First, a little background: In last year's pre-season, there was some discussion about increasing team sizes, given that most teams were at or over the 4-member limit -- and, with Slowdrive having recruited a fourth pipsqueak, all teams are now in such a situation. The proposal didn't succeed, with the advice to teams (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?msg=92048) being to instead lean on the distinction between, so to speak, unofficial members (as many pipsqueaks as desired racing together) and official ones (at most four people registered and scoring points for the team).
Thanks to
@Overdrijf , though, I have realised there's an effective compromise solution right under our noses, one which can be implemented right now, under the current rules:
B teams! If, for instance, Team Orion (https://zak.stunts.hu/teams/orion) were above the size limit and had four of their pipsqueaks already active in the season, the extra members could be registered as Orion II (or The Belt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion%27s_Belt), et cetera). Using B teams, I believe, allows us to steer clear of the potential problems with both a team size increase and an inflexible limit:
- Extra members now are recognised and shown on the scoreboard as being part of a team, which is much more welcoming and avoids any harsh feeling of exclusion.
- The scoreboard team affiliations now correctly show that the extra pipsqueaks aren't actually racing alone, making things a little more transparent.
- The official size limit keeps being 4, so there's no risk of affecting the competitive balance.
- There's no need for the rule book to continuously play catch-up with the trends, as a size increase might induce. (For instance, if we were to increase the limit to 5, it's not unlikely that the teams would take up the opportunity and expand, leading us to restart the discussion, but now about increasing it to 6).
As I mentioned above, it should be possible to start using B teams right now, as soon as the circumstances call for them. The only slight tweak to the procedures we'd need to do is waiving the minimum size of 2 restriction for B teams (and only B teams), as they are an extension of the main team, and it doesn't really make sense to allow 6-member teams to use them but not 5-member ones. A feature that would be nice to have but isn't essential is displaying B team status on the site, perhaps through a link between the team profiles in the database, or even just a notes field in the profiles that allows us to mention the affiliation.
https://youtu.be/tS35tbktcLo?si=pTv8o0kHmK4h3dnt
Sorry, I couldn't miss it.
Quote from: CTG on September 15, 2024, 07:38:56 PMhttps://youtu.be/tS35tbktcLo?si=pTv8o0kHmK4h3dnt
See, they also agree that B teams don't need a lower size limit ;D
https://youtu.be/ZOdn3D4xfs4?si=jfrc-LfLGGHr1B0x
"You may be on B-Squad, but you're the B-Squad *leader*!" ;D
We almost did it in meganium in the early days. It looks a good idea. There are pipsqueaks without team yet and we know it helps a lot.
Will a Slowdrive B team be called Mojaudi 3?
Quote from: Shoegazing Leo on September 21, 2024, 03:49:35 AMWill a Slowdrive B team be called Mojaudi 3?
And for Rolling Stunts, The Beetles?
When I used to play OGame, there was a concept similar to that of B Teams. In Spanish speaking universes, we called it "canteras", but I figure English speaking ones must have had the same thing with some other name. It allowed powerful alliances (teams) to admit unskilled newcomers without losing their prestige and keep them in these B Teams where they could gain skills. Once they became strong, they could move to the primary.
@Cas Indeed, B teams can be made into "canteras" ("academies" or "school teams" are okay equivalents, I think). The use I had primarily in mind for them, though, stems from different assumptions, even if some of the goals are the same.
Instead of preparing newbies for the main squad while keeping a prestige-based separation, a team might wish to grant full trust to its new recruits from the start by bringing them directly into the main squad. The purpose of the B team, then, would be freeing up places in the main squad, by accommodating members on long breaks or light racing schedules (without having to kick them from the team, or to rely on an ambiguous "unregistered member" status).
Having "cantera" B teams is, in principle, a possibility in our competition as well. To prevent the relationship between the squads from freezing into a permanent hierarchy, though, I feel it would make sense to have some kind of time limit -- for instance, a rule specifying that a school team (defined as a B team with a large enough share of newbies) should become independent by the end of the season.
I like the idea of secondary teams!
Would you see them gaining points as normal? Could there be some kind of "balancing", so that strong pipsqueak who often finish third-in-the-team would move from the primary to the secondary team, where their points would be accounted for?
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 25, 2024, 11:31:35 PMCould there be some kind of "balancing", so that strong pipsqueak who often finish third-in-the-team would move from the primary to the secondary team, where their points would be accounted for?
Not too sure on how I feel about such dynamics, but perhaps it could be an option if a team finds that a sensible thing to do. This arrangement might also arise in a different manner, if a team chooses to recruit into the B team and then decides to send a pro to give them some company. Interestingly, if the "third" pipsqueak has a companion or two within a B team of that kind, the B team might be emboldened to become independent!
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 25, 2024, 11:31:35 PMWould you see them gaining points as normal?
I think so, though the implications would be different depending on what the B teams that actually arise will look like. Considering the three kinds of B teams we have mentioned so far: A "squad rotation" B team would likely have its season scoreboard exploits limited due to not racing with its full roster 100% of the time. A "cantera" B team might offer interesting competition below the top of the team scoreboard. It is only the "balancing" B teams, I think, whose performance might raise a few eyebrows.
Hi guys, I was asked by Alan to give my thoughts about this topic. So here it is.
I think it's a good idea to implement B-Teams (although academy teams sounds a little better if you ask me ;) ) in any shape or order.
Of course I only read this post so I don't know if this is already brought up, but isn't it possible to use the rating from the Folyami Project? So if you have a "team" of 6 people the four highest rated pipsqueaks of that team can score for the a-team and the other two score for the b-team.
I think it creates a pretty cool dynamic where both teams work together like one team. Hopefully (if I'm correct) it will make a natural flow between pipsqueaks that are new or inactive for a longer time and the better pipsqueaks over the run of a season. It also gives the newbies a chance to fight for a place in the main line-up (first four) and really good pipsqueaks that come back after a longer time of inactivity (and have lost rating points because of that) have an extra goal to get back into that main line-up.
Also the better pipsqueaks will be pushed to get even better if one of the b-team members threatens to take over their spot in the main line-up.
And last but not least, it might ensure the all a-teams preform at their best because the four best pipsqueaks (or most active) are competing every race. I guess this will even out the playing field more between the teams.
The teams that don't have a b-team won't feel any negative side effect of this idea because they will drive with the main line-up anyway.
I hope I explained what I mean well enough. Of course I don't know if it's even possible taking in the current rulebook. And I also don't know if it is talked about before. But it seems like a cool idea to me.
Ps. It's really cool that the word race(rs) is automatically changed into pipsqueaks ;D !
I agree it's a very good idea and I vouch for it too :) Reading about this and the comments from you guys makes me think of another idea that might be good... perhaps. It's different, so I'll just mention it here, but I'll create another thread to discuss it further... It's about different tournaments and events issuing points or other benefits to pipsqueaks that participate or get good marks in other tournaments and events. Going right ahead to create the thread...
Hi Mortimer, welcome to the Forum! :)
Quote from: Mortimer Macmire on September 26, 2024, 11:02:22 AMOf course I only read this post so I don't know if this is already brought up, but isn't it possible to use the rating from the Folyami Project? So if you have a "team" of 6 people the four highest rated pipsqueaks of that team can score for the a-team and the other two score for the b-team.
I hadn't thought of a promotion system between A-teams and B-teams, in part because the primary use case I had in mind were casual "squad rotation" B-teams, which are perhaps easier to run if there is as little structure as possible. A carefully implemented promotion system, though, could be compatible with the spirit of that idea. Furthermore, as you say, there are quite a few interesting things about this arrangement: aspects of both "squad rotation" and "academy" teams are incorporated organically, there is no risk of the relationship with the parent team freezing into a permanent hierarchy, and there is an additional incentive for the A-team/B-team pair to work together.
(It's worth noting that there is a real choice underlying that last point: a B-team system with a less permeable separation might, by encouraging B-teams to become independent, work as a new team incubator, which could be a worthy goal in itself.)
Specifically about Folyami, one arguable weakness it has for this purpose is that inactive pipsqueaks are dropped from the current ranking but do not lose points. That being so, someone who were to race once every four rounds would stay continuously in the ranking and, if maintaining their usual level of performance, keep a largely stable rating -- and thus potentially remain forever in the A-team. A partial workaround might be allowing each team to assign one or two pipsqueaks to the B-team, so that, if someone knows in advance they will only race a few times through the season, they don't need to take a slot in the A-team.
(An example of a ranking from an earlier era that handled inactivity in a different way is SWR (https://digilander.libero.it/stunts.SDR/SWR/SWR.htm). It had an activity coefficient, and so there was a cost for missing races even before getting dropped from the ranking.)
The other big question in a Folyami-based system, I think, would be how often to carry out the promotions and demotions between the squads. Doing it every race could get awkward to keep track of, while only doing it at the beginning of the season might deviate from the spirit of the proposal by keeping things too static. Perhaps exchanging pipsqueaks every four rounds, in line with the Folyami inactivity windows, would be a good compromise.
You could just use the current season scoreboard instead of the Folyami rankings. Or even easier, just leave it up to internal team politics. The only questios then are if you are allowed to swap during the season and if swaps are retroactive (drivers brings all the results they already scored over to the new team) or just for the months starting after the swap was made.
Nice to read so many interesting ideas and variations on teams. There are a few directions mixing up at this point, I'll try to tease them apart. Let me know if I've missed anything.
- Some less-active members still want to be part of their team. Because of limited spaces, they appear (and feel?) "unaffiliated". They could be part of a "Team B".
If I understand correctly, this would have no effect on the main team, so we have a second team rarely whose members rarely participate. Eventually, the number of these members might increase, and we'll need a "Team C". While I get the "being part of my team" feeling, I feel this might ossify teams, which are most fun when they are dynamic and impermanent.
- New pipsqueaks would learn more if they were part of a team, but teams have limited spaces. Associated "Team B" would bring them into a team context and help them grow.
A concept of "apprenticeship" doesn't need any rule changes or official approval. All you have to do is invite these folks to your team's Forum area, or your favourite gathering spot. It can happen today.
Collecting apprentices in a Team B would give them a visible label. But should they be a separate team, or a clearly marked "- B" team? I'm leaning towards a separate team, which can make a name for themselves, instead of an appendix of another — here again, I think dynamic over static makes for a more interesting competition.
On the other hand, I'm not convinced about in-season swaps between affiliated teams. This would be equivalent (maybe with a delay) to having larger teams. It would increase complexity, give an advantage to big groups, and reduce the value of consistency. We'd have more people feeling like they don't contribute to the actual score of their [main] team.
Overall, what is more fun? Two big teams with cooperating A/B(/C?) groups that have been around forever, or half a dozen teams growing and changing, all competing with each other and making history for themselves?
(For the sake of consistency, I'll refer to the two kinds of B-teams we have been mainly concerned with as "squad rotation" and "academy".)
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 28, 2024, 04:37:37 PMIf I understand correctly, this would have no effect on the main team, so we have a second team rarely whose members rarely participate.
No effect, except for providing the team an easy way to refocus its A-team lineup around whoever is racing regularly in the current season, while still visibly acknowledging its less active members should they show up at some point in the year. (And yup, these little things do matter! They have been a real concern for at least some of the teams.)
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 28, 2024, 04:37:37 PMEventually, the number of these members might increase, and we'll need a "Team C".
It looks extremely unlikely for squad rotation B-teams to expand to the point they might give rise to C-teams. For that, you'd need 4 active pipsqueaks plus 5 mostly inactive ones, which is already very far removed from what the team rosters are like currently, and further for these 5 mostly inactive pipsqueaks to show up in the same season. (In contrast, B-teams are a relevant possibility to consider right now because the average size of teams, including members that haven't raced in 2024, is 4.5.)
(Note that the "extremely unlikely" bit is mainly about B-teams of the squad rotation kind, with no recruitment of new pipsqueaks directly into the B-team. Considering the implications of the alternative, though, gives us a nice segue into academy B-teams, so we might as well switch to discussing them for a moment.)
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 28, 2024, 04:37:37 PMCollecting apprentices in a Team B would give them a visible label. But should they be a separate team, or a clearly marked "- B" team? I'm leaning towards a separate team, which can make a name for themselves, instead of an appendix of another — here again, I think dynamic over static makes for a more interesting competition.
While visibility would be important for academy B-teams as well, what distinguishes a B-team from a regular team is not the branding, but how it works together with its A-team. In my vision, a B-team is really just an extension of the main team, its members having equal access and treatment everywhere except at the team scoreboard, where their results are recorded separately. That being so, a B-team becoming independent means stopping their free exchange of replays with the A-team, and getting their own team subforum so they can strategise independently. (Note that, a long time ago, we tried to have a "halfway" arrangement in which the B-team was only granted partial access (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=2330.0). I believe that initiative was doomed from the start just for being too complicated.)
I get your point about teams making a name for themselves. For similar reasons, I
personally wouldn't feel at ease with recruiting newbies directly into a B-team that I ran while being unable to offer them a clear path towards either the A-team or independence. One way I see to avoid such concerns, and keep academy teams faithful to the purpose of engaging newbies and encouraging new teams to come up, is a time limit: an academy team has full access to its parent team for one season, but must become independent after that, with its members either staying together or joining other teams if places become available.
(How do you distinguish an academy B-team from a squad rotation one? While we might think of some objective criteria based on years of experience or XP of the members, I think it would be much easier to just do it by consensus, as whether a team is an academy one should be obvious by looking at how it was formed.)
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 28, 2024, 04:37:37 PMOn the other hand, I'm not convinced about in-season swaps between affiliated teams. This would be equivalent (maybe with a delay) to having larger teams. It would increase complexity, give an advantage to big groups, and reduce the value of consistency. We'd have more people feeling like they don't contribute to the actual score of their [main] team.
While I find such systematic in-season swaps between squads an interesting idea to consider, I see how they can be a bridge too far, as a fuller commitment to enlarged teams.
Note, though, that systematic swaps are not a requirement for either squad rotation or academy B-teams. On the one hand, I think it would only make sense to promote someone from a squad rotation B-team if something unforeseen happens during the season that stops one of the A-team pipsqueaks from racing for the rest of the year. On the other hand, one year is a perfectly sensible window of apprenticeship, and it is reasonable to expect academy team drivers to stay there for the length of the season.
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 28, 2024, 04:37:37 PMWhile I get the "being part of my team" feeling, I feel this might ossify teams, which are most fun when they are dynamic and impermanent.
[...]
Overall, what is more fun? Two big teams with cooperating A/B(/C?) groups that have been around forever, or half a dozen teams growing and changing, all competing with each other and making history for themselves?
It certainly is lovely to see new teams forming, and new configurations of pipsqueaks taking shape. Such things, however, require people to actually want to become founders, or to leave their teams for a new adventure. These are ultimately individual choices, be it on the personal level or the team one (say, if a team voluntarily decides to split in two). Using the rule book to break up teams, or to set up roadblocks for people who have different priorities and wish to keep racing together, is unlikely to achieve much other than making people unhappy.
Quote from: Duplode on September 28, 2024, 11:44:54 PMUsing the rule book to break up teams, or to set up roadblocks for people who have different priorities and wish to keep racing together, is unlikely to achieve much other than making people unhappy.
I'm trying
not to add rules ;D
"Academy" is something that doesn't require any rules or support: teams can already share tips and replays with anyone they want to include in their discussions. If a team asks, we can add apprentices to their Forum section whether they are in a team, or are individuals. (I think that would be more inclusive than having a separate subforum)
"Squad rotation" remains unclear to me. It seems to mix up a concept of "alumni" who would like to remain affiliated to a team even when inactive, and an additional pool of pipsqueaks that can be drawn upon in case of need. The latter is "larger teams" with a different name. The former could take the form of a more visible label for what is now limited to the team history page (https://zak.stunts.hu/teams/corks-crew).
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 29, 2024, 01:23:56 AMI'm trying not to add rules ;D
Me neither! That's why I have described B-teams in the opening post as something that "can be implemented right now, under the current rules" :D
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 29, 2024, 01:23:56 AM"Academy" is something that doesn't require any rules or support: teams can already share tips and replays with anyone they want to include in their discussions. If a team asks, we can add apprentices to their Forum section whether they are in a team, or are individuals. (I think that would be more inclusive than having a separate subforum)
We don't need any new rules either to add those people to a separate "academy" team.
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 29, 2024, 01:23:56 AM"Squad rotation" remains unclear to me. It seems to mix up a concept of "alumni" who would like to remain affiliated to a team even when inactive, and an additional pool of pipsqueaks that can be drawn upon in case of need.
It's really not a mix of those two things. The only time anyone in this thread has mentioned anything like a substitution "in case of need" was when I, in a side remark within the long reply just above, raised a hypothetical to illustrate why such swaps are
not expected to be a regular occurrence in this kind of team. The expected "squad rotation" would happen in between seasons, as people start and end longer breaks, like they often do. There's nothing more to it, other than me trying to find a catchy name to sum up the concept. And apparently failing :-\
Quote from: dreadnaut on September 29, 2024, 01:23:56 AMThe former could take the form of a more visible label for what is now limited to the team history page (https://zak.stunts.hu/teams/corks-crew).
I'm afraid this wouldn't cover it, as there is a difference between historical former members and current members who happen to be inactive. Using Rolling Stunts as an example: Seeker1982 is a former member, having retired from competition at the end of 2020, with the team restructuring itself shortly afterwards (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=3619.msg77362#msg77362). In contrast, KyLiE and Argammon are
not former members, but are merely on a break, and can resume their activity in the team at any time.
Perhaps it's a good idea to make this discussion more concrete by talking about things we'd actually like to do with B-teams. Please do add your ideas as well! I'll start:
Cork's Crew currently has three drivers active in 2024, hopes to recruit one more in the near future, and has two pipsqueaks that are inactive at the moment. That being so, there is a real possibility that we'll have five or even six pipsqueaks in the same ZakStunts season. Once that happens, I intend to ask for a Cork's Crew II team (not necessarily with that name!) to be registered for our supernumerary entries. That would be a B-team of the "squad rotation" kind (as explained upthread), with no plans to recruit into the B-team.
Hello, I am Alecu from ZakStunts, a Stunts player since 2008, that heard about ZakStunts in 2011, registered in ZakStunts since 2012, that still plays Stunts to this day, and also created his own tracks. Also, can I be in the Doubleplusspeed team? I mention that I got a invitation from Erik Barros to be in that team.
I would be glad if you join us! :D Can we open a B team?
Yes. But I was a simple player, not a moderator or administrator. I am glad that I will be sometime in a team. Also how can I join a team? I ask because I want to join a team. Especially I want to be in the B team with you Alan Rotoi. Asked because Erik Barros given me a invitation for joining a team.
I'm still a bit uncertain about B teams, let me make an example:
- Doubleplusspeed signs a fifth 'apprentice' member, Bernie
- Bernie appears on the scoreboard as part of the Evenmorespeed team
- Bernie has visibility of team replays, strategies, PG surprises, and comes ahead of Duplode
- Evenmorespeed gains points from Bernie's result, taken away from Duplode's own team, Cork's Crew
- The result is that Doubleplusspeed has a proxy team to help them in the team competition
Similar situation can arise with "squad rotation" teams: if any members were to visit for a race, they could affect the team competition.
I think is important to foster competition between teams, and avoid 'collusion' (even involuntary). What are possible alternatives then? Ideas on my mind:
🙊 "non-scoring teams", whose members won't gain points for the team competition
➕ similar to B teams
➖ still limited to four members
➖ might be unclear, as it mixes 'squad rotation' and 'apprentices'
🐱 "team associates", individuals that belong to a team but won't bring points for the current season
➕ full flexibility on numbers
➕ can be labelled differently as 'alumni', 'apprentices', etc.
❓ how do we show them on the website? is the profile page enough, or should they be highlighted on the scoreboards?
Other options? What do you folks think?
A solution about team points would be "only 2 best results counts" then no matter the size of the team or its proxy team.
Quote from: dreadnaut on October 12, 2024, 01:16:40 PM- Bernie has visibility of team replays, strategies, PG surprises, and comes ahead of Duplode
- Evenmorespeed gains points from Bernie's result, taken away from Duplode's own team, Cork's Crew
- The result is that Doubleplusspeed has a proxy team to help them in the team competition
Note, though, that as long as we accept that additional people beyond the 4-member limit can be on a team subforum and share replays, many of these things will already happen even without B-teams. In your scenario, if Bernie were an unregistered member of Doubleplusspeed instead of being in a B-team, they would mutually benefit from their relationship all the same. As I see it, creating Evenmorespeed would only do two extra things:
- Assigning a team name to Bernie and co., making their relationship easier to spot (without having to rely on e.g. scattered messages about individual pipsqueaks); and
- Inserting Evenmorespeed into the team scoreboard (something I find unproblematic, but opinions may vary).
I'm not sure I'd frame the underlying issue in terms of collusion. In my vision, it should be transparent and taken for granted that B-teams are an extension of their parent team -- and again, the relationship of its individual members with the parent team is no different than it would be if they were unregistered members instead.
Quote from: dreadnaut on October 12, 2024, 01:16:40 PMWhat are possible alternatives then? Ideas on my mind:
If B-teams showing up on the team scoreboard is deemed a problem, either of those ideas would be an acceptable compromise IMO.
Quote from: dreadnaut on October 12, 2024, 01:16:40 PM🐱 "team associates", individuals that belong to a team but won't bring points for the current season
[...]
❓ how do we show them on the website? is the profile page enough, or should they be highlighted on the scoreboards?
I would
really like to also see it on the race scoreboards, though I guess we'd need to find a concise way of conveying the difference between (scoring) regular members and (non-scoring) associates. If we can't find a good enough single word, maybe an asterisk with a tooltip or a link would be enough?
Still on displaying "team associates" on the race scoreboard, perhaps a straightforward "NS" marker (short for "non-scoring") would look better than an asterisk:
(https://i.imgur.com/lFVjlcY.png)
Alternatively, we might just use "alumni" and "academy". There's a case for those two categories being enough to cover all associates -- "alumni" for those who once were in the main squad, and "academy" for those who haven't been in it yet:
(https://i.imgur.com/3AGsude.png)
Cars in the UK sometimes have "Learner" stickers. Italy has "P" for principiante (beginner). Is there anything similar around the world?
clipboard.jpg
If there's something similar in other places, it could be a decent icon.
Same here. "Principiante" means "beginner". You have to use it about 6 months.
princi.png
Quote from: dreadnaut on October 13, 2024, 01:13:52 AMCars in the UK sometimes have "Learner" stickers. Italy has "P" for principiante (beginner). Is there anything similar around the world?
clipboard.jpg
If there's something similar in other places, it could be a decent icon.
interesting concept, here in Brazil only the license is different, it is a provisional one that lasts 1 year. but many people put stickers on their own to let people know they are learning to drive.
Maybe a Bernie Rubber icon for padawans ;D
In which case the alumni icon should of course be Otto ;D
Quote from: Duplode on October 13, 2024, 03:03:43 PMIn which case the alumni icon should of course be Otto ;D
True, Otto is kind of the club boater (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ont4kwEWQe4) of the Stunts world. Or at least a veteran.
The video title even says "Otto the Club Boater", doesn't it? ;D
By the way, if the portraits of Bernie and Otto are too large for the desired icon size...
(https://i.imgur.com/HtreQ9q.png)
... we might instead use a subtle nod to them:
(https://i.imgur.com/3L6VaMk.png)
Or, remixing that with
@dreadnaut 's idea:
(https://i.imgur.com/HqPhdNx.png)
Also, there's always the option of (ab)using emoji. There are initials for both
P (https://emojipedia.org/p-button)rincipiante and
A (https://emojipedia.org/a-button-blood-type)lumni, and even for
B (https://emojipedia.org/b-button-blood-type)-team:
(https://i.imgur.com/QD5Ir6U.png)
Quote from: Erik Barros on October 13, 2024, 02:42:24 AMQuote from: dreadnaut on October 13, 2024, 01:13:52 AMCars in the UK sometimes have "Learner" stickers. Italy has "P" for principiante (beginner). Is there anything similar around the world?
clipboard.jpg
If there's something similar in other places, it could be a decent icon.
interesting concept, here in Brazil only the license is different, it is a provisional one that lasts 1 year. but many people put stickers on their own to let people know they are learning to drive.
In my country (Romania) the beginner symbol at drivers was the black exclamation sign on a yellow background, the sign being cut in round shape. It is usable for only 1 year. It was put in the rear and in the front windows.
(https://cdn.dedeman.ro/media/catalog/product/1/0/1060836_1.jpg?optimize=low&fit=bounds&height=&width=&canvas=:)
We don't have a clear logo here. It's usually just a simple sign that reads "PRINCIPIANTE" ("beginner")
I'm thinking to go for "Apprentice" and "Emeritus", small icons next to the name look good, and adding a tooltip should not be a problem.
(Not urgent, but would there be any connections or constraints between Apprentices and Amateurs?)
It's ok :)
I like "Apprentice" and "Emeritus" too! :)
Quote from: dreadnaut on October 15, 2024, 11:56:22 PM(Not urgent, but would there be any connections or constraints between Apprentices and Amateurs?)
They're separate concepts. If we were going to implement an "academy" B-team system, it might have made sense to use Amateur status to help define what an academy team would be. With the simpler "team associates" system we're considering now, though, I don't see much room for one status to affect the other.
(There's also the very minor matter of "Apprentice" and "Amateur" sharing an initial letter. Even so, an abbreviation clash is easily avoided by sticking to precedent (https://www.fiawec.com/en/news/differences-between-gte-pro-and-gte-am/5908) and using "Am" to abbreviate "Amateur".)
Something that caught my eye yesterday, before the F1 race: the Ford Ka in this Heineken ad (https://youtu.be/E114H7BIiAk) has an "L" sticker :D