|
Post by JoeLag on May 17, 2012 19:16:40 GMT 1
As it is now when you set tactics for a fun race you can see the profile - it's drawn in a blue line - but not exactly the terrain! Is a certain passage with a slight descent considered as flat or as downhill? Is a climb only a hill or already a mountain? All experienced managers know that it is crucial to read the terrain correctly. Especially the last 10-20 km before the finish. Shouldn't we mark the sections of the race with alternating colours (i.e. light and darker blue, or as in my example below in navy and lime green ) under the black base line of the profile graphic. Then you could add one letter (F, H, M, D) into each section ... perhaps even the %? i.e. ______________________*_____________________****____________________*******_________***___________________**********____*****************************************----------------------------------------------************************************ F 1% ** F 0% ** M 9% ** D-2% ** H 3% ************************************So we would be able to exactly read the race profile because it's a crucial difference for a race if the last 15 km are 1% flat or 2% hill terrain.
|
|
|
Post by Genomico on May 17, 2012 19:23:22 GMT 1
To know the exact profile is indeed essential and should be known.
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on May 23, 2012 9:02:38 GMT 1
Am I really - apart from Genomico - the only one concerned with this issue? I don't get it. So perhaps someone can tell me if the last 5 km of Paris-Bruxelles is 2% hill or 1% flat?
Nobody needs to post here ... but please at least vote. How else should IP get convinced to implement anything that indicates the terrain for us users?
|
|
|
Post by Schizm on May 23, 2012 9:52:36 GMT 1
I did not notice the poll before (the downside of consulting the '10 most recent post' first.
Paris-Bruxelles ends at 1% flat , but to know that you have to look up the results of a previous funrace there and then skip the race report to the end. (or I could have a peak at the xml file, since I created that profile). Not really a user friendly approach.
BTW : I am in favour of making this info visible by clicking on it (like I already suggested when you made this suggestion the first time - March 30th) or hovering over it. I think the info of some profiles would become to messy (or the fontsize to small) if all is displayed at once below the profile. (Therefor I voted could have some potential).
edit : I am left wondering who voted "Very bad idea" on this, I would like to hear the reasoning behind that vote !
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on May 23, 2012 10:37:56 GMT 1
Thanks for this assessment, Schizm!
Well - indeed I'm quite indifferent about how it is done - as long as it is done in any way at all.
And indeed I'd really like to know, too, which negative aspects I did miss that some of us managers think this is a bad idea.
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on May 26, 2012 11:30:09 GMT 1
Looking at the practical and technical sides, I doubt it's possible to make the different info visible when floating over it, as it's one single image. I agree that the information should be visible, but it's not yet clear how to do this in a clear way. Just listing the terrain strokes, one by one?
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on May 26, 2012 13:46:23 GMT 1
Looking at the practical and technical sides, I doubt it's possible to make the different info visible when floating over it, as it's one single image. I agree that the information should be visible, but it's not yet clear how to do this in a clear way. Just listing the terrain strokes, one by one? Would be better than nothing! Indeed this would be sufficient.
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on Jun 6, 2012 13:27:28 GMT 1
IP, any news in this issue?
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Jun 17, 2012 11:50:51 GMT 1
Sorry, I've been working on the implementation of the new engine in the actual competition and setting up the testwebsite for this. My response is the same as in the other topic: I'll include this on the testwebsite first, but it won't be in the actual game until next season. (more info on the testwebsite will be announced VERY soon)
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on Sept 5, 2012 8:43:34 GMT 1
Sorry, I've been working on the implementation of the new engine in the actual competition and setting up the testwebsite for this. My response is the same as in the other topic: I'll include this on the testwebsite first, but it won't be in the actual game until next season. (more info on the testwebsite will be announced VERY soon) How is it? The new season is starting in 5 days. I fear you won't implement it until the start of the season ... But I still think that this is a very important feature.
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Sept 5, 2012 12:14:06 GMT 1
I'll try to add it!
|
|
|
Post by lee1950 on Sept 5, 2012 18:36:19 GMT 1
I finally noticed the poll and voted. (I could swear I read everything here - don't know how I missed it....)
|
|
dinamok
Cycling Tourist Group
Posts: 12
|
Post by dinamok on Sept 26, 2012 13:56:58 GMT 1
i think that fully info about terrain are fundamental for a cycling game and should be a priority... it can be done in many way but the users have to know sector by sector if it's flat, hill, mountain... and the relative %
|
|
|
Post by lee1950 on Sept 26, 2012 20:16:28 GMT 1
As joelag mentioned in the opening post, even if it was just the %, that would be enough.
0%, 4%, 7%, -5%,...........
We are probably all smart enough to know what the number mean, and it could save space/programming.
|
|
xmike
U23 Developm. Team
Posts: 58
|
Post by xmike on Sept 27, 2012 19:19:09 GMT 1
Different color (gradient from blue, or something to do not conflict with attack/mountain/sprint) for each terrain type maybe ? That should not be so hard to implement ? If the picture is generated on the server side should be doable, or it saved on the server and just pushed to the client ? Its still very hard to see the difference between terrains in some races... (today's race for example..)
|
|