Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
12 Posts

Flamme Rouge» Forums » General

Subject: Need tips for a Solo Grand Tour rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Bram Kok
Netherlands
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm planning on doing a solo 6 stage Grand Tour next week, starting on Monday and playing 1 or 2 stages each evening. But I could use some help planning the details, especially since I see a lot of minor rule variations on the boards here.

What I've got so far:
• I want to do 6 stages in total but haven't decided which, yet.
• I'm going to compete against 3 bot teams (1 Peloton team; 2 Muscle teams)
• Bots don't gain exhaustion;
• I won't lose exhaustion between stages
• Cyclists who have past the finish line can't slipstream (but you can cross the finish line by slipstreaming).
• Time registration is dependent on the front most cyclist of the group
• Otherwise use the Grand Tour rules by Asger

Where could you help me with:
• What is a balanced and interesting combination of stages (note I've got no access to the app, so only stages from the base game and the Peloton expansion)
• Has anyone done something similar? Will the ruleset I intent on using lead to interesting games?
• Anything I've missed?
• General advice
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
René Christensen
Denmark
Solroed Strand
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
• I won't lose exhaustion between stages

Bet you'll run out of those cards after a couple of stages. gulp
You just can't spent them as fast as you gain them.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Keane
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Slotracer wrote:
• I won't lose exhaustion between stages

Bet you'll run out of those cards after a couple of stages. gulp
You just can't spent them as fast as you gain them.


My solo Tours have always been that I start with ~3 exhaustion between my 2 cyclists at the start and don't lose any between stages. Since the bots aren't taking any, if you get all 60 exhaustion in your decks, that's an auto-lose. It's Tour Over dude!

Playing a really long Tour, like 19 stages, I've considered including a couple "rest days" where I do get to lose half, but that's more to have something to look forward to mid-Tour than that I was going to run out of cards.

Bram, that all looks good.

• What is a balanced and interesting combination of stages?
I can't give specific track recommendations, but I would focus on hilly stages with 1-3 medium hills (~6-7 ascent spaces each). I like to include one stage with 1-2 big mountains (10+ ascent spaces) and I also like plateaus (long flat after an ascent before next descent). Mountain finishes are fun too but can feel anticlimactic; they can kill sprinter muscle bots. I like to leave an all-flat stage for last, sometimes I even make it short (~50 spaces).

• Time registration is dependent on the front most cyclist of the group
That's too bad you don't have access to the app. It's really helpful to figure out the time gaps/bonuses for you. I don't use it for tracks.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Doran
msg tools
mbmbmb
I would also suggest a good mix of flat, hilly and possibly an extreme Mountain stage (probably of a 50 step length).
There are loads of good stages out there without the App. If you look at the files section the - "Unofficial Expansion set : custom stages, variants" file will give you a large number of good stages to try out.
I think your rule set should be fine.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bram Kok
Netherlands
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ryan Keane wrote:
Slotracer wrote:
• I won't lose exhaustion between stages

Bet you'll run out of those cards after a couple of stages. gulp
You just can't spent them as fast as you gain them.


My solo Tours have always been that I start with ~3 exhaustion between my 2 cyclists at the start and don't lose any between stages. Since the bots aren't taking any, if you get all 60 exhaustion in your decks, that's an auto-lose. It's Tour Over dude!

Playing a really long Tour, like 19 stages, I've considered including a couple "rest days" where I do get to lose half, but that's more to have something to look forward to mid-Tour than that I was going to run out of cards.

Wow, 19 stages. That's quite the Grand tour. But it's good to know that the exhaustion rules should provide no problem.

The4thJawa wrote:
• What is a balanced and interesting combination of stages?
Ryan Keane wrote:
I can't give specific track recommendations, but I would focus on hilly stages with 1-3 medium hills (~6-7 ascent spaces each). I like to include one stage with 1-2 big mountains (10+ ascent spaces) and I also like plateaus (long flat after an ascent before next descent). Mountain finishes are fun too but can feel anticlimactic; they can kill sprinter muscle bots. I like to leave an all-flat stage for last, sometimes I even make it short (~50 spaces).
ben doran wrote:
I would also suggest a good mix of flat, hilly and possibly an extreme Mountain stage (probably of a 50 step length).
There are loads of good stages out there without the App. If you look at the files section the - "Unofficial Expansion set : custom stages, variants" file will give you a large number of good stages to try out.
I think your rule set should be fine.

Thanks for the pointers, I'll also check out the file section for interesting stages.

Ryan Keane wrote:
• Time registration is dependent on the front most cyclist of the group
That's too bad you don't have access to the app. It's really helpful to figure out the time gaps/bonuses for you. I don't use it for tracks.
I made a spreadsheet to help me calculated the times and determine the standings. Hopefully I didn't make any mistakes whistle

Thank you all for your responses, I'm really looking forward to my first Grand Tour cool
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bram Kok
Netherlands
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So I played the first 2 stages (Ronde van Wevelgem & Stage 9) today.

Started with 3 exhaustion (S:1 R:2)
Had 4 at the start of the second stage (S:1 R:3)
Ended the second stage with 6 (S:4 R:2)

Finished 1st(R) & 2nd(S) in the first stage and 2nd(S) & 3rd(R) in the second stage.

I'm not sure how I feel about a whole group of connected cyclists scoring the same time. I feels like the Pink Rouleur's finishing time is unfairly bad after the first race.


For my spreadsheet with the current standings look here.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Keane
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Quote:
I'm not sure how I feel about a whole group of connected cyclists scoring the same time. I feels like the Pink Rouleur's finishing time is unfairly bad after the first race.


Good point!

Actually, I realized I'm not sure how they do it in real cycling - is the finishing time gap between two packs based on starting a stop watch when the front cyclist of the first pack crosses the line, or when the rear cyclist of the first pack crosses line? I'm pretty sure during a race, the estimated time gaps are calculated for example from the rear of a breakaway group and the front of the peloton.

Maybe it makes more sense in FR to calculate a pack's time based on the location of the rear cyclist. But the turn-based nature of the game still causes inherent problems. Realistically, the Pink Rouleur should have the same time finishing time as the rest of the pack. If at the end of turn I have a drawn-out string of all 8 cyclists, with 5 finishers occupying the 5 spaces past the line, and 3 yet-to-cross occupying the 3 spaces before the line, with no gaps obviously because of slipstreaming, maybe they should all get the same time based on how far those 3 yet-to-cross cyclists get past the line next turn?

On mountain finishes, I like to rule that connected cyclists DON'T get the same time. Each cyclist is timed individually based on their space.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Asger Harding Granerud
Denmark
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Early Flamme Rouge prototype
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As far as I know, the real Grand Tour rules for packs crossing at the same time, is that all riders in the pack get the time of the frontmost rider.

The rules for whether or not it was considered the "same" pack, were once (but I believe they might have changed slightly) that as long as the rear wheel of the winning cyclist wasn't further than the front wheel of the next rider, then both these riders were in the same pack. Then the second riders rear wheel would count, and so on and on.

In other words, it would be possible for every single rider to get the same time as the winner. However, if there was just a single gap where no wheels would overlap, then the next rider would count as the leader of the following pack, and ALL riders coming in with him, would get the same time.

Now imagine 160 riders crossing, and 140 of them getting in on the first pack. The last 20 could end up losing substantial time, and at least the time it would take 140 riders to cross. Those numbers were not picked at random, they represent the exact distribution in the picture above This could in principle be as small a gap as 20cm. And it could cost a lot of time.

Now I DO understand that when you look at the above picture, then the intuitive reaction is exactly what both of you had. It seems unfair. However the cycling rules do allow for very minor differences, still resulting in large gaps in time. This is what is represented in the Grand Tour rules for Flamme Rouge, and though it isn't perfect, I do believe there are solid arguments for it.

I hope this makes sense, and that I am not rambling too much!

Happy racing
Asger Granerud
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Keane
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
I'm almost sure in real cycling, whether 2 cyclists get the same time is not/no longer based on rear-front wheels overlapping. I think it's basically if there's less than a 1 second difference, they get the same time.

Now I have to watch a race and see if a rider dropped a little bit from a massive peloton gets a big time gap or not.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bram Kok
Netherlands
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AsgerSG wrote:
As far as I know, the real Grand Tour rules for packs crossing at the same time, is that all riders in the pack get the time of the frontmost rider.

The rules for whether or not it was considered the "same" pack, were once (but I believe they might have changed slightly) that as long as the rear wheel of the winning cyclist wasn't further than the front wheel of the next rider, then both these riders were in the same pack. Then the second riders rear wheel would count, and so on and on.

In other words, it would be possible for every single rider to get the same time as the winner. However, if there was just a single gap where no wheels would overlap, then the next rider would count as the leader of the following pack, and ALL riders coming in with him, would get the same time.

Now imagine 160 riders crossing, and 140 of them getting in on the first pack. The last 20 could end up losing substantial time, and at least the time it would take 140 riders to cross. Those numbers were not picked at random, they represent the exact distribution in the picture above This could in principle be as small a gap as 20cm. And it could cost a lot of time.

Now I DO understand that when you look at the above picture, then the intuitive reaction is exactly what both of you had. It seems unfair. However the cycling rules do allow for very minor differences, still resulting in large gaps in time. This is what is represented in the Grand Tour rules for Flamme Rouge, and though it isn't perfect, I do believe there are solid arguments for it.

I hope this makes sense, and that I am not rambling too much!

Happy racing
Asger Granerud

Thanks for your response Asger. As my interest in Flamme Rouge far exceeds any interest I ever had in any actual competitive cycling, I had no idea they timed finishes in packs. So we learn something new every day cool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Asger Harding Granerud
Denmark
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Early Flamme Rouge prototype
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ryan Keane wrote:
I'm almost sure in real cycling, whether 2 cyclists get the same time is not/no longer based on rear-front wheels overlapping. I think it's basically if there's less than a 1 second difference, they get the same time.

Now I have to watch a race and see if a rider dropped a little bit from a massive peloton gets a big time gap or not.



Thankfully Flamme Rouge is not based on current cycling rules

Asger
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adrian Brooks
United Kingdom
Rugby
Warwickshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ryan Keane wrote:
I'm almost sure in real cycling, whether 2 cyclists get the same time is not/no longer based on rear-front wheels overlapping. I think it's basically if there's less than a 1 second difference, they get the same time.

Now I have to watch a race and see if a rider dropped a little bit from a massive peloton gets a big time gap or not.



It's definitely one second for the Tour De France. The change from "overlapped wheels" to "allowed gaps" is for reasons of safety - the peleton doesn't have to actively pack so vigorously as it crosses the line to avoid catastrophic unexpected time losses, so avoiding massive crashes in a group of people who weren't winning anyway.

I think the Flamme Rouge version of same time works for either case.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.