Are the Fairplay Rules to complicates?

[Hansa]

Due to some missunderstandings with the Fairplay rules in multiple different races, and one involving multiple very experienced manager (22h Vuelta a Burgos Et.3) were they identified a Team attack that wasnt and all involved teams agreed that it was.

I started to question if the Fairplay rules are to complicated or even misleading.

If they maybe need a change (maybe only in wording maybe a total change) or if we maybe only need some more clarifications (some explanation or examples).

i would like to hear some different opinions on this so maybe we can fix this issue.

[Robyklebt]

I would propose a new title

Are some users too dumb for the fairplay rules?

The answer of course is yes. What to do, get new users? Or dumb down the writing until every borderline retard understands it?

[lennylenny]

for me the most complicated part are all the exceptions, especially for Rule 3.
also the 11+ riders of 4+ teams exception of that rule is very openly abused during GTs where teams hang more than 2 guys on a jersey fighter km1 and suddenly a group of 6 teams with 20 riders is up ahead. While those big group do form sometimes in real races, i think they mostly form by multiple attacks linking up a bit later. so i vote to abolish that exception

[schappy]

And its 11 or more and 4 or more not 11+ and 4+. So the only thing we can chance is the wording. For Example: More then 10 rider from more then 3 Teams.

[FSG Sattelpuper]

I would propose a new title

Are some users too dumb for the fairplay rules?

The answer of course is yes. What to do, get new users? Or dumb down the writing until every borderline retard understands it?

It's nice that you're calling a lot of players stupid here, but Donkey can do anything here!

Well, if we want to help the "stupid and new or stupid newbies" here so that they understand the game better and make fewer mistakes, the rules should be simplified and defined more clearly and ideally made available in the various national languages . You should consider whether you set all the rules in such a way that they can be clearly proven, or whether you stick with it and also set up rules that you can only see from the process and that cannot be clearly proven. If you stick with it, I think you would have to consider including the trik sprint in this rule, which I think is just as unfair and unrealistic as a few other rules.

[Robyklebt]

You're the wrong one to complain about generalizations. Your endless attacks on "old players", never defined, never clear WHAT they do exactly are well known and equally annoying. Yes, you're 55 and seem to think that allows you to behave in whatever fashion you want....

[Gipfelstuermer]

What I can imagine is that we make rule 1 team attack impossible with a technological solution.

Even rule 3 could be resolved in the km-change code, but would require a more complicated solution.

If you stick with it, I think you would have to consider including the trik sprint in this rule, which I think is just as unfair and unrealistic as a few other rules.

Similarly, in theory, it is possible to change the sprint code to make 'trick sprints' impossible. But to do so, we would need a very precise definition of 'trick sprint'. (and of course a bit of time for development)

[Hansa]

This is not a discussion about trick sprint, please open a seperate topic for this so the real discussion doesnt get lost.

[Chemnitz Pro Cycling Team]

What I can imagine is that we make rule 1 team attack impossible with a technological solution.

Even rule 3 could be resolved in the km-change code, but would require a more complicated solution.

This sounds like a solution - I like the the idea of making it just not possible.

[Hansa]

Fixing rule 3 sound rather complicated for me if i attack with 2 guys and have 2 others hanging, how gets decides which ones will escape then and which ones not?^^

[Robyklebt]

also the 11+ riders of 4+ teams exception of that rule is very openly abused during GTs where teams hang more than 2 guys on a jersey fighter km1 and suddenly a group of 6 teams with 20 riders is up ahead. While those big group do form sometimes in real races, i think they mostly form by multiple attacks linking up a bit later. so i vote to abolish that exception

That's actually an interesting point. That might be worth thinking about.

Similarly, in theory, it is possible to change the sprint code to make 'trick sprints' impossible. But to do so, we would need a very precise definition of 'trick sprint'. (and of course a bit of time for development)

Yes, off topic, but you need more than a definition (which is easy). You need support from users that want an end to trick-sprints. Last time I proposed anti-trick sprint measures they weren't universally welcome. Or admins that decide to end trick sprints even without that support.

[team fl]

I think the rules are not that hard to understand if you do a little effort and read them properly. The rest ist logic.

Anyway, I also like the idea of abolishing exceptions about number of teams and riders like lenny proposed, maybe even the 4% exception. These situations happen not that often anyway and I think it would not take away "realism" from the game, as lenny elaborated.

[Hansa]

But there rsf limits us in the Km per km basis. Big attacks happen in real races because people attack and then more people attack behind the first escapes often also on the same km (that is kind of following in rsf) and that forms big groups, taking away that exception will fully get away these chains and these chains do happen in reallife also on the same km, its more like an indirect following with attackign behind other attacks shortly after but that just isnt really possible with our km per km basis.

and for example rider A attacks has 5 riders follwing
Rider B attacks with 5 following
rider c attacks with 5 following

One team follows with 1 each of them so now has 3 guys.

thats pretty much exactly the situation lenny mentioned with big groups form by multiple attacks joining together, but getting rid of the exception would also get rid of exactly this

but i could agree on limiting this exception because the points of the rule is not that i hang all my 9 riders so then with 4 other teams (1 rider each attacking) we met the exception.

its more like 8 different riders leave and i have 3 there thats fair game. but currently you could meet the exception with 3 teams 1 rider each and i hang 8 of my own rider and that would make the attack legal.

other example after a big sieb we have 20 rider group. one team has 4 riders everyone else has 2 riders with 30kms to go.

One team attacks and every rider in this group follows.

Now the team with 4 riders followed with all 4 and that would be a team attack without the exception? he then needs to drop 2 guys? dont really think that would be in the spirit of the rule.

[Gipfelstuermer]

I am with Hansa on the exceptions. It's true that they are a little bit complicated, especially because "if the original group has ≤14 riders" can't be checked in the race-log. But they make the race more realistic in the way Hansa described (multiple attacks on one km in real life). And in a normal sized peloton (let's say 10-20 Teams) they are balanced and fair as well. In smaller pelotons it's a bit strange sometimes, but we'll have to live with that and these days we have less of these very small pelotons, so it should be fine.

In addition, FPC has always recognized that rule 3 is more complicated than rule 1 and so penalties for rule 3 team attacks have always been a bit lower than for comparable rule 1 team attacks.

Finally, on this:

Fixing rule 3 sound rather complicated for me if i attack with 2 guys and have 2 others hanging, how gets decides which ones will escape then and which ones not?^^

You are right it's complicated, but we could find a rule for that if we want to solve it. To stay in your example, some options could be:

A) randomly 2 out of the 4 riders
B) the 2 strongest of the 4 riders on that km
C) the 2 weakest of the 4 riders on that km
D) first, those of your 4 riders who are making tempo (if any), then one of the other decision rules above (simulating that if they are at the front of the peloton, they are more likely to follow attacks)

[team fl]

The problem here is, that in reality, teams in the peloton can react instantly. In the game, a group may be 30 secs gone when you're able to react.

[Gipfelstuermer]

The problem here is, that in reality, teams in the peloton can react instantly. In the game, a group may be 30 secs gone when you're able to react.

Yes and no.

Yes, because we have this km-change-logic and so if you have noone in tempo, others attack, yes, a group may be 30 secs gone before you can react.

No, because if in reality a whole team is not making any tempo, i.e. riding somewhere in the back of the peloton, others attack from the front, a group may also have a significant gap until the riders have received instructions from the team car and moved up through the peloton, especially if on narrow roads.

Of course we don't have such a detailed positioning in game and we also don't have wide/narrow roads. We only have tempo / fail to make tempo / no tempo. But so under these constraints, in my opinion, a significant gap after an attack is not completely unrealistic when a team is making no tempo at all.

[flockmastoR]

The exception that can be modified IMO is the

- if ≥11 riders from ≥4 teams escape, or

in order to avoid very stupid actions (not just theoretically, Schartner showed us what is still allowed but IMO shouldn't) having 8 riders of one team, 1 rider of 3 more teams each. We could do that for example by limiting the maximum number of riders per team per km to 4 (or 3) that escape (attack or follow) as exception from the exception, or a rule 0 without any expections but than it would also affect other rules (is it necessary to allow attacking with all 9 riders in the last 10km?)

The chained attacks you were refering in GTs or longer stage races are kind of a tactical move. I kind of like and dislike them at the same time, but it is definitely something that makes longer stage races different to one day races and short ones.

[bergwerk cycling]

i have problems with the rules too ... but its ervytime only 3. Chained Attacks.

what could help ...

- better a description for everybodys in the native language
- when I'm logged in, I can't find them at all or only with difficulty
- perhaps a button in the race where you can take a look very fast!
- maybe it can be rewritten in a simpler way
- and changes like above might make sense

[Hansa]

The exception that can be modified IMO is the

- if ≥11 riders from ≥4 teams escape, or

in order to avoid very stupid actions (not just theoretically, Schartner showed us what is still allowed but IMO shouldn't) having 8 riders of one team, 1 rider of 3 more teams each. We could do that for example by limiting the maximum number of riders per team per km to 4 (or 3) that escape (attack or follow) as exception from the exception, or a rule 0 without any expections but than it would also affect other rules (is it necessary to allow attacking with all 9 riders in the last 10km?)

The chained attacks you were refering in GTs or longer stage races are kind of a tactical move. I kind of like and dislike them at the same time, but it is definitely something that makes longer stage races different to one day races and short ones.

we could also change it to at:

- if ≥8 riders from ≥3 other teams escape, or

than it wouldnt matter how many riders i chain there are at least 8 riders from 3 other teams in there

[flockmastoR]

The exception that can be modified IMO is the

- if ≥11 riders from ≥4 teams escape, or

in order to avoid very stupid actions (not just theoretically, Schartner showed us what is still allowed but IMO shouldn't) having 8 riders of one team, 1 rider of 3 more teams each. We could do that for example by limiting the maximum number of riders per team per km to 4 (or 3) that escape (attack or follow) as exception from the exception, or a rule 0 without any expections but than it would also affect other rules (is it necessary to allow attacking with all 9 riders in the last 10km?)

The chained attacks you were refering in GTs or longer stage races are kind of a tactical move. I kind of like and dislike them at the same time, but it is definitely something that makes longer stage races different to one day races and short ones.

we could also change it to at:

- if ≥8 riders from ≥3 other teams escape, or

than it wouldnt matter how many riders i chain there are at least 8 riders from 3 other teams in there

more clever, but then we need to learn new numbers

[Hansa]

is that a regular problem anyway? if not we maybe shouldnt change anything by the rule just by the wording maybe.

[claw]

Are some users too dumb for the fairplay rules?

that