vEveresting Climb

Some discussion on the TR forum brought an idea, I can see from previous post similar things have been requested, longer climbs etc but not a total Everest climb with extra features.

Starting from Watopia sea level, you move upwards to Watopia base camp. Then through the Khumbu ice falls, Base camp II…III past avalanches, up Lhotse face etc on to ridges and cols and the steps until you reach the top. Plenty of creativity could be had here.

You would have a maximum of 24 hours with limited unscheduled resting periods during your ascent, say 10 minutes of no moving and see how far up the 8848m Everest ascent you get. More rest can be had at official Watopia Base camps of up to 60 minutes.

Zwifters can then have their usernames chiselled into the ice road as a marker/Tag on how far they got… or a prayer flag at the side to show themselves and others how far they climbed. At the top some sort of roll of honour could be chiselled into a Watopia Everest wall.

The “limited resting periods” of no more than 10 minutes, or specific places to stop makes no sense. If they were to do it at all, it should use the Hells 500 ruleset.

You can break for as long or as little as you like.

https://everesting.cc/virtual-everesting-rules/

In any case, it seems a lot of effort for a climb a small number of Zwifters would ever attempt.

Take Alpe du Zwift as an example. This year there have been 66,377 riders of the Zwift Insider verified full climb segment. Compare that to 80,683 for the Epic KOM and 109,512 for the jungle loop. 215,150 riders have done “Final 200m” this year, so it suggests fewer than 1 in 3 Zwifters even attempt AdZ. For something like an Everest challenge I reckon that would be even smaller.

By comparison, Fuego Flats expansion has been out less than two months, and already 34,707 have ridden Tick Tock. 78,851 have done the sprint.

Seems to me that flatter routes are far better value for the time investment from the Zwift design team.

1 Like

I’m throwing ideas in here and do appreciate constructive feed back. I’m sure Zwift would make their own rules with regards to zEveresting.

The stats aren’t a true representation of how popular parts of Zwift are because certain parts are not available unless you reach a certain level. AdZ is not open for all whilst Fuego flats are right on the mass starting door and open to all from day one without having to explore far.

AdZ has been far more successful than it was ever imagined. IMO the sense of achievement can’t be replicated anywhere else in Watopia and I love doing my intervals their. Do remember hearing when it was released that it was a waste of time and hardly anyone would climb it. I don’t want to imagine a virtual world with endless flat routes, because its “better value”. Don’t think you can’t measure better value in such a simplistic way. AdZ is a Zwift master piece, one of the main reasons I retain my subscription, maybe I’m not the only one and this should be how “better value” is measured?

zEverest would be a vast undertaking and a risk, I agree, the work that must have gone into AdZ for 1000+ metres, to do something ten times bigger would be a huge project. Maybe just do another dozen iconic long climbs and have them joined? That would reduce the risk but wouldn’t get half of the same press as a virtual Everest would.

Anyway I’m glad the design team is brave, doesn’t conform to the norm and has imagination, New York is just one example of their art and look forward to their next release whatever that maybe.

Surely this would follow for the Everest route? It’d make no sense to allow low levels to ride an 8,848m climb when they are blocked from a 1,144m(?) one.

I agree that AdZ has been more popular than anticipated. But that doesn’t in itself justify extrapolating that popularity to a climb 8 times longer.

I’m not against more climbing in the game at all. Rather than a replica of Everest though (which is not a rideable route in the real world of course), I’d much rather see them develop more of the iconic roads we do see people riding in the real world as you said. Stelvio, Ventoux, Galibier, Passo San Gottardo, El Camino de la Muerte, Sa Calobra, Taiwan KOM Challenge route… I think any of those would be preferable. Obviously they’d be joined, but of course it wouldn’t make it a “vEverest” strictly.