|
Post by Il Padrino on Jul 31, 2012 11:25:36 GMT 1
Yes, you're right. But the current formula that calculates the remaining fitness is: effort - 65. So there are a couple of solutions possible. I'll decide what to do this week, I don't want to drag this out.
|
|
|
Post by joachim1107 on Jul 31, 2012 12:30:29 GMT 1
Ouch, that's a bug related to the TT race of yesterday. The bug is fixed, and I'll fix those cyclists with 0 steering/bravery this evening. I don't have a back-up per cyclist, so I'll just make it 15 for both. quote] Also happened with my 5 cyclists: Aubert (77406), Gazeau (3185), Blanckaert (3192), Dormaar (3181) and Cosmescu (75443). Also some mistakes in today's race report: It says twice dat lyskawa cannot follow the peloton, but he always stay in group 1. After part 7 the text is blanckaert cannot follow, although it's Van Verre from my team who could not follow and was in group 2 at that point.
|
|
|
Post by Michellios on Jul 31, 2012 12:59:12 GMT 1
What happend with steering and balance skills of this 5riders?
Cyclist FL HI MO DO SP TT ST BA XP LS HE WE AG FI A. Tuyaerts 7 1 3 1 1 2 0 0 2 3 209 106 24 80 P. Bergeret 7 2 2 1 2 1 0 0 2 3 190 72 20 80 P. Gau 5 2 7 1 1 2 0 0 4 1 174 66 23 80 G. Follong 3 1 6 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 207 94 20 100 S. Hertzog 7 1 2 2 2 1 0 0 2 1 197 77 23 80
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Aug 1, 2012 12:32:57 GMT 1
Yes. Damn, I forgot to reset the steering/balance. I was ill yesterday, and it slipped my mind. I'll do it this evening!!
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Aug 1, 2012 13:14:49 GMT 1
The errors in the report regarding the sprints should be solved; the amount of points won and times are now correct (not in passed races, only in coming races!)
About the message for cyclists not following their group but still remaining in the group: this happens when the cyclist is too slow to follow the group, but his time is still within the limits of the group's time. In this case, the cyclist stays in the group.
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to fix this easily, and we're still reviewing the texts in the report. So I'm going to leave this for now, it's not a big error.
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Aug 1, 2012 13:18:53 GMT 1
I also adapted the Save Fitness tactic. With this tactic: - the cyclist always rides at 60% effort - the cyclist loses 1% fitness
A minimal fitness loss makes sense, I think, and there is still a (minimum) 4% difference with the other tactics so that the tactic is still very useful in (bigger) tours.
|
|
|
Post by Genomico on Aug 1, 2012 13:24:59 GMT 1
The Save Fitness was made for people that focus a stage victory in the end of a tour, right? With the 60% effort and 1% fitness loss, it now looks like the way to win a (big) tour is to save fitness all the time, so you build up a huge amount of extra fitness (depending on amount of stages in a week). I think the effort should be 50% with a 1% fitness loss; like in real life, people that do easy in a mountain stage loose a huge amount of time and have no chance for the general rankings anymore. Unless the save fitness cyclist will loose a lot of time this way, as e.g. he doesn't have helpers that keep him in the group etc? Well, at least something to test then
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Aug 1, 2012 13:49:54 GMT 1
Indeed, something to test 60% effort already creates a 10% gap with the other participants. The difference shouldn't become too big, otherwise no one is ever going to use this tactic As long as there are no cyclists winning races whilst 'saving fitness', I'm happy
|
|
|
Post by Genomico on Aug 1, 2012 13:53:00 GMT 1
Indeed, something to test 60% effort already creates a 10% gap with the other participants. The difference shouldn't become too big, otherwise no one is ever going to use this tactic Ah ofc, the gap is 10 instead of 5. Stupid me Forget about my previous post But no matter what, the tactic remains interesting in every tour if you want to win any (but not first) stage of a tour.
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Aug 1, 2012 15:15:17 GMT 1
Indeed, something to test 60% effort already creates a 10% gap with the other participants. The difference shouldn't become too big, otherwise no one is ever going to use this tactic As long as there are no cyclists winning races whilst 'saving fitness', I'm happy As long as we don't have people being kicked out for missing a time cut, it really shouldn't matter how low the effort is if the goal is to allow people to save energy to win a stage late. Lose 10 minutes or 30 minutes... you're saving energy and not worrying about the GC. It's probably best if the tactic is designed so GC contenders never should use it. It's for sprinters soft pedaling the mountains, guys riding easy to have juice for a late ITT, or mountain goats who want to win the polka-dot jersey taking it easy on flat stages with few mountain points on tap even if they finish 10 minutes or more down.
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Aug 1, 2012 15:26:23 GMT 1
What do you mean with "As long as we don't have people being kicked out for missing a time cut"? There is no time limit to finish a race, like in the real Tour de France. In Peloton, cyclists can take all the time they want
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Aug 1, 2012 22:01:47 GMT 1
What do you mean with "As long as we don't have people being kicked out for missing a time cut"? There is no time limit to finish a race, like in the real Tour de France. In Peloton, cyclists can take all the time they want I assumed that... but who knows what you've coded in the new engin. THat is one we can live without. The point is that it really doesn't matter if the performance penalty is too harsh. The point (I think) of "save fitness" is for it to be used by those not in the GC race. If that's the case, it shouldn't matter if they lose 10 minues or 10 hours... they aren't in the GC race to begin with. Where it could become problematic is if the penalty isn't big enough. Then you can have guys hang on at 60% effort to a main group, then have extra energy to demolish a mountain stage later on to win the GC. I'll try to set up a test scenario for that with my team to see if "save energy" guys can stay with the main group.
|
|
|
Post by Genomico on Aug 1, 2012 22:29:34 GMT 1
Yup, agreeing with kurtinsc here, and that was actually the point I wanted to make too If you go for the general ranking, save fitness should not be used.
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Aug 2, 2012 14:05:56 GMT 1
I guess we all agree then ;D
|
|
|
Post by newborn on Aug 2, 2012 21:29:20 GMT 1
no results today? div 3:9...
|
|