There's already a few new ideas planned for the next season, to be revealed in due course, and the CT questions thread has been hijacked recently to serve this process, but if you have any further ideas for improving the ManGame, feel free to post them here.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 04-03-2015 17:11
In reports I want to be able to directly view the full-size version of a screenshot by either clicking on it or right-clicking and choosing 'view image' - that's both fine.
With Photobucket doing this brings you to a slow-loading page riddled with ads and other crap, where you have to hover over another small version of the screenshot for a second to make the 'view image' button show up, which after clicking it finally gets you to the actual image.
And of course there's the occasional 'this user has exceeded his bandwith limit' problem, which turns the forums into a sea of grey warnings.
So let's either collectively buy a subscription to a good image hosting service (which is not expensive) or switch to a free option that is actually decent, like for example imgur.com
Here's the same screenshot hosted by Photobucket and Imgur. Left-click both and see the huge difference for yourself.
With Photobucket doing this brings you to a slow-loading page riddled with ads and other crap, where you have to hover over another small version of the screenshot for a second to make the 'view image' button show up, which after clicking it finally gets you to the actual image.
This is part of a feature built into Photobucket, which can be turned off using this tip.
And it might just be me, but i can't see a significant difference in the above images. The imgur one's brighter but otherwise i'm having to spend acutaly time looking at the images in detail to pick out pretty minor changes between them.
Not saying Photobucket is a must use, but it's not as bad as those problems might make out. Though hosting the mini-jerseys elsewhere would be awesome (again for personal sig use you could just host them yourself, reducing overall badnwidth use....)
Even easier is using Ctrl+mouse wheel to enlarge whole page, which immediately makes pictures larger and then smaller again with other way with the mouse. At least i find this way fast and easy...
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
Even easier is using Ctrl+mouse wheel to enlarge whole page, which immediately makes pictures larger and then smaller again with other way with the mouse. At least i find this way fast and easy...
That's not quite what it's about because even though I always read every report on 250% or even 300% page size (guys, if you don't do that yet, DO IT!), I still need to enlarge some pictures to fully understand the race situation.
And indeed that whole issue just requires that small little fix to be non-existent.
The main reason I stick with Photobucket over, say, Imgur, is that it uploads the photos without changing the file names, so the urls are known in advance. This is vital for the way in which I write reports.
Similar here. I don`t necessarily need the file names. But I still need twice as much time with imgur as with photobucket. So I don`t want to change this.
But indeed the option should be unticked.
Well, I did a 'little bit' of some brainstorming about possible MG improvements. I believe I have quite a few more or less interesting ideas you make like or not, but I believe we all want this game to become even better than it is. It would be nice if I could start some discussions about possible improvements we could make to this fantastic game.
_______________________________________________________________________
1. Calendar remake - new race category
As SN already said earlier, the coming season should have a shorter calendar. I absolutely agree with this, because exactly what we need is IMO to have the lowest number of reports needed, while we all want to keep the highest number of racedays for our teams and keep the game the most funny possible in the same time, so the season has to have some serious deepness.
We all know reporters aren't growing on trees, so I believe we all agree we need to lower the needed number of reports in a season at least a little bit. Similarly I think we all want the game to run a little bit faster, as it isn't absolutely perfect that one season takes over one year in reality.
Currently we are running a system like this:
207 PT race days = 187 reports needed
120 HC race days = 105 reports needed
80 C2HC race days = 70 reports needed
177 C1 race days = 154 reports needed
109 C2 race days = 98 reports needed
while PT teams enjoying 207, PCT 175 and CT 150 race days, in total 614 reports, while we are having 693 race days in total.
I believe we could maximalise the potential and lower the amount of reports needed to be done by doing two things:
a) shorter slightly seasons for all divisions
b) maximalise the number of teams in every race closer to maximum (24 + control team)
But in the same time MG has to keep fun for everybody.
The thing I currently miss the most as a PT manager is some real interaction with managers from other divisions. And I am probably not the only one, as it is clear that currently PT is almost a league that lives in a bubble and PT managers currently don't have any real motivation to watch at least PCT, it means nothing for their team. I believe that is a bad thing, as I believe all managers should potentially have an interest in at least some races of other divisions too. It is a nice thing that PT is an elite league, but I don't believe it has to be 100% elite league that it is now, I think it would be only a good thing to allow some small variety in PT teams calendars.
On the other way there is a real interaction between PCT and CT, that works in my opinion well. I would want something like that at least between PT and PCT too. That's why I would like to suggest that PT and PCT teams would newly race together in a new race category and points gained there would count for both PT or PCT rankings and teams from both categories would be allowed to bring here their best riders.
In the same time the ProTour would become smaller, but teams there could select more races that would suit their strenghts. In a similar way, PCT teams could use a part of their racing programme to race against the higher division similarly as they race against CT teams, and CT teams would benefit from this, as PCT teams would race against CT a little bit less. I believe it would bring a lot of interesting new decisions both to PT/PCT managers. It could be quite easily implemented, how I suggest here together with another changes to the calendar:
This is the current system (PT 22 teams, PCT 30 teams, CT 26 teams)
RD available
Race category
PT RD
PCT RD
CT RD
Total capacity
Capacity used
207
PT
207
WC
0
4968
4554
120
HC
0
80
WC
2880
2400
0
C1HC
0
0
0
0
0
177
C1
0
70
50
4248
3400
80
C2HC
0
0
60
1920
1680
109
C2
0
25
40
2616
1790
693
Total
207
175
150
16632
13824
And this is my suggestion for 2015 (PT 22 teams, PCT 28 teams, CT 28 teams)
RD available
Race category
PT RD
PCT RD
CT RD
Total capacity
Capacity used
150
PT
150
WC
0
3600
3300
100
HC
40
40
WC
2400
2000
80
C1HC
0
60
0
1920
1680
120
C1
WC
40
40
2880
2240
80
C2HC
0
0
60
1920
1680
90
C2
0
20
40
2160
1680
620
Total
190
160
140
14400
12020
(hopefully everything is understandable, these numbers about capacity are easily counted by multiplication of race days with maximum number of teams for a race (24) and capacity used is calculated by multiplication needed race days for teams for that type of race with total number of teams needed to race that race category)
Notes:
PT: Current PT system with wildcards
HC: 5 bands available, 20 racedays in each band, each PT team selects 2 bands, each PCT team selects 2 bands, an option could be that races could be selected in a similar way like they are currently in C1/C2, there could be wildcards for CT teams to take part to gain XPs
C1HC: 4 bands available, 20 racedays in each band, each PCT team selects 3 bands
C1/C2: current race selections system stands, PT teams newly can take part in C1 races to get XPs, the number of race days for both categories are only an estimation
C2HC: 4 bands available, 20 racedays in each band, each CT team selects 3 bands
I believe we can easily reduce number of reports needed by 10% and in the same time we can keep number of race days for PT/PCT/CT almost at the same level (190/160/140 race days). SN may have even bigger reduction of calendar in his mind - everything is flexible.
In the similar time I would try to suggest setting the number of riders in all divisions on 8 per team per race. We can easily replace that missing race days on a calendar in that way.
In addition to that, we could have a system, where every division has it's own wildcard system. PT teams want to ride their local races in C1 races, so they could send there their riders to get experience or some riders that have a no chance to get a result in PT. Only for a few race days and only if there are free spaces in C1 races after both PCT/CT teams have their calendars done. PCT teams would still have a chance to get wildcards for PT races. But this time even CT teams would have a chance to get into races with PT teams to get experience in that new category.
_______________________________________________________________________
2. Cobble stage race
As the calendar thing goes, I think it miss only one thing for PT teams. I would definetely like a small only cobbles stage race. There are many classics, we have a stage race that is partially decided by cobble stage in ToNE, but there is nothing like a pure 3/4 stage day for cobble riders. I would definetely enjoy to see a race like that in MG instead of a few cobble classics.
_______________________________________________________________________
3. Continental Championships
My last idea about calendar changes is that I would enjoy to see Continental Championships. We have Nationals and Worlds, why not Continentals as well? In real cycling world, these Continental Champs are held as well. We have Pan-American Champs, we have Asian Champs, we have African Champs and we have European Champs in real cycling too, even these race aren't too popular. In MG world I believe it could be a nice addition and a chance to win a jersey to win for winners. I could found only two examples of the jerseys these riders win:
I believe that European jersey could be a nice template for champions of other continents if we decide to give it a go. We are already making selections for Worlds, so I believe these selections could apply for these Continental champs too, or even I could help with organisation of lineups for these races, if we decide to give it a go.
_______________________________________________________________________
4. Level 0 of training experience
Well, this one could help us with adding some really young riders into the DB. If we decide to add a new level of experience before the level 1, we could extend the needed number of seasons to max-out a rider, it could mean we can add a little bit younger riders in the future even without becoming too strong too soon. I think the level of raise a rider would get could be the same when a rider currently goes up from level 1 to level 2. It wouldn't affect current riders in DB at all.
_______________________________________________________________________
5. Better community
Similarly as I suggest creating a new race category between PT/PCT, I believe we should try to make MG community living a little bit more together. I have to be honest, but I don't currently watch many PCT/CT races and race discussions and I think majority of PT managers are currently in some position.
I believe one of the problems could be that we have other forum for PT and other for PCT/CT, similarly with race results. Many times when a new post is posted in PCT/CT I don't pay too much attention into it. I say to myself maybe something like 'it's not my league, it's not my concern'. If threads for discussions and results for all divisions are posted in the same thread, I believe only this thing would increase an interest in the league where my team isn't running. Especially for PT managers, as PCT/CT naturally have a bigger interest in GTs and Monuments than probably I have in Tour of Bangladesh. But in the end I have read quite a lot of reports in the last few days from history of this game and I really enjoyed it, even my team didn't participate there.
In addition to that, I think we should try to create a 'spamming thread' or general discussion to the game somewhere here. Many guys have their Twitter accounts for their team, but I believe we can bring that tweets here and connect more people into the discussion with that. I am not against Twitter, I actually like that, but I think we could bring that Twitter thing here somehow too. I discuss quite a lot about MG through PMs too, but I think that discussions could be seamlessly conducted publicly too somehow. As I know from my history of playing these types of games, the worst thing is if there is no discussion at all. It is a nice thing we at least have these race thread and team's HQs, but I believe we could do better.
_______________________________________________________________________
6. Training camps
I think we could do with something like training camps and it could be brought to the game in more ways. In every way it could be another way what to do with money in this game:
a) Before the season every rider would get -3 or even -5 in every attribute and there would be a need to get a rider into the form for the season. But it costs money and the better the rider is, it costs more, as he needs the best care possible to go after winning things. Every manager would have to decide how much he wants to invests into their riders and which attributes he wants to his rider to work on in pre-season. Before the next season attributes of riders goes back to normal.
b) There could be implemented something like riders could be sent to a training camp where they become better for one month of the season. It would cost money and the rider would get something like +1 for that month of the season. There would be then a need for more database versions to be made, but if it is 10 databases, it isn't so drastic thing.
c) Similarly like in the option b) we would have to use these 10 databases, but actually this time you would have to choose in which month your riders will be in the top form, it wouldn't cost any money. In MG reality that would mean that you will have to choose in which month of the season your riders will keep their attributes. In all other months that riders would get -1 to all his attributes. This could bring in a nice little bit of tactital decisioning. In the end we could choose parts of the season instead of months as well. The calendar could be divided in a few parts and so we would have to choose in which parts which riders should be in-form.
_______________________________________________________________________
7. No-trade clause
(well, there are maybe another things from American sport leagues we could potentially use in our own way )
The no-trade clause could be implemented in more ways too, but it would give another options in contract negotiations:
a) Every team can have a choice to give his riders a no-trade clause. That rider/s would then reduce his wage demands, but he couldn't then be traded or sold in the transfer window. On the other way the team would then get less money from sponsors, as there would be less of a need to invest in the squad as the current rider/s would stay.
b) Even it is a little bit unrealistic in the cycling world, but: Every old man don't like moving, so even here every cyclist that is over ~32 years could get in negotiations a no-trade clause, he would take a discount to stay in his team for older parts of his career. He would then want less money as a wage as he isn't getting any better, but he then couldn't be sold/traded in the coming transfer window.
_______________________________________________________________________
8. Franchise rider tag
The franchise rider tag could be another option during contract negotiations. If you give your rider this franchise tag thing, that would mean:
- you will have to pay the rider some more % of money of your wage cap than the rider would originally wanted, but he will get a small % of extra race days for the season
- if you trade/sell that rider during transfers, he will lose the race bonus you gave him with franchise tag, his wage stays the same, but you will have to pay a fine to MGUCI that you broke the promise that a rider is your franchise rider
- I believe that franchise tag could be given only to one rider per team per season
_______________________________________________________________________
9. Training
We could have a few more options to have with training of riders. I have a few ideas:
a) For riders that aren't the biggest star of MG peloton there could be an option to buy them a 'training package'. It could work similarly like when they are trained on another level of experience. This way the training of not-the-best-riders would be much cheaper and complex. I believe it could be quite cool if we could make some of our key domestics better riders.
b) Or I believe the training for worse riders should be made more cheap, it wouldn't hurt the game too much, if a quite a bad domestic could become at least decent or a decent cobble domestic could become better in flat/hills too for much cheaper than now. I am thinking about riders with average above max 73 or 74 and their attributes that are above that limit couldn't be trained at all using this possible training exception.
_______________________________________________________________________
10. Rider goals
Similarly to team race goals, the riders could have their own goals as well. If team goals are selected before transfers, rider goals could be selected only after transfer window ends. The system could be quite similar like with team goals: you would have to select goals for your riders with a similar difficulty system (that 14 to 23 range) like we have with selecting the team goals. The accomplishment of these goals would then bring the team more money from sponsors for the next season's budget of the team. And I think ideally you would have to choose goals for at least 3 of your 5 best riders (according to average) and you would choose 5 goals in total and riders goals would have to be choosen for different races than team goals. Optionally rider goals would have an effect on rider's wages for the next season. If a rider is successfull, he will want a little bit higher wage next year and vice versa. Similarly you would get more money for your next year's budget or not.
_______________________________________________________________________
4: Yes please! This would take youngsters 1 year extra to get to their top. In addition to that we do need more low potential riders in comparison to high pot. Currently there are almost no level 1, 2 and 3 riders.
5: Could work, but I guess it'd only be 10-15 managers actively contributing.
6: a) No! Whilst it would help making a difference between all riders with an 85 stat, I feel it'd also harm the PCT/CT managers, especially when the PT will also be allowed to race PCT races.
b) Would indeed require multiple databases, but as you say 10 isn't too much. Could still cause problems, but I like the idea.
c) Even better, would represent overtraining, causing fatigue and loss of stats
7: No thoughts about it really, could work, but I'm not sure.
8: Don't understand, like with most American sports rules...
9: a) Would be cool for regional teams, but honestly I think the training should be the same for every rider, domestique or leader.
b) Not needed, there are enough domestiques available.
10: Would be cool, but would also overcomplicate things.
Manager of Team Popo4Ever p/b Morshynska in the PCM.Daily Man-Game
Great ideas Roman, I'll comment on a few. Cobble stage race, yes please! I was really diappointed Eneco Tour wasn't anything like it's RL counterpart. Continental Championships, well I have them in EPIC, but I don't think it would work here. Too many teams won't be able to participate in the races because of the rider/team caps.
Even as an outsider, I might be able to come with a few suggestions :)
1. Activeness
First I noticed when I started following MG, was that the HQ's wasn't really active and some of them only have 3 pages. I will just note here, as I will come with my suggestion on next point.
To compare with EPIC a bit, there are some HQ's with 20 pages and this is in a game with about 50 races each year. So there might be some ideas to increase this, even with just a few pages.
1a. Suggestion
I think that managers should be rewarded for being active, this will also give the managers a reason for being active in their HQ and might also give the less active a push in getting back on track. I don't know how you want to do it, but it's something that should be looked into at least.
1b
Like managers should be rewarded for being active, there should also be some sort of penalty for not being active or a specific set of time. To back this up you might be able to make a thread, where managers can say that they're inactive for say a month and would therefore won't get a penalty.
Cause as far as I can see, the only penalty for being inactive is losing your team (if it's in the end of season)
2. Lower Quality = Faster Pace
One thing that I wanted to do some time ago, was applying for making reports for MG, as I heard that the game wasn't that active atm and as I already loved making reports. The only problem was that I couldn't get to help, cause my report wasn't detailed enough and had some unrealistic camera photo's.
Roman mentioned that there should be less races and that the pace should be higher next season, so all I'm saying is that I think that some guys don't care if there is 1 or 2 pictures from an impossible angle, than what the result will be.
I love the micro jerseys and I love the detail, but it can be too much and it's nothing essential in the small numbers. Also personally I got the feeling, that my reports couldn't get better or improve over time, even if I got in or not ;)
Also I agree with all of Roman's suggestions and should at least be looked into :) Overall there isn't much flaws and all I can see is that the pace needs to be improved, at the cost of some of the details that are required in this type of game ;)
As SN already said earlier, the coming season should have a shorter calendar. I absolutely agree with this, because exactly what we need is IMO to have the lowest number of reports needed, while we all want to keep the highest number of racedays for our teams and keep the game the most funny possible in the same time, so the season has to have some serious deepness.
We all know reporters aren't growing on trees, so I believe we all agree we need to lower the needed number of reports in a season at least a little bit. Similarly I think we all want the game to run a little bit faster, as it isn't absolutely perfect that one season takes over one year in reality.
Currently we are running a system like this:
207 PT race days = 187 reports needed
120 HC race days = 105 reports needed
80 C2HC race days = 70 reports needed
177 C1 race days = 154 reports needed
109 C2 race days = 98 reports needed
while PT teams enjoying 207, PCT 175 and CT 150 race days, in total 614 reports, while we are having 693 race days in total.
I believe we could maximalise the potential and lower the amount of reports needed to be done by doing two things:
a) shorter slightly seasons for all divisions
b) maximalise the number of teams in every race closer to maximum (24 + control team)
But in the same time MG has to keep fun for everybody.
The thing I currently miss the most as a PT manager is some real interaction with managers from other divisions. And I am probably not the only one, as it is clear that currently PT is almost a league that lives in a bubble and PT managers currently don't have any real motivation to watch at least PCT, it means nothing for their team. I believe that is a bad thing, as I believe all managers should potentially have an interest in at least some races of other divisions too. It is a nice thing that PT is an elite league, but I don't believe it has to be 100% elite league that it is now, I think it would be only a good thing to allow some small variety in PT teams calendars.
On the other way there is a real interaction between PCT and CT, that works in my opinion well. I would want something like that at least between PT and PCT too. That's why I would like to suggest that PT and PCT teams would newly race together in a new race category and points gained there would count for both PT or PCT rankings and teams from both categories would be allowed to bring here their best riders.
In the same time the ProTour would become smaller, but teams there could select more races that would suit their strenghts. In a similar way, PCT teams could use a part of their racing programme to race against the higher division similarly as they race against CT teams, and CT teams would benefit from this, as PCT teams would race against CT a little bit less. I believe it would bring a lot of interesting new decisions both to PT/PCT managers. It could be quite easily implemented, how I suggest here together with another changes to the calendar:
This is the current system (PT 22 teams, PCT 30 teams, CT 26 teams)
RD available
Race category
PT RD
PCT RD
CT RD
Total capacity
Capacity used
207
PT
207
WC
0
4968
4554
120
HC
0
80
WC
2880
2400
0
C1HC
0
0
0
0
0
177
C1
0
70
50
4248
3400
80
C2HC
0
0
60
1920
1680
109
C2
0
25
40
2616
1790
693
Total
207
175
150
16632
13824
And this is my suggestion for 2015 (PT 22 teams, PCT 28 teams, CT 28 teams)
RD available
Race category
PT RD
PCT RD
CT RD
Total capacity
Capacity used
150
PT
150
WC
0
3600
3300
100
HC
40
40
WC
2400
2000
80
C1HC
0
60
0
1920
1680
120
C1
WC
40
40
2880
2240
80
C2HC
0
0
60
1920
1680
90
C2
0
20
40
2160
1680
620
Total
190
160
140
14400
12020
(hopefully everything is understandable, these numbers about capacity are easily counted by multiplication of race days with maximum number of teams for a race (24) and capacity used is calculated by multiplication needed race days for teams for that type of race with total number of teams needed to race that race category)
Notes:
PT: Current PT system with wildcards
HC: 5 bands available, 20 racedays in each band, each PT team selects 2 bands, each PCT team selects 2 bands, an option could be that races could be selected in a similar way like they are currently in C1/C2, there could be wildcards for CT teams to take part to gain XPs
C1HC: 4 bands available, 20 racedays in each band, each PCT team selects 3 bands
C1/C2: current race selections system stands, PT teams newly can take part in C1 races to get XPs, the number of race days for both categories are only an estimation
C2HC: 4 bands available, 20 racedays in each band, each CT team selects 3 bands
I believe we can easily reduce number of reports needed by 10% and in the same time we can keep number of race days for PT/PCT/CT almost at the same level (190/160/140 race days). SN may have even bigger reduction of calendar in his mind - everything is flexible.
In the similar time I would try to suggest setting the number of riders in all divisions on 8 per team per race. We can easily replace that missing race days on a calendar in that way.
In addition to that, we could have a system, where every division has it's own wildcard system. PT teams want to ride their local races in C1 races, so they could send there their riders to get experience or some riders that have a no chance to get a result in PT. Only for a few race days and only if there are free spaces in C1 races after both PCT/CT teams have their calendars done. PCT teams would still have a chance to get wildcards for PT races. But this time even CT teams would have a chance to get into races with PT teams to get experience in that new category.
The interaction between PT and CT is indeed lacking. Although always reading the PT reports I think I only comment when I'm actually reporting a race, and I do think the interaction could improve.
However, I do not think a whole new race category is necessary for that. In the reporters forum this has already been discussed as well, and the plan is to keep the division hierarchy the same, but let the PT teams ride one of the HC bands, which for the rest are kept the same. This would prevent us from having to create a whole new system, yet it does make the interaction grow.
I'm not really in favour of having PT teams riding C1 races. Currently the talents can gain experience in lower categories by taking on loans, meaning CT teams can also benefit from this. I personally would like to see that system remaining this way.
_______________________________________________________________________
2. Cobble stage race
As the calendar thing goes, I think it miss only one thing for PT teams. I would definetely like a small only cobbles stage race. There are many classics, we have a stage race that is partially decided by cobble stage in ToNE, but there is nothing like a pure 3/4 stage day for cobble riders. I would definetely enjoy to see a race like that in MG instead of a few cobble classics.
I definitely agree on this. I'd even happily create it if it would go on.
_______________________________________________________________________
3. Continental Championships
My last idea about calendar changes is that I would enjoy to see Continental Championships. We have Nationals and Worlds, why not Continentals as well? In real cycling world, these Continental Champs are held as well. We have Pan-American Champs, we have Asian Champs, we have African Champs and we have European Champs in real cycling too, even these race aren't too popular. In MG world I believe it could be a nice addition and a chance to win a jersey to win for winners. I could found only two examples of the jerseys these riders win:
I believe that European jersey could be a nice template for champions of other continents if we decide to give it a go. We are already making selections for Worlds, so I believe these selections could apply for these Continental champs too, or even I could help with organisation of lineups for these races, if we decide to give it a go.
I think the problem with this is the division of riders over continents. Currently the African riders are very limited in their amount, making it very hard to create a sizable field. The same should go for Asia as well I think, although combining it with Australia/Oceania might solve that.
It would also create another addition to the calendar, which should be cut. I think it's better to lay the core in cutting races first, and then add this when there's time for it.
_______________________________________________________________________
4. Level 0 of training experience
Well, this one could help us with adding some really young riders into the DB. If we decide to add a new level of experience before the level 1, we could extend the needed number of seasons to max-out a rider, it could mean we can add a little bit younger riders in the future even without becoming too strong too soon. I think the level of raise a rider would get could be the same when a rider currently goes up from level 1 to level 2. It wouldn't affect current riders in DB at all.
I like the idea of having riders max later. However, it only extends their maxing by just 1 season, which makes 24 y/o beasts instead of 23. Also, adding this new level means that either the very young riders should start with very low stats, or the stat gain file should change. While the first would make it inattractive to sign weak riders, the second means a big disadvantage for the current riders. This makes me think it's not the best idea.
_______________________________________________________________________
5. Better community
Similarly as I suggest creating a new race category between PT/PCT, I believe we should try to make MG community living a little bit more together. I have to be honest, but I don't currently watch many PCT/CT races and race discussions and I think majority of PT managers are currently in some position.
I believe one of the problems could be that we have other forum for PT and other for PCT/CT, similarly with race results. Many times when a new post is posted in PCT/CT I don't pay too much attention into it. I say to myself maybe something like 'it's not my league, it's not my concern'. If threads for discussions and results for all divisions are posted in the same thread, I believe only this thing would increase an interest in the league where my team isn't running. Especially for PT managers, as PCT/CT naturally have a bigger interest in GTs and Monuments than probably I have in Tour of Bangladesh. But in the end I have read quite a lot of reports in the last few days from history of this game and I really enjoyed it, even my team didn't participate there.
In addition to that, I think we should try to create a 'spamming thread' or general discussion to the game somewhere here. Many guys have their Twitter accounts for their team, but I believe we can bring that tweets here and connect more people into the discussion with that. I am not against Twitter, I actually like that, but I think we could bring that Twitter thing here somehow too. I discuss quite a lot about MG through PMs too, but I think that discussions could be seamlessly conducted publicly too somehow. As I know from my history of playing these types of games, the worst thing is if there is no discussion at all. It is a nice thing we at least have these race thread and team's HQs, but I believe we could do better.
I'm really in favour of putting the race discussions in the same forum. This should definitely increase the likeliness of communication.
However, I'm not in favour of doing the same for results. The main trouble with that is that the results forum would be very distorted. If you look at the current forum of PT
Spoiler
it's all very nice and in order, making it easier to browse through results. If all results were to go into one forum, it would make browsing more annoying, as you'd constantly have to scroll down or look at the second page.
_______________________________________________________________________
6. Training camps
I think we could do with something like training camps and it could be brought to the game in more ways. In every way it could be another way what to do with money in this game:
a) Before the season every rider would get -3 or even -5 in every attribute and there would be a need to get a rider into the form for the season. But it costs money and the better the rider is, it costs more, as he needs the best care possible to go after winning things. Every manager would have to decide how much he wants to invests into their riders and which attributes he wants to his rider to work on in pre-season. Before the next season attributes of riders goes back to normal.
fjhoekie sums it up for this.
b) There could be implemented something like riders could be sent to a training camp where they become better for one month of the season. It would cost money and the rider would get something like +1 for that month of the season. There would be then a need for more database versions to be made, but if it is 10 databases, it isn't so drastic thing.
I'm also not really in favour of this one. It once again seems to favour the PT teams over PCT teams, and especially CT teams could be suffering from this.
c) Similarly like in the option b) we would have to use these 10 databases, but actually this time you would have to choose in which month your riders will be in the top form, it wouldn't cost any money. In MG reality that would mean that you will have to choose in which month of the season your riders will keep their attributes. In all other months that riders would get -1 to all his attributes. This could bring in a nice little bit of tactital decisioning. In the end we could choose parts of the season instead of months as well. The calendar could be divided in a few parts and so we would have to choose in which parts which riders should be in-form.
I quite like this idea. It would also reward teams which are not dependent on one rider, meaning that balancing out your team would pay off. It also serves the good tacticians, as good planning could be very helpful here.
A risk of it is that strong riders will have a very close-bound season. If for example your leader peaks in April/May, the manager will try to get him in as many races as possible there, meaning he won't compete very much throughout the rest of the season. For the spread of the leaders all over the season I think peaks should be left out.
_______________________________________________________________________
7. No-trade clause
(well, there are maybe another things from American sport leagues we could potentially use in our own way )
The no-trade clause could be implemented in more ways too, but it would give another options in contract negotiations:
a) Every team can have a choice to give his riders a no-trade clause. That rider/s would then reduce his wage demands, but he couldn't then be traded or sold in the transfer window. On the other way the team would then get less money from sponsors, as there would be less of a need to invest in the squad as the current rider/s would stay.
I don't think this should be implemented. It sounds like it's very unattractive for a rider to stay then if he has a no-trade clause, as this limits his options and his financials. That said, riders could be made to resign by the formula used now.
b) Even it is a little bit unrealistic in the cycling world, but: Every old man don't like moving, so even here every cyclist that is over ~32 years could get in negotiations a no-trade clause, he would take a discount to stay in his team for older parts of his career. He would then want less money as a wage as he isn't getting any better, but he then couldn't be sold/traded in the coming transfer window.
I'm not really in favour of this one. I think discounts should come with lack of stats/quality, not with someone's willingness to stay at a team no matter what. And as you said yourself, this occurring in the world of cycling is not very realistic.
_______________________________________________________________________
8. Franchise rider tag
The franchise rider tag could be another option during contract negotiations. If you give your rider this franchise tag thing, that would mean:
- you will have to pay the rider some more % of money of your wage cap than the rider would originally wanted, but he will get a small % of extra race days for the season
- if you trade/sell that rider during transfers, he will lose the race bonus you gave him with franchise tag, his wage stays the same, but you will have to pay a fine to MGUCI that you broke the promise that a rider is your franchise rider
- I believe that franchise tag could be given only to one rider per team per season
I don't see the value of giving a higher wage when only a small percentage of rd is given. If a rider for example gets 70 instead of 65, I don't think it's financially attractive enough to give an extra wage for a possible rise of points, which could also be achieved by training or buying another rider.
_______________________________________________________________________
9. Training
We could have a few more options to have with training of riders. I have a few ideas:
a) For riders that aren't the biggest star of MG peloton there could be an option to buy them a 'training package'. It could work similarly like when they are trained on another level of experience. This way the training of not-the-best-riders would be much cheaper and complex. I believe it could be quite cool if we could make some of our key domestics better riders.
I don't think this idea is feasible. For CT teams this probably is too expensive, and PT (and possibly PCT teams) domestiques would grow further away from CT teams, making the bridge even larger.
b) Or I believe the training for worse riders should be made more cheap, it wouldn't hurt the game too much, if a quite a bad domestic could become at least decent or a decent cobble domestic could become better in flat/hills too for much cheaper than now. I am thinking about riders with average above max 73 or 74 and their attributes that are above that limit couldn't be trained at all using this possible training exception.
I like this idea. This would prevent market inflation a bit, which is what we do want. This should also balance out some riders, who now are just useless in all but one terrain.
_______________________________________________________________________
10. Rider goals
Similarly to team race goals, the riders could have their own goals as well. If team goals are selected before transfers, rider goals could be selected only after transfer window ends. The system could be quite similar like with team goals: you would have to select goals for your riders with a similar difficulty system (that 14 to 23 range) like we have with selecting the team goals. The accomplishment of these goals would then bring the team more money from sponsors for the next season's budget of the team. And I think ideally you would have to choose goals for at least 3 of your 5 best riders (according to average) and you would choose 5 goals in total and riders goals would have to be choosen for different races than team goals. Optionally rider goals would have an effect on rider's wages for the next season. If a rider is successfull, he will want a little bit higher wage next year and vice versa. Similarly you would get more money for your next year's budget or not.
I don't see how rider goals are related to sponsor budget. Usually it's the sponsor deciding the key races, and riders just have to give in to that. Personal goals are playing a smaller role there.
_______________________________________________________________________<
Edit:
sgdanny wrote: 1. Activeness
First I noticed when I started following MG, was that the HQ's wasn't really active and some of them only have 3 pages. I will just note here, as I will come with my suggestion on next point.
To compare with EPIC a bit, there are some HQ's with 20 pages and this is in a game with about 50 races each year. So there might be some ideas to increase this, even with just a few pages.
1a. Suggestion
I think that managers should be rewarded for being active, this will also give the managers a reason for being active in their HQ and might also give the less active a push in getting back on track. I don't know how you want to do it, but it's something that should be looked into at least.
I think the focus of the MG should remain where it is: the management. The HQ gives a nice opportunity to keep your fans updated and do roleplaying, but it should not be a really important part of the game.
1b
Like managers should be rewarded for being active, there should also be some sort of penalty for not being active or a specific set of time. To back this up you might be able to make a thread, where managers can say that they're inactive for say a month and would therefore won't get a penalty.
Cause as far as I can see, the only penalty for being inactive is losing your team (if it's in the end of season)
Being inactive for a month often comes unexpected, and sometimes it just can't be helped for various reasons, despite coming unforeseen. I don't think punishing people for having RL things is very contributive for the game.
2. Lower Quality = Faster Pace
One thing that I wanted to do some time ago, was applying for making reports for MG, as I heard that the game wasn't that active atm and as I already loved making reports. The only problem was that I couldn't get to help, cause my report wasn't detailed enough and had some unrealistic camera photo's.
Roman mentioned that there should be less races and that the pace should be higher next season, so all I'm saying is that I think that some guys don't care if there is 1 or 2 pictures from an impossible angle, than what the result will be.
I love the micro jerseys and I love the detail, but it can be too much and it's nothing essential in the small numbers. Also personally I got the feeling, that my reports couldn't get better or improve over time, even if I got in or not
I've seen some of your EPIC reports, and I don't know if they are similar to the ones you sent to SN, but the main issue was that the focus was not enough on the final 20kms, but about 2/3 was from before that.
That said, shorter reports are being considered in the reporters forum atm and it would not be surprising if these shorter reports were to come next season.
Edited by Selwink on 06-03-2015 09:32
Ollfardh wrote:
Great ideas Roman, I'll comment on a few. Cobble stage race, yes please! I was really diappointed Eneco Tour wasn't anything like it's RL counterpart. Continental Championships, well I have them in EPIC, but I don't think it would work here. Too many teams won't be able to participate in the races because of the rider/team caps.
Just to point out that there are already multiple cobbled stage races in PCT and CT.
I'll comment on Roman and sgdanny's points, and the responses to them, later.
1. Calendar remake - new race category
All for a shorter calendar to help speed up the season. Don't think we need to try and force all races towards 24 teams, the variety in startlists is very much an enjoyable thing and creates a nice part of planning and overall game variety.
I don't think we need a new catagory, we've already got plenty. Having PT teams compete in HC races. Equally i'm not a fan of your new suggestion of RD division, mostly because i don't see any problems with the current one that can't be solved by reducing the calendar a bit
3. Continental Championships
Really don't see the point. Same riders as Worlds just split up a bit. I see the same guys as normal winning so what makes it key or different?
4. Level 0 of training experience
Again i really don't see the point. There's no issue of riders maxing out too soon, the problem is they max out at too young an age because they are added too young. Stop adding riders at 20 and add more 6/7/8pot riders at 23/24. If things were to be slowed down i'd suggest taking away the 1>2>3 in one season jump (but i don't think that is needed)
5. Better community
I have no probems reading PT discussion threads or races. I don't comment hugely, usually because i don't have much to add. If all that is preventing you from posting in PCT/CT discussions is that they are in a different forum, then i would be concered.
A general discussion thread would be nice to increase overall chat perhaps. Love the little exchanges on twitter and other means i have with other managers.
6. Training camps
God no for me. Pricing it to be fair for all divisions would be a nightmare. And what if you didn't train a rider back up, in two seasons would they be -6/-10? For a poor CT team it would be a killer very very quickly.
Anything that requires 10more DB's is just really unlikely to happen unless it's a stellar idea
7. No-trade clause
Not a fan of the idea. If you don't want to sell a rider, just don't sell him. If you need incentive not to sell him then it seems you don't want him and should just sell him. (I would so use this option on almost my entire team though!)
8. Franchise rider tag
Again i don't see the point. Would i pay 5% more for 5% more race days? The differences are negligable or would be made too big for noticable effect. Franchising works in sports where Franchises exist, they don't in cycling.
9. Training
More concerned about limiting top end spending and the proliference of 85 stat riders than inboosting lower end riders. I could see the point in B) but there's plenty of decent riders to chose from in the DB anyway. If you want a specific one then that's your choice and you should pay for that choice
10. Rider goals
Sponsors decide a teams goals. Riders have personal goals but they don't impact the teams rewards as such. For increasing rider realism it would make sense, but it's the Management Game with the emphasis on the team management.
_____
1. Activeness
I would like to see some more managers active with their HQ's. The focus should be on the discussion threads but the way some people ignore HQ's is shocking. It's still part of the game and it's still a way to show activity and dedication. In tough activity related decisions HQ's should take a role.
Completely bias but i think there should be some greater reward for being active. Just continuing my team isn't exactly a reward, it should just be a given for staying above the acceptable activity level. Not that i have a real idea on how to make it fair...
Big advocat for shorter reports but there's some hefty opposition. Ongoing discussions there.
As I hope renewals might be harder this year and the chance we might a loose a rider we really want to keep I could like a different version of franchise tag. If you after 3 rounds of negotiations fail on signing a rider you can franchise tag him. It gives him a contract at the avg wage of his avg from last season for the coming season. Kinda works like i feel franchise tags are used in the states, force a rider that wont agree to a new contract to stay
DubbelDekker wrote:
Let's ditch Photobucket as our image host.
Agreed. And since PCM.daily has its own server, why even have a image host? Just set up a folder on the server, give access to that folder to the reporters and let them upload their pictures to it via FTP.
Great post Roman and a very interesting one. I guess the concern with a lot of the later ideas is the workload it would put on and balancing issues with the game.
I'd love to see a short cobbled stage race along the lines of:
Stage 1 - cobbled team chrono
Stage 2 - cobbled flattish Roubaix stage
Stage 3 - flat transitional stage
Stage 4 - cobbled hilly Flanders style stage
Of course in real life the essence of cobbled races is that they are one day classics in the main - with the occasional proper cobbled stage thrown into the Tour de France.
Not sure which category we would want to throw it into, but certainly would be an interesting oddity to watch.
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
)
