|
Post by Ab Normaal on Dec 25, 2012 20:29:43 GMT 1
During the last week of the first season in the new RE, it is now time to evaluate.
I find the new RE interesting. A lot of new possibilities. The focus is in the beginning a lot on sprint and tt.
I think if you don't train in the beginning on these skills, you won't get results. That is, I guess, the reason that a few managers quit the game, dissapointed. Because they couldn't get results.
On the other hand, teams that started to train on these skills in the old RE, are doing great now. I wonder what will be the best strategy on the long run. For me it's an improvement. I also like the multi training part. Now you can train a lot of different cyclists with a lot of different specialties.
As an improvement for the game, I really hope that somehow the crew finds a way (perhaps with colors, or thick lines) to make clear in the race profile what is hill and what is mountain. Also I would like to see new sponsors.
But what worries me the most is the fact that IP logged in for the last time on October 28, on this forum. I don't know what kind of job he has, but I can hardly believe that he hasn't found the time to log on to his baby for two months! Is he sick? Is he in a part of the world that doesn't have internet? Is he in prison? This really worries me for the future of the game. Will it continue? We are now completely depending on Nikeboy. What if something happens to him?
|
|
|
Post by ElGringo on Dec 26, 2012 11:44:26 GMT 1
I agree with your concern and I know we are few managers but we like a lot of this game and we hope he will continue.
IP told that between Christmas and New Year he´d be were, lets hope so.
Nikeboy is making a excelent job keeping the game rolling, congratz.
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Dec 27, 2012 17:25:11 GMT 1
I'd say there needs to be a little bit more of a "daily fatigue" applied to the speed of riders who attack early.
Some sort of slowing effect that hits riders the longer they are ahead of the pack in an attack. It's a bit too easy to attack early and stay ahead.
I also think we need to collapse the leagues a bit. I'm in a level 4 division with 4 active teams. I'm going to promote which may help... but the fact is the two that don't promote might not be enjoying things with even less participation next year.
At the very least, eliminate divison 5 and move all of those into 4 and have new arrivals go into a division 4 league. Perhaps hasten promotion in some way as well... say an active team with ANY points automatically gets promoted up a level if there are open (bot) teams the level above.
The longer it takes to get to active leagues, the less likely people will be to stick around. The setup is too big for the number of teams.
Ideally with 20 team divisions like we have, we probably just need
1 division 1 4 division 2 16 division 3 32 division 4
and leave it at that. Double promotion for division 4 so that 4 promote rather then 2, leave the rest the same.
1060 total players.
If we feel the numbers will get above that again, then leave division 4 with 64 and promotion as it is for the long term, but in the short term get people up to division 3 quicker. That gives us 1700 slots... let's work with that until numbers necessitate adding division 5 again. Promote as many as possible up to 3 who have scored points and are active over ANY bot team in division 3.
We currently have 564 teams. There are 420 spots in division 3 and above. Let's get those with 100% activity, QUICK.
|
|
|
Post by Genomico on Dec 27, 2012 17:47:26 GMT 1
I'd say there needs to be a little bit more of a "daily fatigue" applied to the speed of riders who attack early. Some sort of slowing effect that hits riders the longer they are ahead of the pack in an attack. It's a bit too easy to attack early and stay ahead. ... We already have flats and falls.
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Dec 27, 2012 19:45:35 GMT 1
I'd say there needs to be a little bit more of a "daily fatigue" applied to the speed of riders who attack early. Some sort of slowing effect that hits riders the longer they are ahead of the pack in an attack. It's a bit too easy to attack early and stay ahead. ... We already have flats and falls. I'm simply saying that if you attack early, the cyclists should be worn out at the end of a stage. You'd think those attacking later should travel at a higher speed and make up ground on those who've been out front all day. Right now that doesn't seem to be the case. It seems like it's almost always better to attack early if you're going to attack on a stage. Some sort of cumulative slowing to a cyclists speed from an early attack seems reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by NikeBoy on Dec 27, 2012 20:39:46 GMT 1
We already have flats and falls. I'm simply saying that if you attack early, the cyclists should be worn out at the end of a stage. You'd think those attacking later should travel at a higher speed and make up ground on those who've been out front all day. Right now that doesn't seem to be the case. It seems like it's almost always better to attack early if you're going to attack on a stage. Some sort of cumulative slowing to a cyclists speed from an early attack seems reasonable. This "fatigue" mechanism for early attackers is already in the engine from the beginning. I have not made a analysis, maybe it needs some finetuning...
|
|
|
Post by Ab Normaal on Dec 27, 2012 20:41:35 GMT 1
I'd say there needs to be a little bit more of a "daily fatigue" applied to the speed of riders who attack early. Some sort of slowing effect that hits riders the longer they are ahead of the pack in an attack. It's a bit too easy to attack early and stay ahead. ... We already have flats and falls. But what I find remarkable is that flats and falls don't occur a lot at cyclists who attack. Check your race reports. Hardly an attacker falls or has a flat tire.
|
|
|
Post by chakra on Dec 27, 2012 20:47:18 GMT 1
Lacerda attacked and fell...
|
|
|
Post by Genomico on Dec 27, 2012 21:25:17 GMT 1
We already have flats and falls. But what I find remarkable is that flats and falls don't occur a lot at cyclists who attack. Check your race reports. Hardly an attacker falls or has a flat tire. Perhaps that is because cyclists with poor secondaries aren't put as attackers very often? For a sprinter secondaries aren't important, but for an attacker it is.
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Dec 27, 2012 21:58:29 GMT 1
I'm simply saying that if you attack early, the cyclists should be worn out at the end of a stage. You'd think those attacking later should travel at a higher speed and make up ground on those who've been out front all day. Right now that doesn't seem to be the case. It seems like it's almost always better to attack early if you're going to attack on a stage. Some sort of cumulative slowing to a cyclists speed from an early attack seems reasonable. This "fatigue" mechanism for early attackers is already in the engine from the beginning. I have not made a analysis, maybe it needs some finetuning... Well it may be my perception, but so far it's seemed like early attacks are always better then later ones in my league. Perhaps the later attacks are gaining ground, but the peloton is always so far behind at that point they can't catch up. Of course... much of this is hard to judge. We're often playing in divisions with 4-5 active teams and lots of bots, instead of a 20 team league where everyone is participating. Not enough teams with helpers to pull early breaks back.
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Dec 27, 2012 22:02:26 GMT 1
But what I find remarkable is that flats and falls don't occur a lot at cyclists who attack. Check your race reports. Hardly an attacker falls or has a flat tire. Perhaps that is because cyclists with poor secondaries aren't put as attackers very often? For a sprinter secondaries aren't important, but for an attacker it is. I can confirm that I attack with poor-secondary riders all the time... and they fall the same as they always do. I had two attackers in Emilia and one fell while the other had a flat (both sub-7 secondaries).
|
|
|
Post by ElGringo on Dec 27, 2012 23:42:03 GMT 1
I agree with kurtinsc, we should close the 5 div and put all active teams in division 4, this way we will have more action and people get more interested.
|
|
|
Post by chakra on Dec 28, 2012 10:38:04 GMT 1
I agree with kurtinsc, we should close the 5 div and put all active teams in division 4, this way we will have more action and people get more interested. This discussion we had @ the end of former season too (or perhaps a few seasons ago). As far as I remember there were critics: * the effort other teams had done to promote * there would be some financial disadvantages * new teams would be disadvantage to teams playing 2 or 3 seasons because their cyclist don't have equal skills (e.g. 5 flat and 3 mountain against a skill 1 or 3 for the new team) * new teams would not be able to win races so easily and could lose their intrest in this wonderfull game BUT! I'm sure that with a bit of knowledge of the game new teams can be competitive to teams in 4th Div. And that knowledge might be a little problem for totally new managers. Not for those who had a team in the past and were made bot-teams for one or another reason. I do agree with closing the 5th Div and promote all the active teams from 5th to 4th Div.
|
|
|
Post by enders on Dec 28, 2012 13:16:39 GMT 1
My evalution is: - regarding the calendar : is obvious that only flat matters, and in some measure hill--- the calendar is not balanced like the past one when different training tactics of the teams could win the season. There are way to many races with 80% flat and the rest ...whatever. - regarding finances : we play now with the new wages , much bigger , wich were introduced later in the game, i don't remember the exact season when the teams have already acumulated lots of many - nowadays i think the costs are to high for the money involved ( ex look at the transer market- prices are way to low).
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Dec 28, 2012 14:38:00 GMT 1
I agree with kurtinsc, we should close the 5 div and put all active teams in division 4, this way we will have more action and people get more interested. This discussion we had @ the end of former season too (or perhaps a few seasons ago). As far as I remember there were critics: * the effort other teams had done to promote * there would be some financial disadvantages * new teams would be disadvantage to teams playing 2 or 3 seasons because their cyclist don't have equal skills (e.g. 5 flat and 3 mountain against a skill 1 or 3 for the new team) * new teams would not be able to win races so easily and could lose their intrest in this wonderfull game BUT! I'm sure that with a bit of knowledge of the game new teams can be competitive to teams in 4th Div. And that knowledge might be a little problem for totally new managers. Not for those who had a team in the past and were made bot-teams for one or another reason. I do agree with closing the 5th Div and promote all the active teams from 5th to 4th Div. I think closing 5th is a given. We can open it up later if we get there numbers wise, but without 5th you have 1700 spots. Closing down half of 4th leaves you with 1060... which is really where we need to be right now, but optimistically we hope to be above that eventually. Let's assume we don't touch promotion to 1st/2nd/3rd divisions and just close 5th and promote all teams to 4th. What do we have? -8 human teams in 1st division - good enough -19 remaining active teams plus 32 promotions for 51 teams in the 4 2nd division leagues (12.75 per league) - good -113 remaining active teams plus 128 promotions for 241 teams in the 16 3rd division leagues (15 per league) - good -The 265 other teams all in division 4. At 64 leagues... that's just over 4 teams per league. THAT IS NOT ENOUGH. At 32 it would be 8 (with 4 promoting from each). I think that's a much better number... and you still have 12 empty spots in each league for growth. If we have over say... 14 in each league at the end of the season, we should switch it back to 64 division 4 leagues (7 per league). But until then... I think we need to not just eliminate division 5 but cut division 4 in half.
|
|