this would be a good solution…

    Here’s some other ideas:

    Maybe another way would be to just have the 4/5 split for Grand Tours, not for any other races.

    Or maybe the Star Riders for Grand Tours should only be the Top 10 in GC from the previous year…

    Or that Star Riders should be limited just to the teams’s appointed GC guys, 1 guy per team, for a total of 20 or 21 Star Riders at each Grand Tour… And maybe limit it so you can only choose 2 or 3, not 4… You could have all the Sprinters you want on your team, but only 2 or 3 guys for GC…

    I kind of like that, too, since the reason we all have similar teams at the end of a Grand Tour is that those riders are getting Finish Line Points, GC points and KM points and sometimes PC points… limiting those riders to 2 or 3 would substantially force different teams, maybe! đŸ˜‰

    A wilder idea? Do away with budget points all together and just have the 2/7, 3/6, or 4/5 split… đŸ˜‰

    October 10, 2012 at 5:03 pm #698135
    0
    Gkam84

    So 20 Star riders? Are you
    So 20 Star riders? Are you mad, they you would HAVE to scrap the 4/5 spilt as most of the time you’d be lucky to have half of the 20 racing at the same time.

    I think there is no further point in discussing the riders points system as its already being worked on for next season đŸ˜‰

    October 10, 2012 at 4:50 pm #698133
    0
    enrique

    Dave Atkinson wrote:really

    Dave Atkinson wrote:
    really like the star budget/ds budget idea. that could work well, deciding whether to spunk your 100 on two or three big names or spreading it over four riders.

    Like I said above, I’d rather you create a 2 or 3 Star Rider limit, making it a 2/7 or 3/6 split, rather than alloting a part of your budget to just Stars or DS’s. And! make the Star Riders JUST (!) GC guys… That way I can have as many Sprinters, AR’s and DS’s as I want and it forces teams not to be the same…

    For races other than Grand Tours, and maybe one-week events like the Dauphine, the Tour de Suisse, Paris-Nice and Tirreno Adriatico, I’m all up for eliminating the Star Rider limitations completely. Just let it all be sorted out by budget limitations…

    October 9, 2012 at 6:59 am #698131
    0
    drheaton

    Gkam84 wrote:1, The game is

    Gkam84 wrote:
    1, The game is not based on salaries. The new values will be based on the last 12 months performances in various races. Ones they have done well in, they might be a bit more expensive. If they haven’t competed or didn’t do well. They might be less expensive.

    2, There is no way of knowing a riders salary unless its released to the public. So getting salary figures for over 1000 riders is NOT going to happen. ;)

    Plus, salaries are not set for the year, they’re set for the length of the riders contract, so if a rider has a stellar year they may not actually get a pay rise until 1 or 2 years later. That’s not something you want to reflect in the game.

    I have some reservations about the new variable value system but Dave and the team seam to have put a lot of thought into it so I’m sure it’ll be fine and hopefully it’ll improve the game.

    October 9, 2012 at 1:57 am #698129
    0
    Gkam84

    1, The game is not based on
    1, The game is not based on salaries. The new values will be based on the last 12 months performances in various races. Ones they have done well in, they might be a bit more expensive. If they haven’t competed or didn’t do well. They might be less expensive.

    2, There is no way of knowing a riders salary unless its released to the public. So getting salary figures for over 1000 riders is NOT going to happen. đŸ˜‰

    October 9, 2012 at 12:42 am #698127
    0
    enrique

    drheaton wrote:I’d … like

    drheaton wrote:
    I’d … like to see fewer restrictions and see the 4/5 split go all-together…

    Me too…

    drheaton wrote:
    I would say that as you’re already making a massive change with the varying rider values I’d consider leaving any other big changes for 2014 just so you can see how the new value system works before changing splits/credit limits or anything else.

    Frankly, I’d like to see set values stay, just like with the Pros. I don’t see them changing salaries mid-season, so if you get a deal, you stick with it till your contract is up. Are rider salaries public knowledge so you can achor the game salaries to real life salaries?

    October 6, 2012 at 10:34 am #698125
    0
    Stumps

    The 100 / 50 split sounds
    The 100 / 50 split sounds good. I also like the idea of having a couple of the womens races in, just to make a change.

    October 3, 2012 at 7:49 pm #698123
    0
    Alan Tullett

    Dave Atkinson wrote:really

    Dave Atkinson wrote:
    really like the star budget/ds budget idea. that could work well, deciding whether to spunk your 100 on two or three big names or spreading it over four riders.

    Glad you like it. It’s main effect will be to mean it’s not necessary, although it may well be desirable sometimes, to pick cheap DSs. You’d have an average of 10 points per DS, way higher than nearly anyone uses most of the time at the mo. You’d also have to make more of a choice between the best star riders rather than being able to have 3 high scoring stars. This would make the pick of riders more even across the value element rather than being biased towards the expensive and cheap ends of the scale.

    The 175 idea is not so good but might have some of the same effect in some races where it’s worth having some cheaper stars thus freeing up credit for a more varied pick of DSs. I only suggested it as I don’t know how difficult it would be to program the split idea or get it across to people.

    October 3, 2012 at 10:13 am #698121
    0
    letsgoup

    jimmythecuckoo wrote:+1 for

    jimmythecuckoo wrote:
    +1 for the idea of picking a squad at the start of the season and then having to work with it throughout the year.

    Maybe a budget of 200 to get 20 riders.

    Would be a true test of covering the classics and tours (standard and premium) for those of us who don’t want to make lots of changes lots of times.

    I have always tried to manage a group of riders and tweak between races. More realistic in my eyes, but I can see that isn’t the way to play and win.

    It’s a kind of middle ground between full and purists.

    I have pushed in the past for a purist team to be able to run alongside your regular team under one account. So taking the idea mentioned above here are my 2 penny’s worth for next year:

    1) Have 2 transfers per day as usual but have the ability to save them up. If you don’t use them you get to keep them either for that race/tour or maybee even the season. So if you don’t make a transfer at the start of Le Tour for 5 days you will have 10 transfers banked.

    2) For the purist team I like the idea of the squad idea. Pick say 25 riders at the start of the year (or whenever you sign up to play) and then you can only select from that squad for your purist team for each race/tour.

    3) I don’t like the idea of a split budget for Stars and DS. My preference is to still have riders identified as one or the other but be able to pick your 9 riders based on value alone.

    October 2, 2012 at 8:41 am #698119
    0
    Stumps

    I still like the idea of just
    I still like the idea of just picking 9 riders regardless of stars / ds.

    There has been some stages where the ds sprinters have faired really well and you could literally have had 9 ds’ going for the stage.

    October 2, 2012 at 8:02 am #698117
    0
    dave atkinson

    drheaton wrote:By placing

    drheaton wrote:
    By placing more restrictions on what you spend your credits on you’re basically stopping people from using tactics like having 5 very expensive DSs and 4 very cheap stars or vica-versa. I think this would actually end up causing most teams to look the same, even more so than they do now.

    i’m not sure it would: all it would stop you doing is spunking all your budget on the four/five best stars and then filling up with no-hopers. there’d just be a maximum spend on stars; it wouldn’t stop you from picking all DSs if you wanted to. the idea being that you’d need to think harder about your whole team. like i said before, the people that end up at the top will have teams that are essentially the same. that’s inevitable.

    October 2, 2012 at 7:38 am #698115
    0
    drheaton

    Gkam84 wrote:That makes it

    Gkam84 wrote:
    That makes it ever better if you have to pick “crap” DS’s, then you have to pick ones who might finish in the top 20, plenty of them this season. Also riders from teams the winner might come from OR aim for the last place man :evil:

    The problem with this is that there may be fewer low value DSs who’ll be worth picking as the ones in form or ’emerging’ mid-season (Bouhanni is a good example, as is Quintana) would increase in price and become unaffordable if you’re also having to shell out 35+ credits each for Valverde, Rodriguez, Contador and Froome… I know that you always had the option of not picking those 4 at the Vuelta but with the scores weighted towards the first couple of riders over the line you want riders who you think will finish 1, 2 and 3 (90 points) rather than 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 (also 90 points). It’s just human nature to pick the winners and with the scoring as it is there’s a clear incentive to pick those riders rather than potential scorers who’ll finish outside the top 5 or so on a stage but may top 20.

    dave_atkinson wrote:
    really like the star budget/ds budget idea. that could work well, deciding whether to spunk your 100 on two or three big names or spreading it over four riders.

    Not sure on this, it all depends on what exactly you want the change to acheive. If you want to encourage people to pick different teams with loads of variation and different tactics then this won’t do that. By placing more restrictions on what you spend your credits on you’re basically stopping people from using tactics like having 5 very expensive DSs and 4 very cheap stars or vica-versa. I think this would actually end up causing most teams to look the same, even more so than they do now.

    I’ve said before that I’d quite like to see fewer restrictions and see the 4/5 split go all-together ( or even have a 3 stars, 2 anything 4 DS split for more flexibility) but I guess it all depends on how you want the game to work. I would say that as you’re already making a massive change with the varying rider values I’d consider leaving any other big changes for 2014 just so you can see how the new value system works before changing splits/credit limits or anything else.

    October 1, 2012 at 9:11 pm #698113
    0
    drheaton

    dave_atkinson wrote:drheaton

    dave_atkinson wrote:
    drheaton wrote:

    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.

    i don’t agree – up it to 175 and you’re just getting extra cash to spend on one more sure thing. the trick is to pick the DSs that score, like Gkam says. anyone can pick the top GC guys

    by the end of a grand tour everyone’s team at the top is going to be similar, that’s inevitable, and i don’t see how it would be changed or even that it needs to be

    I was agreeing with the small number of scorers plus junk riders comment rather than the 175 limit, that could have been clearer I guess.

    I agree that there’s not really any change you can implement to stop the top teams from all having the same riders or make it easier to catch the top teams once they open up a lead, that’s just how the game works are there’s no way/need to change that.

    October 1, 2012 at 8:26 pm #698111
    0
    dave atkinson

    in fact the best way to get
    in fact the best way to get people to pick different teams would be to revise the budget down, not up đŸ˜•

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 15 replies - 91 through 105 (of 198 total)
1 2 3 … 6 7 8 … 12 13 14
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.