|
Ideas/Suggestions for 2014
|
| Ste117 |
Posted on 21-01-2014 23:29
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3684
Joined: 21-02-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Im not sure I will have enough time for both, Ive struggled to update my HQ thread this season, we will see how it goes but I would like to report races 
MG Team manager Team Ticos Air Costa Rica
 |
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 21-01-2014 23:39
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ste117 wrote:
Im not sure I will have enough time for both, Ive struggled to update my HQ thread this season, we will see how it goes but I would like to report races
While ideally its nice if all teams had an up to date HQ, it's certainly less important if you are able to report races from time to time instead.
|
| |
|
|
| Roman |
Posted on 22-01-2014 02:28
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4386
Joined: 29-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Thank you for your answer SN. I really would like to know what others think about my main idea. In my opinion, it is only about finding a good ratio between fixed races and races which should be choosen by managers. A ration there will be a general satisfaction.
100 fixed races is maybe too much, I don't know. But let's say there would be 80 fixed race days for every PCT/CT team plus PCT teams would have Tour of America fixed as well, why not have one serious PCT GT with a great competition?
Other 80 race days could be still decided by managers giving priorities to races they want to ride and then every race would have 24 teams at the start? PT teams would have about 210 race days, PCT 180, CT 160. Maybe I exaggerating my idea too far, because there could be a problem with not too many teams wanting to ride cobble races, etc... But if it was all well thought out, it could work really, really well, I believe. What do you guys think?
|
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 22-01-2014 03:07
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Personally I'd be opposed to fixing race days, particularly something as serious as Tour of America. It would mean that teams like mine, which have no GC riders would have absolutely zero chance of promotion whereas currently it is possible for me to create my entire season without facing a single mountain stage all season - thus meaning that I am able to tailor my season to my team. Promotion comes down to my managerial ability. It is simply not possible to have a team that is competitive on every type of terrain with PCT budgets - to get a decent GC rider is 300k plus, and you are looking at similar wages for puncheurs, top cobblestone riders, time trialists and even the very top sprinters.
Fixing race days would only work if there as an equal proprtion of race days for all types of terrain (say 20% of total cobbled, hilly, mountain races) in which case it does not unduly affect any one type of team, though I still feel that it would be too heavily weighted to teams with top climbers. Not only that but I feel that it would damage people who are targetting the regional rankings where they willl want to ride every race possible on any given continent.
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 22-01-2014 06:19
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
I have to say i mostly liked the idea of Roman, till when i realized what Count said above me. Tour of America as fixed race would cost my team 21 or whatever precious race days, so i would be crazy if i sent my captain there, because he could have like 40race days per season and half should be used for this race. I think nobody sane would send the captain there with that in mind.
Also type of stages are not proportionally same i think, so as Count said, that could be big problem for some of "not so widely focused" teams.
Next thing is, that i would maybe have a problem with some 75 "forced" race days against CT teams on some C2level,if i got Romans idea right. Because it would not make much sense from my managerial point of view. I cant take strongest riders to these races and i dont have reason to send my youngsters there, as they level very slow oon C2 races. So i would need to "trash" some of my riders there, without much added value to my team...
I like the idea of 22PT teams though (because i could have a chance some day) 
I think that the system of race days,divisions and XP allocation is good as it is, we just need more people to report and that is "fault" of all of us bar those ca.six people giving so much to the game already. I hope i will be able to help with that next year with PCM13, of course not on that great tempo and quality of Roturn or Count.
|
| |
|
|
| Smowz |
Posted on 22-01-2014 06:33
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6479
Joined: 09-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
The issue with the pct and ct selection as it stands currently is that you tend to get 'gaps' in the market, creating races that are undersubscribed.
Cobbled races and hilly classics at c2 are typical examples. Some say it is skill to try and pick races that are undersubscribed, though really this is not what we should be aiming for - the teams at the top of each division should be the best teams.
The tour of America is not currently a HC race, nor should it be it would likely create some imbalance.
Personally all things considered I quite like Romans idea, though I understand the reservations.
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 22-01-2014 06:52
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
I hate there is no edit button in this thread, hard to keep discussion going without that.
While i agree Smowz,that best teams (i think you mean strongest,coming from transfers?) should be at the top of divisions, i think that it is welcomed only to some extent. Because who wants the season predictable?
We could basically have the promotion spots settled coming from transfers, because there would be very slim chance for "planning mistakes" or opposite, your team punching above its weight by careful clever planning and yes,luck.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 08:17
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Smowz |
Posted on 22-01-2014 07:09
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6479
Joined: 09-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
So the protour is decided before the season begins? Rubbish.
By best team I mean a combination of great riders purchased and good planning. Currently pct teams have to race a certain amount if HC races, an increase in those wouldn't hurt. I still think people will opt out of cobbles even if they have to take in a cobbled race or two, similarly with mountains.
I imagine SN will still engineer clashes and besides if I understand Roman correctly he is advocating a certain amount of fixed race days not all.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 22-01-2014 07:48
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
A higher amount of fix pct and ct races could work with counts additions. It must be the same amount for every rider type.
Tour of America of course is a bit difficult. A gt would be nice but would also take lots of race days. So the top climbers would probably avoid being there. Which makes it a low quality gt. Going the Gesink or VdB way should deliver more points for most. |
| |
|
|
| tyriion |
Posted on 22-01-2014 09:01
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1510
Joined: 29-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Fixing race days in the PCT wouldn't really work, unless there are less than 30 teams. Maybe I missed it, but as it is now not every team can participate in any given race at the same time.
Check out my ManGame team here
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 22-01-2014 09:36
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
So the PCT made the feelings known, so i'll offer up from the CT...
A fixed race day calendar is just not possible with a CT budget, full stop. As most of the top ranking teams from the last season show, specialization and planning are what brings rewards. It is possible to have a wide base team (Cobblers, Sprinters and Climbers) because i've got that, as do some others. But your budget is so tight specialization is by far the most effective method at CT level.
Gazzelle wouldn't be half the team it is with a fixed calendar because a good portion of the fixed calendar would not suit them, like a certain race type would not suit the majority of teams. For 500k total budget you are pushed as it is, forcing that to be spread across 4 terrains is really asking too much. Especially of the new managers who would come in with no experience.
So thats the racing/rankings/budget aspect. But, for me, the biggest fun in the CT is having that ability to specialize or create a project. Just creating your normal "do everything" team is dull, and if you are always acing against other "do everything" teams it would also be boring. The teams create personalities and at CT that is just as important because CT means f*ck all in terms of importance or legacy. It is much more of an introductory level and allows you to experiment and learn the ins and outs of the game in your own way, which is very important if you want valuable long term managers.
Basically a fixed CT calendar has the possibility of working, but would be heavily opposed by almost all the managers and would overall decease the quality of the game at the lowest division.
I like ideas that simplify things and speed the game up, but to input a fixed calendar a number of changes would have to be made to the calendar and the league set-ups to accommodate the change. PT already fixed, just a change in number of participants. PCT partially fixed, by forcing entry into X number of HC race days (but they could ride more if they wanted to). CT partially fixed, by forcing entry into X number of C2 race days. C1 still being open to both divisions (and C2 still being possible to PCT teams, and HC wildcards being open the CT teams if there is space)
That sort of set up would not need a decrease in PCT teams either.
Probably just repeating a lot of what other people said already but you've got a CT view now as well. Speeding up is all well and good, but if it means the game is less fun or good then i don't want it
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 22-01-2014 10:50
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Budget wise I agree that PCT and in especially CT teams will struggle more than PT teams to get a leader for all terrains.
Then again, this is not a must have imo.
Even if some teams are more focussed on the cobbles and others are on the climbs, this could work with a partly fixed calendar, where those teams will have good and bad races of course.
Example is Santander in an extreme case in the PT. Except for the climbs they don`t concentrate on the other stuff.
Or last year`s Vesuvio without cobble focus and still one of the greatest teams.
So even with a partly set schedule the teams wouldn`t need to be good on all terrains.
That all said other things will play into this as well.
- Salaries in the 2nd or more consecutive year will usually be lower than in the first year. So Manx and all the other CT managers should have some cap left while still having their 2013 leaders.
- All CT and PCT teams would need to eventually look for some other terrain leaders. In my example I would have Ruijgh and improved Koep, Olivier at the moment for the climbs, which I didn`t focus at all so far. But they might be okay leaders for those 4-5 mountain races on a fix schedule and so my main salary could still go into the sprint/hill terrain as Boom/Vantomme would be a good enough duo for those cobbled races.
But as all teams would eventually need to focus on some other riders, the amount of salaries might change for all and a rider, who was worth 500k before might just be a 400k rider as teams with a strong terrain there already, might not focus him and instead focus another terrain leader.
Hope you get what I mean in those last sentences.  |
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 22-01-2014 10:51
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ultimately, the ideal Man-Game requires enough reporters to be able to maintain a solid pace for race reports. We don't have that, so its not realistic to expect to be able to keep doing the same big calendar, with the same big flexibility in choices. These are always things that can be returned in future (and they will be kept as much as possible anyway), but I really think the 2014 season needs to quicker. Slower seasons do inevitably lead to a drop off in some managers, and that just makes a little bit less fun for those who do stick around. Getting an influx of new managers for next season who are active and able to help out, is probably more important than ever.
Obviously an addition in fixed races will be carefully planned to try and maintain the game balance as much as possible. People are right that the Tour of America just wouldnt work as a fixed race. PCT/CT riders get less race days than PT - in part because there are no Grand Tours that take up so much - and having only one fixed GT would be distortive. PT is fine as there is 3, but also the division is generally built around needing a good Mountain climber if you really want to be at the top. In PCT, Mountains are not the be all and end all quite as much - and nor should they be.
For PCT, it could work as 24 teams and all 24 per race, or equally it can also work with 30 teams and some choice - with still 24 per race. The 20 team per race limit is something like the 9 rider GT rule, that can be scrapped this year for the good of the game.
For CT, I dont think it would hurt to have some races where all teams take part. Maybe they could be worth the same amount of points as a C1 race (but with only CT teams allowed to race) to put a bit of priority on them. But you are right Manx, having all C2 races as fixed wouldnt work as well.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 22-01-2014 10:53
|
| |
|
|
| Luis Leon Sanchez |
Posted on 22-01-2014 10:52
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5533
Joined: 12-06-2013
PCM$: 500.00
|
In other words, you can't change the calendar because CT teams will struggle a lot?
|
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 22-01-2014 10:55
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Luis Leon Sanchez wrote:
In other words, you can't change the calendar because CT teams will struggle a lot?
I suppose it depends on how you look at it.
Yes, CT teams can't possible expect to excel in all terrains. But that is the same for all CT teams - and ultimately the thing that matters is who is the best CT team. So long as the calendar is balanced, there shouldnt need to be any teams too unduly affected.
|
| |
|
|
| Rin |
Posted on 22-01-2014 11:17
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2748
Joined: 14-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
I fully support Romans idea.
Well I also liked to pick special races at PCT, actually it was pretty much picking every single ardenne type race no matter if one-day classic or stage race, and giving absolutely nothing on cobbled races.
When it leads to more teams and managers involved, less work needed to be gone (collecting race picks etc.), weird 10 team races gone/every race is full and contested and less races needed (less reports in general needed) then I think that is good for the Man-Game.
Edited by Rin on 22-01-2014 11:18
 Team Bianchi - 2012 Man-Game ProContinental Tour Champions
 |
| |
|
|
| fjhoekie |
Posted on 22-01-2014 11:27
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4476
Joined: 25-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
My input on this idea:
I do not like it.
I know the season has to be faster and such, but what if they racedays are calculated so in CT that when there would be 30 teams * 150 racedays = 4500 total racedays, then a minimum amount of 18 teams per race = 250 days to choose from, incluing a minimal of 25 days in C1 races would mean only 225 C2 race days to choose from. This would have a risk of having 10 teams in a race, but the chance would be minimal. A lot more races will be heavily contested. Also the PCT teams can sign up for those races, so even less chance of races with a small number of teams.
I have no idea how much C2 races we could choose from this season but this could help I guess...
Back to learning my tests...
Manager of Team Popo4Ever p/b Morshynska in the PCM.Daily Man-Game |
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 22-01-2014 11:41
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
One interesting pattern spotted.
All the PT managers are kay with this idea, PCT managers mixed feelings and CT managers rather against it.
I think this says a lot.
|
| |
|
|
| Rin |
Posted on 22-01-2014 11:51
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2748
Joined: 14-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
I am just close to finishing my first PT season whilst having raced in 3! PCT seasons.
So I know more how it's to manage a PCT team than a PT team 
Team Bianchi - 2012 Man-Game ProContinental Tour Champions
|
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 22-01-2014 12:01
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
@Avin. What, the fact that managers who have experienced both the PCT and PT system, suggesting that actually, it wouldnt be a bad thing if there was bit more of the PT system in PCT?
Btw, looking at your first post - it seems like you think Roman is suggesting PCT teams have to have 75 C2 race days? That isnt the case. Roman suggested 100 fixed HC race days, then 75 C1 race days which are totally up to the managers race choice. And those 100/75 could easily be shifted to 75/100 or whatever.
With fixed races. Of course you arent going to be do well in every one of them. But no team will be, so wheres the problem? And if there is a team who can score highly in all terrains, then they probably will be promoted regardless of calendar format.
Its not sustainable to say lets keep it how it is, and hope we have more reporters.
Im not really sure what your point is, fjhoekie.
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
