matthew
Cycling Tourist Group
Posts: 6
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 14:52:41 GMT 1
Post by matthew on Jan 10, 2012 14:52:41 GMT 1
Shorter seasons
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 15:03:20 GMT 1
Post by Schizm on Jan 10, 2012 15:03:20 GMT 1
Well I thought of that to. I guess the current calendar would also fit in f.i. 12 weeks and more racedays per week means more tactical choices ! that way 4 seasons / year are possible in stead of 3. I am Pro. But do you really think that has a big impact on attracting/keeping new users ?
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 15:07:29 GMT 1
Post by Il Padrino on Jan 10, 2012 15:07:29 GMT 1
A 12-week season is the shortest I'd go for now. But the question is indeed whether this will help to attract new players. Maybe the problem is more the lack of a good user guide, causing new players to quit before they get to know the game. Nikeboy had a great idea for this, but we need to see how we can implement it
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 15:14:36 GMT 1
Post by Genomico on Jan 10, 2012 15:14:36 GMT 1
12 weeks, great!
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 15:27:49 GMT 1
Post by kurtinsc on Jan 10, 2012 15:27:49 GMT 1
It's not really about the length of the season I think. It's about the time for a new user to see any impact from their management decisions.
As a new user, I can tell you it's a slow start. If someone started on Monday, 10/24... in 2 weeks they'd have seen a total of 9 race results.
Many simply are going to lose interest without a quicker jump start into the game.
Once you're in it, the pace is fine I guess. But I think as it stands you'll get a lot of people who sign in, look at it, wait a couple of days without seeing much happen, then wander off.
I still say doubling the pace wouldn't be a bad idea. Say have two sims a day rather then one. AM and PM sims.
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 15:52:27 GMT 1
Post by Il Padrino on Jan 10, 2012 15:52:27 GMT 1
9 race results in 2 weeks, isn't that enough!? There's a popular football sim that has only 2 results in that time Maybe we can review the calendar so that there's always 1 race/day? We'd have to add new races/tours, but I guess no one is opposed to that?
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 15:58:49 GMT 1
Post by Genomico on Jan 10, 2012 15:58:49 GMT 1
We have 79 races. Putting them into 12 weeks (=84 days) seems already fine to me. I can handle 5 rest days... I think
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 16:00:44 GMT 1
Post by Schizm on Jan 10, 2012 16:00:44 GMT 1
Well if you shorten the calendar to 12 weeks that won't be even necesseary : (min.) 6 races plus a funrace (on the remaining day) in a week. Sounds like Peloton-Heaven ;D
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 16:27:32 GMT 1
Post by Il Padrino on Jan 10, 2012 16:27:32 GMT 1
Ok, we will keep this in mind when we review the calendar for RE2!
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 20:44:25 GMT 1
Post by lee1950 on Jan 10, 2012 20:44:25 GMT 1
~30% more races per week = ~30% more Fitness loss
....just something to keep in mind before we implement.
I'm a fan of adding a race or a stage here and there (especially the Milano - Sanremo week when there is a long gap between Tirreno-Adriatico and Ronde van Vlaanderen) (!) but there is a downside to increasing the number of racing days between Updates.
It's fine for me as I average 28 riders so I can keep 4 or 5 fresh for every race, but it will strain smaller teams.
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 20:52:20 GMT 1
Post by Quatannens on Jan 10, 2012 20:52:20 GMT 1
The fitness loss isn't really a problem, as everybody has to deal with it. It probably gives smaller teams also a chance to win. Strong teams want to get points everywhere and won't put a cyclist at 100% effort too fast. Weaker teams can make profit of this and win some races.
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 20:55:04 GMT 1
Post by JoeLag on Jan 10, 2012 20:55:04 GMT 1
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 20:58:59 GMT 1
Post by NikeBoy on Jan 10, 2012 20:58:59 GMT 1
Stronger (read "richer") teams will just buy a number of extra riders (if necessarry) and so they can still ride their cyclist at 100%. I don't think that adding more races will give weaker teams more chance to win, however it may increase the fun for the new teams.
However, adding extra races does not solve the problem that new teams have to wait 11 or 12 days to enter a race when they register on day 1 of the TdF or Vuelta.
Maybe (but a bit harder to implement) it would be nice that new teams (in the first 2 weeks) could also enter a kind of virtual league were they could ride against each other in a single race every day. There would be no fitness loss, injuries, ... After 2 weeks, they would not be able to join these races anymore. In the mean time they can ofcourse also enter the real races (if any)
Or to take it a bit further : when they register, they only enter this virtual league for the first 2 weeks. They can experiment as much as they want (buying trainer, ...). After these 2 weeks, they will be placed in a real division ...
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 10, 2012 21:02:56 GMT 1
Post by Quatannens on Jan 10, 2012 21:02:56 GMT 1
Richer teams won't buy more riders I think. Having more than 25/26/27 riders is not that common, even for stronger teams.
|
|
|
< 1000
Jan 11, 2012 14:15:28 GMT 1
Post by quiller on Jan 11, 2012 14:15:28 GMT 1
Wages should not be changed... (i have a 20 mountain and now 6 flat - almost 200000) - later (some divisions higher) it will be possible to have a multi 20 trainer AND 20-20-20 scout because you will have more income IF you perform good in the races... At the moment great scouts are not that important because every cyclist is still young enough... Later on (when first riders become 29 years THEN a strong scout will get important... now it would just make the game less realistic...). Personally i wouldn't even mind if the new race engine stays away but that will not happen i suppose
|
|