|
Ideas/Suggestions for 2014
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 14:29
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| fjhoekie |
Posted on 22-01-2014 12:08
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4476
Joined: 25-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Try 2 to make it clear.
If there'd be 30 C2 teams, with each having 150 days to subscribe a race for there would be a total of 4500 days to spend between all teams.
To ensure a strong field at most races you could say there would have to be a minimum of 18 teams per race, on average that is.
If you have 18 teams per raceday there should be 4500/18=250 C2 racedays on the calendar.
This, with PCT teams entering some C2 races should mean there still will be a planning as it was this year, with full control for the managers and no fixed races. Yet there'll be a minimal amount of races, and with that less reports.
Manager of Team Popo4Ever p/b Morshynska in the PCM.Daily Man-Game |
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 22-01-2014 12:18
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ok got it. The problem is predicting how many racedays CT teams spend on C1 races.
This season there were 20 CT teams. 220 C2 Race Days from 58 C2 Races - with an average of 11.4 teams per race. (Including the PCT teams involved, which Id guess was an average of 2 per race)
In comparions, 63 C1 Races, 265 race days, average 16.85 teams.
20 HC races (Max 10 per team), 80 race days, average 18.8 teams.
|
| |
|
|
| fjhoekie |
Posted on 22-01-2014 12:37
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4476
Joined: 25-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
C1 seems pretty solid then, maybe if the amount of teams is kept the same 10/15 racedays could be removed.
For C2 if you take 20 teams, 150 racedays per team, you have 3000 days to split over all teams. Divided by the average amount of starting teams per race of 11,4(CT)+approx.2(PCT) (as it was this season) you get 223 racedays. So with 220 days you could've predicted this average...
If you divide that 3000 days by 18 teams you would find ~170 racedays, which would've been a much more optimal number.
Manager of Team Popo4Ever p/b Morshynska in the PCM.Daily Man-Game |
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 22-01-2014 12:38
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
If PCT and CT teams are forced to compete on all terrains it will be a really interesting tactical battle - if try to cover all bases you'll end up with weaker leaders but you'll be scoring points all season, if you go for a megastar you'll win big but only in a couple of races. Seen as CT teams are in effect only competing amongst themselves [and the same for PCT], why does it matter that much if the rules are changed? It's not going to stop advancement through the ranks, it will just change the way the game is played.
Personally, I think it would be better if the game was faster and I wouldn't be averse to having fixed races all across the board as a solution. |
| |
|
|
| Dippofix |
Posted on 22-01-2014 12:49
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3904
Joined: 29-01-2013
PCM$: 300.00
|
Since i'm not in the game, i'm not sure if i can really contribute to this discussion, but here's my point of view, as somebody who wants to join next season:
Personaly i think that it's good the way it is now. Yes, a few races can and probably will have to be cut, but the tacticality of race selection, and the possibility of making both regionaly and performance wise very specialised and in a way also very individual teams, is what makes up a big part of why i really want to join. Without the possibility of choosing your races as it suits your team, but having to ride the same races as everybody else all the time, will just lead to an increasing assimilation of the teams, with the teams becoming more and more identical. I also think that choosing races and riders for them is an important part of the off-season, and apart from transfers the only part of the game where it's your decision what you do, where you can make the difference between pushing for promotion or being stuck in mid-table, where you're not dependent on a sometimes very buggy game, but were you're 100% in control yourself.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 22-01-2014 12:56
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
But if it`s like 70/100 for example those 100 race days are still free to choose.
So a team concentrating on cobbles and flat stages would still have ~120-130 flat and cobbled races with some hills and some climbs.
But this isn`t too different than before I think. This year I had a full flat and hill focus and still got like 10-20 mountain races due to the HC races and 5-10 cobbled races to fill my schedule with.
So it`s not that different. But would lead to filled races. |
| |
|
|
| fintas |
Posted on 22-01-2014 13:06
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2602
Joined: 21-03-2008
PCM$: 1200.00
|
Do not like the idea of ​​so many race days are fixed ..
I think it is preferable to reduce the number of races to choose in hand thus making the remaining races busiest and causing less reports to be made.
This year only on c2, we had 220 days of racing in hand to choose from, even adding the possible choices in c1 and HC. This led to several races had only 6, 7 and 8 teams present, so I think it is quite possible to pass from 220 days to 180 or 190. This isn´t a drastic reduction but helps make a shorter season and will become the most populated races and holds the possibility of choosing each of their races by his preferences
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 22-01-2014 15:08
|
World Champion
Posts: 12188
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
I think Romans idea is brilliant.
Obviously it's important to rethink it so it matches the game the best way possible, but the CT managers who moan about it being unfair because they can't specialize their team should really take a step back, leave their teams own ideas for a while and look at the big picture. Will this help YOUR team or will it help the game? I have oftens been pro ideas that would be very negative for my own team, but the point isn't to make my team be in the best possible situation, but having the game so.
Also the idea that you can't have a specialized team is rubbish. Of course you can. Several PT teams have done amazingly well without sprinters and cobblers, so why shouldn't CT teams be able to get the same amount of results? Obviously you need too have a look into what you think is best for your team in every transferseason, but the fact that you can't promote without a good GC rider is just wrong.
NO CT team can focus on everything, and if they do I'm rather sure they won't promote. Simply because the leaders they have wont be top 5 material. And to finish every race as 10th probably won't promote you, eventhough it will give you a decent ranking. It's much better to get a top 3-5 in every other race and then nothing from the rest, than being a little shitty, but not totally bad, in everything.
That has been my main issue a couple of seasons in the PT. I wanted to have a leader for every single race. That only meant that the support wasn't strong enough, a crash was devastating, and obviously picking races with all the main competitors would ruin the entire season. The teams that have the winning types are much much better suited, and they aren't affected nearly as bad, when reaching a 0point scoring race, as those who target a little bit of points everywhere.
Teams such as Pokerstars and Aker are perfect examples of how you can do well with only 2 good riders, and a bunch of helpers while my team with 5 captains are not doing very well. The same would apply for the PCT and CT, and while only 50% of the races would be fixed you still have a great possibilit of creating shitloads of points in the rest. You don't have to score high in every single fixed race to be in contention for a promotion.
Oh and... It's the same for everyone in the league. No team will have an unfair advantage.
I'm fine with the fact that people will miss selecting their entire calender by choice. Picture it as a pre-determined must from the Sportive direction of the sport or your team.
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 22-01-2014 15:21
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
From me it has nothing to do with being specialized or not (between Thomas, Chicchi and the Colombians i've had some top results everywhere and should improve at least one of those areas greatly in the transfer season) but that a Forced Calendar is wrong for the CT division.
I'm all for a Partially Forced Calendar, where you have to take part in X number of Y level races, as that is basically the current set up in the PCT. If this was put in well enough for the CT as well then it would be easy to cut out a decent number of races from C1 and C2 level, reducing the overall race load for the reporters.
|
| |
|
|
| Firefly21 |
Posted on 22-01-2014 16:25
|
Domestique
Posts: 506
Joined: 15-09-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
While I can't say I totally *love* Roman's idea, I do agree that it will speed up the game and considering that is the #1 problem with the man-game, that unless a better alternative is provided, I would be fine with it taking place.
Also, when the game moves to PCM 13 I'll be able to do some reporting (hopefully)
|
| |
|
|
| jph27 |
Posted on 22-01-2014 20:03
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7339
Joined: 20-03-2010
PCM$: 900.00
|
Just my two penneth on Roman's idea.
Firstly I have to say I agree with the basic outline as it'll definitely speed the game up. However, I'd suggest doing it a different way. Instead of 100 compulsory race days, why not reduce the number of races and create "packages" as it were. Say have 25 race days in each and PCT teams have to pick 4 - a larger scale version of the system used with the Canadian classics. Still allows for specialists, but also creates races with higher turnouts. Other race days would be open choice as usual. What do people think?  |
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 22-01-2014 22:34
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
jph27 wrote:
Just my two penneth on Roman's idea.
Firstly I have to say I agree with the basic outline as it'll definitely speed the game up. However, I'd suggest doing it a different way. Instead of 100 compulsory race days, why not reduce the number of races and create "packages" as it were. Say have 25 race days in each and PCT teams have to pick 4 - a larger scale version of the system used with the Canadian classics. Still allows for specialists, but also creates races with higher turnouts. Other race days would be open choice as usual. What do people think?
Oh now that is interesting. With 6 packages of races you would have enough to ensure that almost every package would have roughly maximum teams. You could even base it on different continents with each package so that those who are going to aim for continental rankings aren't disadvantaged.
My main misgiving with it is that I'm not sure it fixes the same problem that is being aimed at - it really probably wouldn't reduce the calendar by much at all.
|
| |
|
|
| Luis Leon Sanchez |
Posted on 23-01-2014 00:37
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5533
Joined: 12-06-2013
PCM$: 500.00
|
If you want to lower race days in CT, take out races, but keeping the spread over different disciplines the same. So if you take away a mountain stage race you must also take out a few flat races and a cobble race or two.
Someone said earlier that it would be tactical decision between choosing between having weak leaders but consistently scoring points or having strong leaders in different disciplines.
I personally, if I get a team next year will aim particularly at Stage races because it is easier to do that with the budget that CT teams get.
You must also keep in mind that a manager may go for regional focus for his team. Then a team from the Basque or from Colombia would focus on climbing. take away the Mountain Stage races and those teams and riders will struggle, likewise for a team focused on sprinting or Classics.
Last point, I see the Man game is in the World Champs but over the past few weeks I have seen very few races been raced (could be due to problems which I am oblivious to). I, for example, are currently not at school and would have time to write up and race like 5 races a day.
Just my opinions on the matter.
|
| |
|
|
| sammyt93 |
Posted on 23-01-2014 00:44
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3634
Joined: 03-07-2012
PCM$: 300.00
|
Just a thought but if you are having problems with people wanting to report stage races is there any reason why you can't have different wimple report different stages and have the save posted in the reporters forum whenever someone else is due to take over?
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 23-01-2014 06:21
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
You were right SN, i certainly get that C2 fixed race days for PCT teams wrong from post of Roman. With that in mind, i am not much against basic of his idea, if Tour of America will still be only an option, not a must.
Long term goal of my team is diversity anyway, so i am trying to cover lot of terrains already.
If the changes will be thought to the last detail, i would welcome them. Even if i am still maybe the only one,who has 0 problems with game speed, i dont see any point in having 9 months season instead of 13 to be honest...Daily is not just a man-game for me and i am here every day, so i either see a new man-game race or not.
So yes to speeding up the game, but please not for a cost of qulity or manager options. If transfers will be only thing to do, it can become boredom for me,much bigger than waiting a week for a race...
|
| |
|
|
| FroomeDog99 |
Posted on 23-01-2014 07:34
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4573
Joined: 07-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
CountArach wrote:
jph27 wrote:
Just my two penneth on Roman's idea.
Firstly I have to say I agree with the basic outline as it'll definitely speed the game up. However, I'd suggest doing it a different way. Instead of 100 compulsory race days, why not reduce the number of races and create "packages" as it were. Say have 25 race days in each and PCT teams have to pick 4 - a larger scale version of the system used with the Canadian classics. Still allows for specialists, but also creates races with higher turnouts. Other race days would be open choice as usual. What do people think?
Oh now that is interesting. With 6 packages of races you would have enough to ensure that almost every package would have roughly maximum teams. You could even base it on different continents with each package so that those who are going to aim for continental rankings aren't disadvantaged.
My main misgiving with it is that I'm not sure it fixes the same problem that is being aimed at - it really probably wouldn't reduce the calendar by much at all.
That could be solved by instead of adding an extra two options, splitting the original four into 8 groups, for example each continental tour has two options, a Mountain and hilly one and a flat and cobbles one. |
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 23-01-2014 08:55
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
If we assume we are sticking with 30 PCT teams, then packages would be a good work around for guaranteeing all races are full. For example 5 packages of 25 race days, and each team has to pick 4 of them, then that will lead to 24 teams taking part in all of those 125 race days. 6 packages of 20 race days, and each team picking 4, would also work if going for 80 'fixed' days rather than 100.
The packages wouldnt be as basic as 'Mountain Package', 'Hill Package' etc. They would have to have a mixture of races in each package, as that will make it far more tactical for picking them. Some packages would be more suited to some terrains than others - but not exclusively.
I'd sort of be inclined to not base them on continents though - if anything, make them fairly Europe heavy. Otherwise, the continental rankings become out of reach for CT teams, and in general may give more of a chance to those who really focus on a particular continent. There would have to be some 'continental' races in the packages, otherwise regional focused PCT teams might have less opportunities to score well in the higher points giving races.
My other thought is that as an extra conundrum when picking the packages, it won't be that all races in the packages are HC. Some of the races in there could be C1 as well.
Doing it like this adapts more of the PT fixed race approach, but still keeps the popular PCT race choosing element, and guarantees around 120 races full of 24 teams - so should help to cut down on the reporting burden. Sounds like win win to me.
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
So yes to speeding up the game, but please not for a cost of qulity or manager options. If transfers will be only thing to do, it can become boredom for me,much bigger than waiting a week for a race...
Its never going to be just the transfers. Even 9 months is still a big gap between seasons (if it even manages to be that fast!), and there are plenty of other benefits to having faster seasons. For example current riders will age, and be replaced by the talents coming through; and there's more opportunity for CT/PCT teams to move up to PCT and PT respectively at a faster rate.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 23-01-2014 08:59
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 23-01-2014 09:02
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
If you did go with "Packages" for PCT, would there then be a similar system for the CT?
|
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 23-01-2014 09:15
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
If you did go with "Packages" for PCT, would there then be a similar system for the CT?
Of course. There may have to be less choice to ensure they still produce big fields.
So this season there were 22 CT teams. 4 packages of 20 race days, pick 3. That produces 60 race days per team, 80 in total, and races with around 16 teams per race.
Maybe with some C1 races in those packages, which would work as CT's version of the HC races for PCT.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 23-01-2014 09:22
|
| |
|
|
| Luis Leon Sanchez |
Posted on 23-01-2014 09:23
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5533
Joined: 12-06-2013
PCM$: 500.00
|
Does that mean there wou be a low limit of race days or are there races outside of these 'packages'?
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
