Sprint 17/18, redo the sprint system

[Robyklebt]

Yes, the sprint, a sad chapter in C4F history I think.

Even though we have countless sprint threads, I open a new one, hoping to get something going to get a better system than what we have now. As far as I know Luques is working on some general no flash version, he said it would be ready for the offseason.. .so that's soon. No idea if he's on schedule or not, but once that's done, implemented than debugged (unless he's a genius and manages it bugless in the first attempt) he has time for new stuff. And IMO, the sprint is the most urgent part of the game needing attention.

Right now I see 3 main problems with the sprint:

1) It's bad.
2) The programmers for reason I'll never understand seem to kind of like it. First Buhmann liked it, ok in his case I understand why, he has no clue about sprinting...But Luques? Each time I criticize the sprint (between 3-8 times a day) he asks what was so bad about the sprint in race xyz? He seems to like it, maybe I'm wrong...
3) Nobody really has any idea how to make a better sprint system. Including me. So let's do what always worked best for improvements, throw ideas out there, maybe in the end something usable comes out of it.

The sprint now: Short (ok, probably around an average length novel I fear...) background story, general, personal, historical.
In a way the "new" sprint system was set up to fail from the start. The reason. The managers most pushing for it were the sprinter teams (if I remember correctly, not always guaranteed), and their goals were completely different from Buhmann's goal. And somehow both sides didn't seem to realize that until the whole thing was implemented. The sprinters wanted a system that favored them more, somehow they felt that the winning ratio they had was too low (I disagreed) and too often parasites or other morally reprehensible people won. Buhmann was anti-sprint anyway, so he wanted a more fun system and one that if anything made the sprint more "open". So less pro high skill riders. In the end we got what we have now, and we lost almost all of the historical sprinter teams, I think Brio might be the only survivor, and he was never involved in the development etc. The old system while not perfect, in the end was better for sprinter than the new one. And in my opinion actually it simply was a better system. Less "fun", but better. More realistic in both result and the way the result came to be.

The new system wsa just frustrating when it was introduced. At the time I had a good sprinter, Creek, 95 top, probably a bit less when the system was introduced, and it was just shit riding with him. Even wins weren't fun, even wins were frustrating. Losses too, the whole sprint just seemed idiotic. You have only the sprinter and a good flat team? Top sprinter, do it alone! TEams with trains escape nonstop, more than before (maybe more than now too, can't really say since I'm out of the sprint business) and if they don't and help, or you alone get the sprint, you're then being fucked by tricksprints. Because of course there is nothing worse than being beaten by the guy in your wheel, better arrive 5th and 8th but the guy in your wheel is 3rd, than 2nd and 6th, and the guy in your wheel wins. Ok, 2 man train, 87-95, wooow, he has a train, do it alone. 80-91-92, no chance!! Ok, bring a full train, 77-87-95, do it alone, you're unbeatable! (Which is actually kind of true, with that train in most groups it was a win, if there is a sprint) I even won MSR with Ghazali, 86-88 sprint at the time I guess. And a ridiculous win in a ridiculous unrealistic idiotic sprint, it's not even fun to win like that. He started way back, did some backwheel jumping, went early and won, don't remember details, but probably the guys that should have won were engaged in some "not from my backwheel" antics. FRUSTRATING SHIT.

Ok ok, less personal, introduction over: Let's get to some more criticism:

A not very wise user (Team FL) once the following very wise words: The sprint is like a minigame in the game, but one that doesn't really fit the rest of the game. I fully agree.
A much wiser user (Radunion) said very wise things, I read thme in September when I wanted to open this thread, unfortunately I have mostly forgottten what he said. But it was wise. Mmh...
Something about:
- Accelaration!
- Intelligent riders!
Ah, I go check!
Ok, a point about flat riders early in the train that should be stronger than sprinters. No opinion on that one right now.
Then intelligent riders: You stay on the guy you are in any case. But you can follow another one, you change wheel only if that guy passes you.
- Acceleration: Not only position, but also acceleration should be a factor. Speed. Acceleration costs time and energy. A rider that leaves the slipstream gets a speed bonus. The further back you are in a train, the higher your endspeed should be. So your win chances increase. But the best chances still in a train.
Since I myself don't really understand my translation, here the original:

- das Mitgehen bei Fahrern die hinter einem liegen sollte verbessert werden. Das könnte man so machen, dass ein Fahrer solange am alten (nicht mehr eingestellten) Hinterrad bleibt solange der eingestellte Fahrer hinter ihm fährt. Erst wenn der andere vorbei fährt wechselt er das Hinterrad. Das verhindert zum einen, das man den eigenen Zug abreißen lässt, zum anderen erhöht es die taktischen Möglichkeiten. Will man einen Fahrer aus dem Zug entfernen kann man das immer noch mit Sprinten "nein" machen, dann fällt er aber sehr schnell zurück.

- Realismus, Beschleunigung, zu großer Vorteil der Position. ...
Jetzt fängt es an kompliziert zu werden, weil ich die Sprintphysik an sich ändern will. Ein Fahrer soll. neben der Eigenschaft Position noch eine Eigenschaft Geschwindigkeit bekommen. Beschleunigen kostet Zeit und Kraft. Zudem bekommt ein Fahrer der aus dem Windschatten hinausgeht (umschalten von mitgehen auf Sprinten) einen kleinen Geschwindigkeitsbonus (er beschleunigt aus dem Windschatten heraus). Ziel ist es das die Endgeschwindigkeit je höher ist je weiter man hinten im Zug fährt, und damit die Siegchancen besser werden. Die besten hat man aber weiterhin mit einem guten Zug. Schwieriger wird es auch an ein Hinterrad zu wechseln, das den Sprint früh eröffnet und viel schneller an einem vorbeizieht.

And another user said a short while ago: IT takes so long. I think that was Gipfelstürmer who came back after a few years break, his first experience with this system. And yes, it takes very long, we all just got used to it, but actually 10 minutes for this minigame? Too long.

Other criticism but not from wise of unwise users, jsut from me, some the same as above:
- It's so negative, so much effort is done to make the guy in your wheel lose, instead of trying the best for yourself.
- It's too energy based, 50 meters in the wind costs shitloads of energy.
- The wind direction is too unimportant. If the energy is that important at least make it more dependent on the wind, where its from
- Acceleration doesn't exist.
- The lane jumping is ridiculous.
- The first setting, the way the first thing you see is not really understandable. Only 3 sprint lines but 5 riders have a message that says sprints from the front but blocked... serious?

Anyway, what I want to say is: THe sprint is bad. Feels free to add stuff... I have more but temporarily forgot and it's too frustrating.

Of course not every sprint turns out bad, some indeed are good. And I realize that making this sprint was a big challenge, I think it's very difficult to make something realistic in 50 meters steps. It would be much easier with a flowing sprint. The problem there is that it penalizes people with bad connections. Old computers. Etc.

Anyway, I would be for a completely new system. If possible a bit shorter timewise ,and more realistic.

Right now the train is only about 2 things, slipstream and position. But of course in reality it has another reason, acceleration. A sprinter doesn't want to have to accelereate from 50 km/h to 70, he wants to start at 60 already. This doesn't really exist at c4f.
Make it less wind/energy dependent somehow. . A guy with 10? less sprint can follow, if the guy in front sprints long enough he'll overtake him too. Which sorry, doesn't happen in reality. The weaker guy would not follow, or if he does he would explode like the strong guy in front. The decisive factor is not just if you're in the wind or not, it's the speed, the pace, if a 95 goes the 85 if he follows at all loses as much energy as the topsprinter. NOt here, if you follow, you save lots of energy.
Trains: At c4f it's trains. In reality there's trains. Then there's the sprinter that has only a "position rider with him", a guy that only tries to deliver him to a good position, behind or near a topsprinter, not do the leadout itself. And there's the single sprinters, like at RSF. The difference is that at RSF you're set in your position, move and you lose energy, in reality the single guy is not in the wind even if he moves. The figure of the sprint is different. It's more like a pyramid, (that's why they usually go to the side, to make it a half pyramid) at RSF it's different lines. Out of the line: Wind, energy fucked.

What to do? I'm not sure...
One kind of idea would be to first change the "definition" you're not putting in helping and following for the sprint anymore, but the different roles. Sprinter for sprinter. Then Leadout 1, leadout 2. Position getter (must be a better term..) More intuitive (our sprints are intuitive after all) really. And then try to build more the pyramid thing. Get one dominant train, all others automatically go near that one. Somebody in the train will get blocked, yes, good, happens.
Maybe start the sprint earlier, that means 2 km from the end. If somebody has a "train setting" with leadout 1-2-sprinter show that at 2 km from the end, not from the side like now, but from above, helicopter camera so to speak. Give the option to go right or left to the manager, chosing the side he wants depending on the wind. To minimize how others can profit from you (being in the wind still should count a bit, but less) If nobody has that 3 man setting, show nothing. And continue to last km. If somebody or several teams have that setting, show 1500 after 1 minute, see how it develops. Weaker trains can adjust and dump their nr 1 leadout, number 2 just going to the right or left near the dominant train. Then 1 km the same. Then jump to 500 meters, then 300, you still save 1 minute? or even 2? Ah, some mathematician please. Then from 300 some sort of 50 meter sprint like now, but if possible in pyramid form (before too) The position guys stay til max 250 from the goal btw. Leadout 1 is out at 300 automatically, leadout 2 takes over. And IMO position guy should be calculated on flat strength (or mountain or pavé or downhill depending on terrain). And maybe add races raced, experience should maybe play a role. The young 25 year old 89 flat weaker than the experienced 32 year old 86. Then add acceleration, means calculate speed internally, can be shown too... and once the sprinter goes his speed jumps up, that's acceleration. If that then ocntinues til the goal, even if going at 200 (fairly standard for real sprints), do they keep going faster or do they get slower or pretty much stable? Don't know, maybe somebody does. And of course the acceleration hurts all, not just the guy that goes. Those that follow too, and if they are still on following they might lose a bit of terrain, but gain it back once they start the sprint.
And of course, some anti trick sprint measures built in. If somebody stops sprinting, the guy behind just passes him buy... the guy that stops will have even less chance than now, since he'll be far back and and low speed, making the acceleration more painful.

Something like that... yes, it's not really a workable idea, but maybe somebody finds something useful here and can develop this further or come up with something new.


We could of course just change the existing system, tweak a lot there. Intelligent rider from RAdunion sounds interesting (it helps trains a lot of course) some acceleration in, less energy by wind, once you sprint you can't take it out or you take it out completely (anti trick sprint one) You keep following the wheel of your teammate unless there's a guy ahead of you (intellegent rider and anti trick sprint 2), make it more wind direction dependent,

And of course this right now is all for mass sprints. Group sprints are something different.

Ah, and I'm actually very interested in the view of our new sprinter teams like Trekken or High Flyer, what do they think of the sprint, what's good, what's bad? No change needed, just tweaking, full renewal?

[Cerro Torre RT]

Well, hope that doesn't go for highjacking your thread, but your idea to me sounds like something of a transition from a (nonexistent, and probably never materialising) positioning system into the sprint. You got a point here, a train does not come out of nowhere at 500m or 1km, but has to be prepared beforehand and can be seen by opponents. That kind of helicoptre view is interesting, but to me (guess what) especially interesting for the whole race, to show positions. I know, this way to see it is pretty much a sure stop to it, but too me, this would have to come from positioning in the field.

Now, I don't have perfectly in mind what all you mentioned in your long middle section, so I add my views to some other points:

Acceleration:
Good point, very important. Difficult to ballance probably, and a challenge to display, but an obvious miss in the physics. Needing a bit of distance to build up topspeed would positivly effect the train setup and the folowing when passed. Worthy to discuss apart from other points, makes sence to me even without other changes.

Line choice:
To be just set anywhere on the street is not realistic. Who sprints for himself can choose a line, who is ahead, wins.

Change of line:
Should be possible, especially in combination that riding not directly, but sideways behind another rider does protect from wind to a certain amount, but not fully. Would maybe provide a tendency to the pyramid. And important: line change is a small additional distance to ride. No loss of speed (acceleration thoughts), but small loss of "position". And no riders going through each other while lines change, blocks in sideways direction, too.
Problem: Change of line is forbidden in certain situations, especially late in the sprint. Probably close to impossible to implement, as the RL solution of human jugdes not possible here. Or is it enough to simply forbid changing lines if there is noone in front at the last 150m? And probably limit number of changeable lines to 2 per 50m for all the sprint.

Intelligent riders:
On your mentioned point: To me, I'm not too keen to that, simply because it's more automatic and less manager decision. Alone, it makes it too easy for the train sprinter. It can be a good thing in combination with acceleration, and maybe the elimination of dissolving riders (see further down).
Another thing: Left-Right decisions. Here I would agree. Make it not a fixed decision, but a priority. If chosen direction is open, go there, if not, go the other way, if not open there too, blocked. If facing that decision again in the same 50m, same procedure again.

Position fighting:
Too few here in my mind. It should be possible to have a chance to kick any rider from any wheel if besides him. Better chance if rider has a line to be pushed to. Nearly no chance if the situation is at the side of the road. Should also be possible to push into a train. Difficult to balance.

Dissolving helpers:
A necessity right now as one cannot take actions to prevent beeing blocked behind your own rider right now. Can come into discussion when we have line choice (change) and acceleration/speed. Then adds danger to a train if the rider coming by is able to get ahead of the first rider of the train and they are at one side. Than no line change is possible and the sprinter is blocked.

Time of the sprint:
Good point, I'd say as immediate measure, just shorten the waiting periods. Sprint is about fast decisions. I'd propose go down to 30s here and see from there how it may be further adjusted.

Very many different points, this discussion wil probably again dissolve into details on thousand different issues all linked to each other.

[Cerro Torre RT]

Oh, and my thouht about the old sprint: I like the new one better. Simply, and quite only, because there's more to play and it's not just a number's game, which we have in mountain sprints already.

And the fit for small group sprints: Don't think we have to worry too much about that. That came to a fairly good solution just as a byproduct the last time, and probably adjustments, if necessary, will not be too difficult.

[Gipfelstuermer]

Pretty cool that people still think about improving technic of RSF! So trying to cover your points and trying to be realistic about a RSF technic project, I propose improving the current system without requiring a completely new, revolutionary design, realtime, high-performance, positioning jack of all trades device.

My proposal keeps the current design, but includes changes in line choice, train composition, acceleration, time of sprint. Also, I propose a very very simple positioning system. My system should resolve two big problems in the current sprint system:

1.) Sprint-Teams in RSF need TWO trains: One flat-monster-train to create a sprint, and one sprinter-train for the train. Frustrating and doesn't make sense.
2.) Trick-Sprint, Bugs and Weird positioning suck.

Very, very simple positioning system:
Riders collect positioning points (PP) for every of the last 10km, in which they successfully make tempo. Importance of km has to increase as we get closer to finish line. For instance, 1 PP for successfully making tempo at km10, 2PP for successfully making tempo at km9, 3PP for km 8, until 10PP for km1 before the finish line. Could even be exponential. That way only really strong flat riders can collect PP, which is realistic because only very strong flat riders can be well positioned in a peloton.

New train composition: The Sprint-value currently is a combination of SPRINT + ENERGY. In the future, it will be SPRINT + FLAT + PP + ENERGY.

Line choice: Not sure how it is today. In the future, it will be strongest train in the middle, weakest train at the outside.

Acceleration #1: The Sprint-value will change each 50m. Impact of PP decreases very fast to 0, e.g. 0 at 300m. Impact of FLAT also decreases to 0, e.g. 0 at 100m. Accordingly, impact of SPRINT and ENERGY increases. At 50m (or even earlier), only SPRINT and ENERGY is decisive.

Acceleration #2: Riders reach their full speed after 100-150m sprinting, then decrease again.

Time of Sprint: Go down from 60sec to maybe 45sec, 40sec or even 30sec as Cerro proposed.

Ok, so this is mostly Mathematics running in the background. Should actually be relatively easy to implement. My thoughts apply mostly to mass sprint with flat finish, but I think it would also be ok in hilly terrain, simply applying the skill of UPHILL and DOWNHILL, just like it is today.

[High Flyer]

Reading this, a few points from me:

Acceleration: Seems good in theory, but what about breaks and esp the low energy ones, with acceleration in place, Iit would take forever or them to overtake me infront.

Line Choice and changing: This really needs to be changed. If left is blocked, common sense says go right or say in the wheel, not try again multiple times, losing energy. This for me is the most importnat change that is needed.

Time Of Sprint:@ Please, dont make it 30 seconds. It's important to watch the full sprint animation sometimes so you can tell how the energy or power of opponents are, that + the fact the us free using C4F lose 5seconds per update, it wouldn't really work. I would rather see a beautifully worked out sprint than a sloppy rushed one. And why would you need this change anyway, just making sprint unnecessarily realistic and hinder-ous, its meant to decide best tactic, not who is quickest to react.

Lastly, I think we need to remember when suggesting changes that something will just happen anyway and out of our control, just not worth making a system change for it.
Trick sprint are awful, the worst, super bad, what is there anything that you can actually do about it? In the end, the 89 who decides to sprint from 250m with the 93 leader dropping off is no different from the 89 sprinting from 250m without the leader dropping off. What exactly can you change to stop this that won't inversely have a bad effect on sprinting in general. (Thinking about it, things like acceleration rules would actually make it easier for trick sprints, esp if the trick sprint is done after the lead out has ridden 50m first.)
Same with trying to make other lose. Some teams want to risk 3rd place for the win, others want win no matter what,others would rather lose than lead someone to victory. Again, I don't see how any change can help this witohut inversely hurting the sprint in general. I you can give me an solution then sure, but for know all you can do it shrug and give a -2 i guess.

Personally, I am quite fine with the energy bit, I have seen a mix of 100m and 50m sprints

Truthfully, start positioning s far isn't the best,but it rarely ever decide a race, usually it comes down to the sprinting of the first leadout and how the team thats falling behind reacts rather than the positioning. Essentially, there would be no point changing the position of the first readout if you don't change the way the first lead out sprints too, I'm slightly interested in the "early on, flat matter more" method, but not fully convinced.

[Pokemon Club]

I definitively prefer this system of the old one. One of the main problem the currently nearly never had improvement.
Anyway for me, the main problem is that it is way too much predictable. Make it less predictable and people will do less strange things as tricksprint, and maybe collaborate better because they trust more in their own chances.
In definitive I want that the malus 0/-6 for sprint (and not only for the sprint in fact) comeback

[luques]

Just fast answer, I will read later the discussion. It's not that I think this system is good, it has bugs and problems. But 1) I think it was a step in the right direction, more interaction with the users. 2) I can't find a system better than this, and also ideas here at the moment seems to ask for new features of this system, not for a revolution of it (But I gave just a fast reading).

[Cerro Torre RT]

I'd get to the same conclusion, most writers seem to see the actual system as a suitable base. But some proposals contain mayor adjustments and additional features, probably having a mayor impact, requiring further balancing adjustments in the underlying calculations or aditional input options.

[Robyklebt]

I am for new.
Because I think one of the main problems, or let's say the main problem now is the basics. Which is the same as for the rest of the game. There it works, it's not perfect either, but in the end it kind of works. Energy, you are in front, you lose energy, you follow, you don't (in many cases..) For the sprint IMO it doesn't. Adjust it, make the consumption lower, you don't really change the basics, you just make the sprint longer, the rest stays. Which probably would already be slightly better and more realistic than the usual 100 go, 50 the guy behind tries to overtake thing we have now. But the problems would stay the same, you are in front, you lose energy, the one in the slipstream gets a pretty free ride in comparison.

Go for speed as basis. And acceleration. And instead give some kind of bonus for not being in the wind, 60 speed, costs xxx for everybody that travels that fast, but the ones in the slipstream get xxx energy back for being in the slipstream. Depending on how covered he is. Or some bonus points like Gipfel said. Or something else, because obviously the slipstream still has to count somehow too. But not as the decisive factor for energy consumption.But, as mentioned, I think we need to get away from the wind vs slipstream based system for the sprint.

Plus the one now really is very buggy too, since my programming skills are the opposite of my insulting skills, that means non-existent, I don't really know, but could imagine that redoing it from scratch might be almost easier than debug the old one and than add/change stuff.

[kunske]

I will follow this thread closely because i maybe ar 1 of the better sprint teams that are playing the game. I'm not playing this game as long as you guys. But some things look good to improve.

[Cerro Torre RT]

My opinion to the redo from scratch: Most likely, it's better to not do that.

Errors happen when programming. That's only human, and cannot be prevented completely. Redoing it from scratch likely will lead to new bugs, which then are completely unknown and have to be found anew, while those occuring today, you have a starting point of what input might cause it, so you can search from there. Start from scratch is only in option if you come to the conclusion that there are mayor issues with the basic structure of the program (or you simply don't understand it, because that makes it unfixable, too). One could argue that it's already known in this case, as on problem is flash, but that goes even deeper. But usually, you can't expect that simply doing it again will lead to a better result.

[Robyklebt]

As I said, no idea about programming..

But by redo from scratch I just realized that I mean 2 things, not only the programming, but also the ideas. The ideas from scratch, not just looking to change details.Not just increase this influence, decrease that influence as a proposal, taking the system we have now as basic, but think about something completely new. If then it's similar, ok... once (and if) we get to a conclusion of course Luques will know best what to do.

[Robyklebt]

And a few comments about other comments.

Agree on most things with Cerro.

Positioning for the whole race... makes it very complex, and IMO could come later, start with positioning for the sprint I'd say.

Change of line of course possible, what I meant is those crazy changes where one train goes from one side of the road to the opposite side to follow another train. Killing everybody in between.

On intellegent riders, we can't micromanage the whole sprint, for example with somewhat intelligent riders we could do the sprint in 100 meter steps. It has disadvantages too, it favors strong sprinters, is against surprise sprints, but then I think those often are very unrealistic too. Sprinter passes everybody at 200 from the line and everybody just watches him go by? Depending on how intelligent they are it changes a lot. One thing for example is that they could automatically try to go near the dominant train. Which as far as I know happens in reality. Instead of having what we have now, everybody his way.

Agree on position fighting, would like to add that the addition of a "placer", a guy that fights for the position for his sprinter, but then goes away, and the sprinter takes his place without the energy loss he would have now would make sense. This exists in real life, the guy who just tries to "deliver" his sprinter to a good position, without doing a leadout.

Not sure on the dissolving tihng, not sure I understood everything.

Time of sprint, 1' is necessary per step, I played half my c4f life from China.. I know how it is with a bad connection. Fast decisions, yes, but not by the manager really, fast decisions are taken by the rider. Let the managers have their time.

Gipfel: Thinking about the PP system, no comment yet. Slow thinker...
Flat value though has to be out of the equation much sooner than 100 meter IMO.
Strongest train in the middle, no, most of the time the strong trains try to be on the side, to avoid giving slipstream to everybody... the manage to half the pyramid like that. Choice by the manager.
New point : A separate sprint tactic menu might help I think, where you can put in your line preference etc.
Acceleration 1+2, still thinking about PP, but otherwise sounds ok, but full speed when depends on the wind direction too.

High: Not sure about the trick sprint part, meaning don't really agree. There's lots of easy solutions against trick sprints... can't take out sprint once it's in, unless you do the give up thing. Speed, if you stop following instead riding at the base speed again, lose speed slowly. So lose only half a bike length, maybe one to the guy in front of you in the first 50 meters. (Depending on skills obviously) Intelligent riders, if the guy in you stops go around him. Crashes, if the guy in front of you stops, crash into him, the guy who stopped then is at -5000 energy. And can't be sold, the ones behind lose 50-100 energy from injuries. Would stop trick sprints soon. There's lots of little things that can be done against trick sprints I think.
Acceleration in groups? It takes forever now to overtake somebody as well... low energy sprints. And anyway, we need to discuss the details of every proposal, what costs how much, what is the effect etc etc.

Donkey is thinking about posting something about his speed as energybase system soon, but still thinking.

[Yamaka Corse]

I remember the old sistem, and when this one was relased we were all happy about it (also I remember we want to change a bit the mountain)

If you want acceleration is simple, just make a valuable equation about flat + sprint + energy and reg

ex:

Flat 60 Sprint 90 Energy 1000 reg 50
60 / 10 = 6
90 / 10 = 9
1000 / 1000 - 50 = 1

So the paramether acceleration in this case is = (6,0 + 9,0) x 1,05 = 15,75 acceleration point when he start sprinting for the first 50 mt

for the second 50 mt it will be
6 + 9 x (current energy/950) / 1,5 (this 1,5 is the "fatigue after the first 50 mt")

So if "current energy" is 800
6 + 9 x 0,842 / 1,5 = 8,4

this value can be added with the current algorithm (it seems a huge boost!)

Little Change can be flat skill bonus = skill / 30 instead of 10 'cause we don't want to let a 90 flat 70 sprint rider win a sprint right?

[Pokemon Club]

I remember the old sistem, and when this one was relased we were all happy about it (also I remember we want to change a bit the mountain)

If you want acceleration is simple, just make a valuable equation about flat + sprint + energy and reg

Not flat but slope power as sprint doesn't always finish in 0%

[High Flyer]

High: Not sure about the trick sprint part, meaning don't really agree. There's lots of easy solutions against trick sprints... can't take out sprint once it's in, unless you do the give up thing. Speed, if you stop following instead riding at the base speed again, lose speed slowly. So lose only half a bike length, maybe one to the guy in front of you in the first 50 meters. (Depending on skills obviously) Intelligent riders, if the guy in you stops go around him. Crashes, if the guy in front of you stops, crash into him, the guy who stopped then is at -5000 energy. And can't be sold, the ones behind lose 50-100 energy from injuries. Would stop trick sprints soon. There's lots of little things that can be done against trick sprints I think.
Acceleration in groups? It takes forever now to overtake somebody as well... low energy sprints. And anyway, we need to discuss the details of every proposal, what costs how much, what is the effect etc etc.

No stopping sprinting once started? A: Thats a horrible idea imo. It's like I said, affecting good tactics because of a few trick sprints. What if a weaker sprinter goes early, and you need to do 50m sprint to catch up, then wait till 100m to go again? Or a simple misjudgement you want to undo by stopping sprinting, or maybe you only want to catch up with your team mate that you get separated from.

Not following sprint: How would that work exactly, you are still essentially following a rider, just not the rider in-front of you. Unless you have a system that can check if the rider you are following is no longer the same, but its quite common to change trains midway through.

I can imagine crashes happening:
Team A "it always happens to me, never the italian teams"
Team B: Its the devs, they are manipulating the game
That would be funny. As well as easy to abuse with a simple lane 1 and 2 block.

Anyway, as I said before, the only thing I find wrong with the current sprint system is that riders dont go left if right is blocked and the other direction.

[Yamaka Corse]

High: Not sure about the trick sprint part, meaning don't really agree. There's lots of easy solutions against trick sprints... can't take out sprint once it's in, unless you do the give up thing. Speed, if you stop following instead riding at the base speed again, lose speed slowly. So lose only half a bike length, maybe one to the guy in front of you in the first 50 meters. (Depending on skills obviously) Intelligent riders, if the guy in you stops go around him. Crashes, if the guy in front of you stops, crash into him, the guy who stopped then is at -5000 energy. And can't be sold, the ones behind lose 50-100 energy from injuries. Would stop trick sprints soon. There's lots of little things that can be done against trick sprints I think.
Acceleration in groups? It takes forever now to overtake somebody as well... low energy sprints. And anyway, we need to discuss the details of every proposal, what costs how much, what is the effect etc etc.

No stopping sprinting once started? A: Thats a horrible idea imo. It's like I said, affecting good tactics because of a few trick sprints. What if a weaker sprinter goes early, and you need to do 50m sprint to catch up, then wait till 100m to go again? Or a simple misjudgement you want to undo by stopping sprinting, or maybe you only want to catch up with your team mate that you get separated from.

Not following sprint: How would that work exactly, you are still essentially following a rider, just not the rider in-front of you. Unless you have a system that can check if the rider you are following is no longer the same, but its quite common to change trains midway through.

I can imagine crashes happening:
Team A "it always happens to me, never the italian teams"
Team B: Its the devs, they are manipulating the game
That would be funny. As well as easy to abuse with a simple lane 1 and 2 block.

Anyway, as I said before, the only thing I find wrong with the current sprint system is that riders dont go left if right is blocked and the other direction.

Also a counterattack button can be good.. maybe you sprint for 0,7 time instead of 1 just thinking

[Robyklebt]

No stopping sprinting once started?

Sprint IN. Not sprinting. Use following.

What if a weaker sprinter goes early, and you need to do 50m sprint to catch up,

Following

Or a simple misjudgement you want to undo by stopping sprinting,

User mistake. Happens.

or maybe you only want to catch up with your team mate that you get separated from.

Following

Not following sprint: How would that work exactly, you are still essentially following a rider, just not the rider in-front of you.

Instead of stopping the following completely until the new wheel overtakes you, the rider loses speed gradually. So instead of losing lets say 3 lengths because he goes from 60 to 40 km/h in 1 second, he loses 1 length

I can imagine crashes happening:........That would be funny. As well as easy to abuse with a simple lane 1 and 2 block.

How?

Ok, more in the next post

[Robyklebt]

Anyway, let's continue here:

1) I think adding a separate sprint tab is a good idea regardless of what actually changes. Or if anything changes.
a) Becomes easier to manage the sprint, now often long explanations needed for new players, since the system in the normal tactic tab is not really that intuitive. A separate sprint tactic tab would obviously be made specifically for the sprint, so easier to understand and if done well pretty self explanatory. Not only easier for newcomers, but for oldies as well. Why have it complicated if it can be done more easily.
b) New additions easier to implement possible new features. Preferred starting line. Position fighting helpers. Sprint intensity.
c) Sprint settings can be done earlier.

c) of course will be unpopular, since it would allow offliners in stage races to put in the sprint before the stage... but since I don't see offliners in general as a malevolent species, IMO there are more offliners with "good offline manners" than offliners with "bad offline manners", I don't see it as a problem. If it's regarded as too big a problem there could be a number of solutions anyway. (sprint settings in stage races off after x km offline (while normal settings stay), offline riders with sprint in are marked visibly for everyone. etc etc)

Then back to my main concern. Get away from the current base of the system.


Change that to speed.
On speed Luques had an idea a while ago, finally managed to find the post again. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5196
I of course want to take it further.
Example: All numbers are just examples, Albert Donkey hasn't done any calculations (lack of ability), just there to illustrate the idea.
With the slipstream base system we have now.
82-82-90 train: The first 82 loses lots of energy, the one following virtually nothing. Don't know the exact numbers, if somebody has the time he can go and check in a short race. But let's say 80 vs 20 or so.

With speed: (I just use the values as speed, could maybe should be changed to km/h and could be displayed in the sprint too)
82 loses let's say 80. The following 82 loses the same amount, since he goes at the same speed and his topspeed is the same. The 90 on the other hand loses less, since his topspeed is 90. A complicated formula that calculates how much he loses says he loses only 50 for example.

Then in addition to that there of course still has to be the "in the wind factor". With 0 wind, the guy in front loses 10% more, so 88. This penalty should be highly dependent on the wind strength and direction, so with 5 headwind, it should be much higher, with 5 favorable win, much lower. The guy right behind on the other hand gets a 5% bonus. Either on the energy, so would be -4 so 76 consumption, or on the sprint skill, so he'd be a 86,1 sprinter and only lose +/-65 energy The guy in third wheel and everybody else behind get a 10% bonus, again, either or. (Could be full bonus from 4th place too?) Sort of like the one on the sprint skill, but might create problems with acceleration later, not thought through completely yet. Riders on the side, those that now get the full "in the wind treatment, energy consumption" should get a small slipstream bonus too (pyramid) without the wind penalty. Here dependent on wind, side wind, you're covered, bigger bonus, side wind you're not covered, no bonus at all anymore. 0 wind, 2,5% bonus.

Accelaration: (Have to admit I don't understand Yamakas calculation, so will ignore it. Not saying it's bad, simply don't understand it) That's costs energy too. Either fix, something like 5 per point (82 to 90 8 points=40) or exponential. Anyway, let's say it costs 40 points either way. The followers will accelerate too, but lose a bit less energy, but lose the wheel slightly, reaction time. So if 90 goes, other 90 follows, first one will lose 40 in the example above, second one only 35, but lose a quarter bike length or so in the process, without the loss of slipstream.
One thing that I don't really have a clear idea about right now is a bonus for coming out of the slipstream, the acceleration bonus basically, how much that should increase your sprint skill and for how long. But probably acceleration shouldn't only be an energy cost but some sort of speed bonus? Not even sure. Edit: FINALLY think I understood Yamakas proposal. That's basically the speed bonus for the acceleration? 15 seems a bit high, but something like that, but lower probably would be ok.

Then another problem of the sprint right now is that the sprinters get slower after every 50 meters. Which isn't all that realistic either. So either an automatic 90-95-100% intensity, a percentage that guarantees that in 0 wind conditions they keep their speed for 150 meters. Or the ability to chose the intensity in the sprint tab. Want to go for a long sprint with your sprinter you'd put in 95-100 for leadout 1, 95-100 for leadout 2, then a 300m sprint with your sprinter. Opposite, you want to go for a short one you put in longer sprints for your leadouts.

That's it for the base basically. Lot's of extras can be added (should be) (including stuff that can cost energy too, positions fights for example) but as long as I have hope to get the base to change I'll keep that for later.
Speed base
Wind penalty
Slipstream bonus
Accelaration cost

To me sounds good. And again, the numbers are just purely examples, more talented mathematicians can start playing around with them if this goes anywhere

ps. To shorten the sprint by one minute eliminate the 50 meter minute. From 100-0 can be done in 1 minute, changes very little to 2 minutes (left right block maybe, but ok, make those dumb sprinters intelligent. And with more automatism maybe every 100 meters could actually be enough, settings can be done for 50 meter or if we want even 25 meters intervals. More automatism doesn't necessarily mean less tactics. (But ok, don't really want to make the post about that, concentrate your brain power on the base idea and improve it, not on automatisms)

pps: If somebody asks why change from slipstream=base of energy consumption to speed=base of energy consumption: It's more realistic.

ppps: Satono Crown-Rey de Oro-Kitasan Black (or Cheval Grand) the winning bet for the Japan Cup. Donks told you!

[Cerro Torre RT]

Anyway, let's continue here:
Then another problem of the sprint right now is that the sprinters get slower after every 50 meters. Which isn't all that realistic either. So either an automatic 90-95-100% intensity, a percentage that guarantees that in 0 wind conditions they keep their speed for 150 meters. Or the ability to chose the intensity in the sprint tab. Want to go for a long sprint with your sprinter you'd put in 95-100 for leadout 1, 95-100 for leadout 2, then a 300m sprint with your sprinter. Opposite, you want to go for a short one you put in longer sprints for your leadouts.

At this point, there is a problem with the 150m speed keeping. In real life sprints, there are usually 2 leadouts for one km, sometimes 4. In RSF, those 3 to 4 riders are condensed to 500m. If we now adjust the speed keeping to 150m like RL, we'd have to prolong the the sprint to the whole km. If we want keep the 500, then we have to cut the real speed keeping in half too. Which would be first 50m accellerating to top speed, next 50m top speed, next 50m a noticable dropoff, and the next 50m a very sharp drop of. Those numbers would apply to full intensity sprint and could be prolonged by sprinting with less intensity.

[High Flyer]

I think I understand what you mean by the following part.

I have to say, I 500% disagree with allowing the final sprint setting from the start of the race. This will be a gold mine for suckers, and their numbers * will* increase. Literall,y all they need to do is bring 1 93 and a cheap team, set sprint, come midway through and done. It'll be like having multiple Team Gigi's. For me, there is no compromise there.

Please keep the sprint to 1min intervals of 50m. For me that gives the best possible sprint, there is a reason why we have min-tacts towards the end of races. Even 1 min intervals for 100m is too risky, 100m lost compared to 50m lost is very big, in many cases unreachable.

[Yamaka Corse]

I think I understand what you mean by the following part.

I have to say, I 500% disagree with allowing the final sprint setting from the start of the race. This will be a gold mine for suckers, and their numbers * will* increase. Literall,y all they need to do is bring 1 93 and a cheap team, set sprint, come midway through and done. It'll be like having multiple Team Gigi's. For me, there is no compromise there.

Please keep the sprint to 1min intervals of 50m. For me that gives the best possible sprint, there is a reason why we have min-tacts towards the end of races. Even 1 min intervals for 100m is too risky, 100m lost compared to 50m lost is very big, in many cases unreachable.

But Min-tacts is probably completely fucked up in most of races... I see some fantasy races 160 km, 120 minutes.. please stop that shit [OT END]

[Pokemon Club]

But Min-tacts is probably completely fucked up in most of races... I see some fantasy races 160 km, 120 minutes.. please stop that shit [OT END]

Depends of the profil not of the lenght normally for designers.

[Yamaka Corse]

But Min-tacts is probably completely fucked up in most of races... I see some fantasy races 160 km, 120 minutes.. please stop that shit [OT END]

Depends of the profil not of the lenght normally for designers.

Disagree with you Poke, I like mountains stage of 2 hours, but I rode few flat (100% flat) ov 2 hours.. it is insane sometime

[Cerro Torre RT]

Even, though it is off topic, but I can't just keep quiet on min-tact issues.

When, once upon a time, it was implemented, the anticipated should-be average was 50 km min tact. I'm probably one of very few teams left that support this value. So yes, the min tact is fucked up, but it is not too long, but too short. Stages of 220 km, medium or hard, if the profile is accordingly, should last 2:30 and more, not 2:00.