- This topic has 124 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by
dave atkinson.
-
CreatorTopic
-
August 26, 2013 at 5:30 pm #19702
drheaton
Autumn is here, the Vuelta has started and we're beginning to think about the World Championships. That means that it's the traditional time for me to open up a 'suggestion' and 'request' thread where you can outline how you'd like the game to change for next season and what you think has worked particularly well this year.
Despite the fact that I'm now involved in a small way with running the game (namely, updating start lists and results) as in previous years this is very much unofficial and just a place for everyone to get together and bounce some ideas around. Nothing may come of them but Dave has always been great at incorporating good ideas from the community where possible.
For reference, you can find the 2012 and 2013 threads here:
"Suggestions for the 2013 season"
So, what do you think has worked well this year and what would you like to see change?
-
CreatorTopic
-
AuthorReplies
-
JAndrewHill
I felt for some racex, the
I felt for some racex, the prices were too steep, and I could not afford more than three decent riders, and my squad was filled with four cheap fillers…which was too much….but tnen things got cheaper, and for tne recent usa pro challenge, it fe.lt like you could pick the first nine in the gc and have money left…so things got too cheap.
Its difficult, but if you are having a budget, you need to make it as needing some skill to pick a squad within budget, but not with too ma y cheap fillers that you have never heard of…mindy
Why do we have the 2 rider
Why do we have the 2 rider per team rule? I can’t see why really…serge78
Not all races have a young
Not all races have a young rider jersey anyway. My reason for getting rid of it is just because it is often double counting, with riders getting points for GC and YR. So it is more beneficial to pick a good young rider than a good GC rider. I like the game to mirror cycling as much as possible, so you just pick the best riders for the stage or race. Like wise with last man home, which DS gives their man a big pat on the back for being last. Same argument for increasing points for team mates. The biggest skill in the game is picking the stage winner, so you get extra points by picking someone from his team. Plus cyling is a team game.However more than happy if nothing changes. It is still great fun even if it becomes a research exercise at he start of the season in some races working who is still under 25 and picking Boeckmans because he likes finishing last.
Maybe I was just upset that Barry Markus picked up 10 points yesterday for being rubbish, when I was closing down on top spot.
Perhaps what we need to do is
Perhaps what we need to do is just ask the people who want fewer races what it would take to make them happy with just not submitting teams to races they weren’t interested in?If you would prefer a smaller race calendar, what’s stopping you from just picking and choosing the races you play? Is it the league tables that make you feel like you need to compete in every race? Is it a sense that you’ve paid for premium membership so you need to get your moneys worth? Or is it just the case that the races are there and even tasking away the tables and the money elements you’d still play the races because they’re there?
sm
Playing as purist this year
Playing as purist this year (non premium) the only table I care about is the “Overall purist (non premium races)” as its the only one where I can monitor progress over the year. I see the game as a season rather than tours or races. I fear I may be alone in caring so much about it (and it’s not because I’m doing all that well in it either!).However can see the other side of the argument in that the overall compels people to play all of the races. This is the main reason why I don’t play premium (yet!) as I already spend way too much time on the purist comp.
TERatcliffe26
We already have the standard
We already have the standard overall table though for non-premium, I think people just need to get into the mentality that there is no prizes for overall and so you don’t need to partake in everything if you don’t wish to.For me the more races the better as it keeps my mind active and away from normal life issues when i don’t need to be thinking about them.
I agree, I’ve really really
I agree, I’ve really really enjoyed some of the small races this year like the Volta Algarve and I’d hate to see them cut entirely. That’s part of the reason they’re premium, so you have the option of playing them or not.The problem is, not everyone wants to put all that planning and effort into picking a team every week as it sometimes feels in the spring.
That’s why, for me, the best thing for the game would be to stop people feeling like they HAVE to play every race and let everyone choose what they WANT to play and what they want to skip.
Getting rid of the overall table might help, or even restricting it to a ‘core’ of races such as the standard races and abandoning the overall for premium races so premium players can skip a premium race and not feel like they’re losing out.
Ghedebrav
I suppose my big issue
I suppose my big issue against the captain idea is, if I’m honest, a gut reaction. I just don’t see the need for it.But if it’s what the people want, then fair enough đŸ˜€
2 pennorth on the calendar – I like having lots of races, the more the merrier. One of the big plusses of the fantasy game is the educational aspect – following the lesser-known races has vastly increased my knowledge of riders and teams, and has actually augmented my enjoyment of the sport as a result (as well as making me even angrier at Phil ‘n’ Paul’s gaffes).
It’s definitely an
It’s definitely an interesting idea, especially if you’re forced to keep that rider in your team becuase you have to balance the positives of getting double points for someone like Froome in the mountains or Sagan on the flat against having 40 credits tied up in a rider for the entire race.I haven’t looked into it but based on a rough points score of 450 for Froome in the Tour having him as captain would double that (or, if it’s just double stage points maybe add another 250-300) but how many points would you lose out on by not being able to have Cav or Sagan in your team on the flat? Cav scored maybe 350 points, Sagan up at 450 as well so that’s potentially a lot of lost points.
It’s interesting but also full of pitfalls. What happens if you picked Wiggins as your Giro captain? Are you forced to keep him in your team even after he withdraws? Can you re-allocate your captain if your original one drops out?
Personally, depending on the implementation, I’d be tempted to pick a cheap guy as my captain so I get potentially double points if he gets in the break or features on any stage finishes, then I’d use my free credits to put together a better team on each stage than I would be able to if I had 40 credits locked up in my captain.
Stumps
Sorry to harp on about it but
Sorry to harp on about it but the capt idea was to keep the same rider as capt throughout the race so for instance you pick Froome for the TdF then on the flat stages where he comes in the peloton you get no points but on the mountain stages he can score double if he’s in the points and like Cav on the mountains he is likely not to score in the top 20.Basically its down to working out who you think will score regularly in the stages throughout a race. In the one dayers its a bit easier just picking Spartacus but it works much better in the multiple stage races.
ray silvester
A few extra badges would be
A few extra badges would be great(especially like the 20,000 one).TERatcliffe26 wrote:Again my
TERatcliffe26 wrote:Again my views may not be echoed, i just see it as an added complication that wouldn’t actually change the overall winner, but actually just further the gap between top and bottom. (also in football the amount of points awarded per game for certain aspects are much lower than you see in cycling, lending for easier making up of ground through the captain idea, and not too much lost if you get it wrong)I agree with everything you’ve said but this point for me is the most important.
Whenever you change the rules or scoring with a view to ‘giving people a chance to catch someone ahead of them’ as some people think the Captain idea will allow everyone seems to forget that the person out in front will ALSO be making captain picks and by the virtue of them being in front of you (therefore having made better picks in the race to date) they’re likely to have also made better captain picks and therefore be even further ahead.
It’s just natural that after 18 of 21 grand tour stages that someone who has made consistently better picks than you will be ahead of you.
It’s also perfectly fair that if someone has built a 200 points lead on you over 18 stages of a grand your that you really shouldn’t be able to easily close that gap in the remaining three.
In real cycling if someone gains a 5 minute advantage after 18 stages you wouldn’t expect it to be easy for someone to overhaul them. In fantasy cycling it’s just the same. If someone has out performed you consistently enough to lead you by 200+ points is it fair that you can pull that lead back on one stage?
leortp
Jerseys is a great idea for
Jerseys is a great idea for the Grand ToursI imagine the percentage of people who regularly keep up to date with their team throughout a whole GT is low – due to time/life constraints.
A great medium between the involvement of having a purist team and having to change your team every day would be too focus on one jersey and know you can bank transfers on the flat days and not have to log in for a while because you are focusing on the KOM jersey – and vice versa.
also a great option of interest for day 2 onwards when you realise you aren’t gonna win the thing and stage hunting is more hit and miss.
Just one complication the
Just one complication the captain idea could cause especially changing on a daily basis, is people forgetting to change it, as its an added emphasis to need to come on each day even if they don’t wish to make transfers etc. For me its one thing forgetting to make transfers, thats part and parcel of it, you still have a team if don’t make transfers, but its another thing when you have your team set up with say froome and Cav and one day you have froome (captain) then next days its flat so you would put Cav as captain, but as you didn’t need to make transfers or whatever, or chose to as you couldn’t get on, you could almost be double whammy by not getting to change your captain.The difference with cycling compared to say football where the captain idea is implemented is that with cycling you can have 21 stages in 21 days with multiple different stage types and puts emphasis on you remembering to change it, whereas with football you change it every week (every game), however if you have Van Persie as your captain and forget to change him it is still likely he will be playing and could still score high points, whereas its unlikely forgetting to change J-Rod on a mountain stage to say Cav on flat stage will yield J-Rod winning (or high placing) the flat stage and offsetting no change in captain.
I think generally the specifics of cycling don’t lend themselves quite to a captain idea as football, in football anyone of your 11 players can do well and score high points (so any player who plays that weekend could do well), with the opposition coming into play, whereas with cycling the terrain is more dictatory and thus you know the category of riders more likely to score well on such a stage and just reduces the potential pool of riders as captain and thus seeing many people pick the same captain.
Again my views may not be echoed, i just see it as an added complication that wouldn’t actually change the overall winner, but actually just further the gap between top and bottom. (also in football the amount of points awarded per game for certain aspects are much lower than you see in cycling, lending for easier making up of ground through the captain idea, and not too much lost if you get it wrong)
johnny2names
I like what Dave said. I
I like what Dave said. I think the cheapening of rider prices post tour has given some of the pre vuelta races an embarrassment of choices. So a good option is to maybe go back to previous pricing but give 170-180 credits or something for GT races.Going back to the captain idea, I quite like that precisely because it could help shake up the ‘ immovable’ leader board. But how about, in standard, you can change your captain everyday? ( no transfer cost but has to be one of your 9). Also, double points for stage only, not for gc/points/mountain/youth jerseys. Otherwise it’s way too predictable. Do you go for cav, griepel or kittel on the champs? Just gives it a bit more buzz in those situations.
For purist, one captain for whole comp I guess.I’m with you stumps đŸ˜‰
Going back to premium/non-premium argument, I’m happy with parting with 10 quid, I consider it a bargain with respect to time spent on the game! But I think it’s important to keep a free version to have the widest audience possible, and importantly, the non premium league tables should have an equal footing. Sorry to say but I’m with Enrique on one thing: same transfer rules should apply, either you only carry 2 over, or unlimited building up, for both premium and non-premium. Otherwise you’re not comparing like for like, which is a shame.
I find the calendar pretty full already, and found the classics a bit of a mare to manage! But happy to see women’s races, but perhaps at the expense of other races/during a lull in calendar.
Lastly, thanks to all you guys who run/manage the game, I’ve really enjoyed playing it, especially thanks to the layers of complexity/pro-active management of it! It has helped me hugely in understanding pro-cycling races better, which was pretty much why I joined!
Thanks
J-m
-
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.