|
2016 Planning: Rider Form
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 22-11-2015 01:24
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
I just don't like the idea. It's certainly interesting and adds a new elements of planning, but it just seems a bit... well...
Honestly, I don't have any reason not to like it, it just rubs me the wrong way.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| sammyt93 |
Posted on 22-11-2015 01:32
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3634
Joined: 03-07-2012
PCM$: 300.00
|
If we do go for it and have it as 1 month +1 2 months -1 could we have the option of swapping the 2 months -1 to 1 month -2 and get to choose which one we want to go with as long as the race days still work out equal or with more RD at the lowered stat? I was just thinking that could be used to swap a superdomestique into a leader for a race in his home nation if he goes +1 and his normal leader goes -2 that month.
Obviously I can't see that being used that often by the top managers but for those of us that like to roleplay and have foreign leaders that could work out well. e.g. I'd have been tempted to make Rusli 76 and Alizadeh 75 for Langkawi in my first season so the Malaysian could have lead his home tour with support from the Iranian that lead us everywhere else that year (Rusli was 74MO Alizadeh 76MO that season)
|
| |
|
|
| Roman |
Posted on 22-11-2015 02:36
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4386
Joined: 29-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Well I think this thing would be easily implemented for PCT/CT as we already have the needed 'diversity' of calendar according to number of races of a terrain in particular months - or it could be easily tweaked. If we tweak the calendar a little bit in PT, so we create more diversity in calendar - if we split Ardennes or Flanders/Roubaix into different months and so on, it suddenly creates big options in this category.
I think an idea how to make this work could be to have these three options:
1. the option to not having any form months and have similar stats all year long
2. the option to have 2 +1 form months in season, but all other would have to be -1 months (with the exception that you can't ride 2 GTs in these form months)
3. the option to have 1 +2 month in season, but all other would have to be -2 months
As a (future) possibility I could see an option to 'buy' an extra form month for money. This could be another way how to take out some additional money out from teams.
Edited by Roman on 22-11-2015 02:43
|
| |
|
|
| Kentaurus |
Posted on 22-11-2015 03:33
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3999
Joined: 26-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Roman wrote:
Kentaurus wrote:
Also this rule sucks because it could mean other teams take turns boosting their classics riders to stand a chance against Summerhill.
I actually think absolutely the opposite. For example Bewley was so dominant this year. But well if I would not select any + months for him, it would be likely he would not be the biggest favourite in some of races he would be participating in. And isn't that exactly what we want to see? To see same riders always predictably winning, that is not the greatest thing to see. So I think it would be more fun to see way more riders having a chance to go for a better result if they decide to do so. +1 or -1 would likely not change things too much after all, but if we give it a go and it works, we may go for options for +-2 or even 3 in the future, if we set the system right. And that would bring in way more strategic options which may bring us even more fun. But well, for first it is better to keep it simple and we will see...
That was sarcasm from me, I know it makes those riders that dominated certain parts of the season more vulnerable, but also will make racing against them more interesting.
AZTECA - NBCSN  |
| |
|
|
| Mresuperstar |
Posted on 22-11-2015 03:36
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8059
Joined: 22-06-2009
PCM$: 650.00
|
I'm all for a form system to be implemented. I just don't think this is the best possible way. But, I don't really have a solution to share that I like either at the moment.
|
| |
|
|
| Smowz |
Posted on 22-11-2015 07:26
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6479
Joined: 09-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
We have talked about rider form before, often this has been simply cast off as too much of a difficulty for SN. However I have always thought it would be an outstanding evolution for the ManGame.
I am firmly in favour of it - obviously it needs to be carefully managed in terms of balance. For which we should always be thankful that SN is excellent at managing such things.
I think doing it +1 racedays <= -1 racedays for example is needed. I think that would work pretty well in all cases. As SN says a top leader cannot afford very easily to have any -1 racedays. It would be highly questionable for example that riders like Bewley, Pluichkin... would take the +1 bonus as they would then have to sacrifice an equal amount of race days without.
I think it should be further +1 racedays <= - 1 racedays per category(i.e. HC, C1, C2, C2HC). Though I admit not sure how this works for Grand Tours. Perhaps if you go +1 for Tour de France, it is -1 for at least all other race days up to 30 RD? Or alternatively if one cannot balance it out then you cannot go +1 for the chosen race?
I can see a lot of managers considering tactics - +1 for race guy has a chance and -1 for a race guy has little chance. I good cobbled guy for example, but I don't see why that is a problem. It simply makes one dimensional riders perhaps slightly more valuable and two dimensional riders like Cunego, F Schleck in the past slightly less points monsters.
I do think we have to think about the Bewley, Pluichkin, Ponzi factor in this years PT, Trofimov/Cunego/F Schleck etc. in previous years being just a bit too dominent. The form factor gives a very welcome added layer of unpredictability.
|
| |
|
|
| trekbmc |
Posted on 22-11-2015 07:41
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7366
Joined: 11-07-2014
PCM$: 700.00
|
Just tested if riders on 86 will actually work, I made 9 riders, one all 70s, three all 85s, 3 all 86s, one all 90s and one all 99s, I named each rider the number of their stats with one two or three written after if needed.
Raced over a 42km ITT that was mostly flat with a small hill at the end (nothing really) they were all on 70 effort the whole race and had similar in race form. the results:
1.Eightysixone
2.Eightysixthree (+12)
3.Ninetynine (+23)
4.Eightyfiveone (+24
5.Eightyfivetwo (+26)
6.Wiggins (82 TT but probably higher effort)
7. Martin (83TT but probably higher effort)
8. Eightyfivethree (+1'05)
9.Ninety (+1'22)
16. Eightysixtwo (+3'10)
I then did a second test noting daily form (this time including the hundred rated rider because the seventy didn't do much) :
This winds were crosswinds around 20, slightly more for early riders slightly less for later (the riders are put in the order they started below)
Daily form:
Ninetynine (-1)
Ninety (+2)
Hundred (+3)
Eightysixtwo (+2)
Eightysixthree (0)
Eightysixone (+1)
Eightyfivetwo (+2)
Eightyfivethree (+4)
Eightyfiveone (+1)
Results (set up as rider (time) (form):
1. Eightyfivetwo (56'58) (+2)
2. Eightyfivethree (+15) (+4)
3. Martin (+53) has 83 TT but would have gone higher effort.
4. Wiggins (+1'41) same as above but 82 TT.
5. Eightyfiveone (+1'44) (+1)
6. Eightysixone (+1'54) (+1)
7. Eightysixthree (+2'02) (0)
8. Hundred (+2'08) (+3)
9. Ninety (+2'22) (+2)
10. Eightysixtwo (+2'23) (+2)
It's also worth mentioning that on the pre race briefing the three eighty fives were rated above the other riders in favourites.
No way the slight (maybe 6 at the most) difference in wind could have made those time gaps, I don't know what could really, but it doesn't look like it really works as an improvement above 85.
Although I would be in favour of adding form if there is a way, sounds like some extra challenge and unpredictability (wish I had it for Sinkewitz this year though  )
"What done is, is one." - Benji Naesen
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 22-11-2015 07:45
|
World Champion
Posts: 12188
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
The problem for me here lies in having an 85MO rider. I know he gets better in everything else, but I cant help but think that the effect is bigger fornavn 84MO rider, thus making this an unfair treat for those who havent yet spent all those millions in making a rider 85 in a stat.
I like the idea as a general thought, but IMO form doesn't make a rider better at what he does. The stats the riders are given is an image of their top level. If anything I think the form thing should only be implemented for endurance, resistance and recuperation.
If we, in the future, makes sure that no riders have 85 in a stat, then this ideas could work.
We could make that happen by doing a simple thing. All riders go down -1 stat in Thr off season and makes it impossible to train a rider to 85. That way all riders are hit the same, and no one can just jump up to 85 without using the form idea that is suggested...
Edited by SotD on 22-11-2015 08:28
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 22-11-2015 08:24
|
World Champion
Posts: 12188
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
Roman wrote:
Well I think this thing would be easily implemented for PCT/CT as we already have the needed 'diversity' of calendar according to number of races of a terrain in particular months - or it could be easily tweaked. If we tweak the calendar a little bit in PT, so we create more diversity in calendar - if we split Ardennes or Flanders/Roubaix into different months and so on, it suddenly creates big options in this category.
I think an idea how to make this work could be to have these three options:
1. the option to not having any form months and have similar stats all year long
2. the option to have 2 +1 form months in season, but all other would have to be -1 months (with the exception that you can't ride 2 GTs in these form months)
3. the option to have 1 +2 month in season, but all other would have to be -2 months
As a (future) possibility I could see an option to 'buy' an extra form month for money. This could be another way how to take out some additional money out from teams.
+2 month while all other months are -2 months could be used well for teams who have great depth. For a team who have 82, 79, 79, 79, 77, 75, 75 HI riders next season I could probably cover all months better than if I didn't spend those months.
But I do think +2 monts could be very interesting to "play" with for subtop riders. I could easily imagine making Vasyliv my leader in a month where there are chances for him to make the top 10, and just "live with" him being what he is now as a domestique for the rest of the season. Especially because I already have similar level riders that could step up when needed.
Also I would love to have this opportunity with a rider such as Piter Campero. Normally he would be 78MO, but by giving him +2 he would suddenly be a potential team leader for one race.
Similarly my subtop TT'ers could in fact win TT's in a month if I wanted to make Vlatos 83TT, or my normal leadoutsprinter Coquard could be 83/85 in a month. That could be the Tour de France - And then he could just leadout Tzortzakis with 79/81 like he did this season for the rest of the time...
There are some very interesting scenarios for sure.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 10:01
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| trekbmc |
Posted on 22-11-2015 08:32
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7366
Joined: 11-07-2014
PCM$: 700.00
|
+2s can make CT teams too good though, say if my team had that they will be 79 - 78 - 77 - 77 - 76 - 76 - 75 HL which seems kind of OP, even if I only have one month I can select them in such a way so that I have at least a 76 rider all year, or some sprinters would become amazing and able to win C1 races, etc. seems like you can get to a point where each team is amazing and just picks a month to win in, which is not realistic at all, I don't think it can be higher than +1.
"What done is, is one." - Benji Naesen
|
| |
|
|
| fjhoekie |
Posted on 22-11-2015 08:51
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4476
Joined: 25-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Do I like the idea? Yes, it adds some realism of peaking and facing the consequences of doing so in a way. I even believe I brought something similar up last year. However, I don't think we should add this feature to the game. I feel it gives certain riders, and teams an advantage, an unfair advantage to be precise. Cobbled classics, and hilly ones to an even larger extent, seem to yield more PPRD compared to stage races. Teams focussing on these races would just have to find a month with 3 or 4 of these races and they would score an insane amount of points with a decent leader whereas the stage racers would only benefit in 1 race, possibly 2, not pumping up their PPRDs as much.
Classic focused teams already have a slight advantage imo, and we should not give them an even larger advantage by implementing this.
Manager of Team Popo4Ever p/b Morshynska in the PCM.Daily Man-Game |
| |
|
|
| Luis Leon Sanchez |
Posted on 22-11-2015 08:56
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5533
Joined: 12-06-2013
PCM$: 500.00
|
People buy/train riders that are better for a reason. +1 wouldn't have a great effect but +2 is a definite NO.
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:00
|
World Champion
Posts: 12188
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
trekbmc wrote:
+2s can make CT teams too good though, say if my team had that they will be 79 - 78 - 77 - 77 - 76 - 76 - 75 HL which seems kind of OP, even if I only have one month I can select them in such a way so that I have at least a 76 rider all year, or some sprinters would become amazing and able to win C1 races, etc. seems like you can get to a point where each team is amazing and just picks a month to win in, which is not realistic at all, I don't think it can be higher than +1.
Well most other team will have the same... Or atleast have the same opportunity to do so.
Especially in the CT where a lot of teams are new.
|
| |
|
|
| matt17br |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:02
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 10525
Joined: 28-09-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
@trek: https://pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread....st_1005861
I plan to test it for PCM 15. Also the scale doesn't go up to 100. It goes up to 99, just for clarification.
|
| |
|
|
| trekbmc |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7366
Joined: 11-07-2014
PCM$: 700.00
|
Did it half because I was really interested half because of this post earlier I the thread:
SportingNonsense wrote:
1. Well PCM2014 showed the scale went up to 100. Would be great if somebody wants to test that in PCM2015. Regardless, they still get the advantage of all other stats going up 1.
That thread was done for PCM14 and I did it with PCM15 and there quite a few differences to show that PcM14 handles it better, for example as Schar I. Your thread (third post) had all stats of 86 and an average of 86, for PCM15 all riders with stats above 85 had and average of 85, there are a few other examples likely but I don't have timid now.
Also your one proved that it worked for. PCM14 but based on what happened. I really don't think it does work for PCM15. 
"What done is, is one." - Benji Naesen
|
| |
|
|
| Smowz |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6479
Joined: 09-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
@fjhoekie:
I disagree with the assessment that the mangame is skewed towards classics riders. The fact that we get mountain classics and that stage racers can do well in hill classics, and hill riders can do well in hill stage races obviously makes it hard to analyse. I do feel as you go up the divsions stage racers become much more important.
PT individual rankings 2015
Spoiler | 1 | Sam Bewley | NZL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/bec.png | Becherovka - Petrof | 3123 | | 2 | Aleksandr Pluchkin | MOL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/met.png | Metinvest-Dacia | 2844 | | 3 | Simon Spilak | SLO | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/fes.png | Festina-Canal+ | 2144 | | 4 | Simone Ponzi | ITA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/gde.png | Good Energy | 1870 | | 5 | Rein Taaramäe | EST | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/btc.png | Bouygues Telecom | 1856 | | 6 | Yuri Trofimov | RUS | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/tcs.png | Tinkoff Bank - Tinkoff Insurance | 1838 | | 7 | Edvald Boasson Hagen | NOR | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/akm.png | Aker - MOT | 1735 | | 8 | Ben Swift | GBR | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/vsa.png | Vesuvio - Accumalux | 1670 | | 9 | Andy Schleck | LUX | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/vsa.png | Vesuvio - Accumalux | 1594 | | 10 | Angel Madrazo | ESP | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/qst.png | Quickstep | 1527 | | 11 | Damiano Cunego | ITA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/mei.png | Meiji - JR East | 1430 | | 12 | Taylor Phinney | USA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/ven.png | Venchi | 1343 | | 13 | Fabian Cancellara | SWI | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/rbh.png | Red Bull - Huawei | 1243 | | 14 | Tejay Van Garderen | USA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/mus.png | Movistar - US Postal | 1233 | | 15 | Jan Bakelants | BEL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/btc.png | Bouygues Telecom | 1212 | | 16 | Riccardo Ricco | ITA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/fes.png | Festina-Canal+ | 1192 | | 17 | Justo Tenorio | ESP | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/bac.png | Bacardi Limited | 1167 | | 18 | Robert Gesink | NED | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/pro.png | Project 1t4i | 1159 | | 19 | Mikhail Ignatiev | RUS | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/met.png | Metinvest-Dacia | 1088 | | 20 | Daniel Martin | IRL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/akm.png | Aker - MOT | 1076 |
Five of the top ten are stage racers, Swift is a sprinter, Trofimov does well in stage races as well as classics and Bewley is bastard. We see another five stage racers in the next ten too.
PCT Individual rankings 2015:
Spoiler | Individual | | 1 | Luis Leon Sanchez Gil | ESP | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/evo.png | Evonik - ELKO | 1207 | | 2 | Alberto Contador | ESP | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/bon.png | Bonsucro | 1006 | | 3 | Janez Brajkovic | SLO | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/onc.png | ONCE-Eroski | 999 | | 4 | Tom Boonen | BEL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/evo.png | Evonik - ELKO | 993 | | 5 | Wilco Kelderman | NED | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/pum.png | Team Puma - SAP | 991 | | 6 | Jay McCarthy | AUS | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/boi.png | Bank of Ireland | 977 | | 7 | Danny Summerhill | USA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/azt.png | Azteca - NBCSN | 975 | | 8 | Michał Kwiatkowski | POL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/ken.png | Team Kenya Airways | 951 | | 9 | Martijn Keizer | NED | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/aeg.png | Aegon - Lavazza | 925 | | 10 | Tiago Machado | POR | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/prp.png | Prio - Porto | 843 | | 11 | Maxime Monfort | BEL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/gzl.png | Gazelle | 779 | | 12 | Jurgen Van den Broeck | BEL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/bpo.png | Team BPost | 777 | | 13 | Gerald Ciolek | GER | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/pum.png | Team Puma - SAP | 767 | | 14 | Hassen Ben Nasser | TUN | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/ken.png | Team Kenya Airways | 765 | | 15 | Emanuele Sella | ITA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/scl.png | Siam Cement - Lenovo | 713 | | 16 | José Rujano | VEN | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/mac.png | Mobil - Aeropostal Ciclismo | 675 | | 17 | Daryl Impey | RSA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/ken.png | Team Kenya Airways | 666 | | 18 | Maxime Vantomme | BEL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/tom.png | Team TomTom | 660 | | 19 | Jonathan Bellis | GBR | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/rbc.png | RBC Pro Cycling | 653 | | 20 | Jonas Ahlstrand | SWD | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/sbp.png | Swedbank-PEAB | 634 |
Again top three are arguably stage racers - and a great mix of stage racers, sprinters and classics men.
CT Rankings 2015:
Spoiler | Individual | | 1 | Anthony Lavoine | FRA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/fab.png | Fablok - Dunlop | 594 | | 2 | Maximiliano Richeze | ARG | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/san.png | Sancor Cycling Team | 513 | | 3 | Frantisek Rabon | CZE | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/npn.png | Novatek-Panarmenian.net | 490 | | 4 | Marc De Maar | CUR | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/cdb.png | Carlsberg - Danske Bank | 479 | | 5 | Aleksandr Serebriakov | RUS | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/npn.png | Novatek-Panarmenian.net | 436 | | 6 | Aidis Kruopis | LTU | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/ino.png | Indosat - ANZ | 416 | | 7 | Jukka Vastaranta | FIN | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/dek.png | DeLaval - Kiitokori | 408 | | 8 | Winner Anacona | COL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/dek.png | DeLaval - Kiitokori | 408 | | 9 | Michael Matthews | AUS | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/cpl.png | Compal-Merida | 369 | | 10 | Sebastian Langeveld | NED | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/sva.png | Strava | 361 | | 11 | Kazushige Kuboki | JPN | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/act.png | Actavis - DKSH | 339 | | 12 | Mauricio Soler | COL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/alp.png | Alpina - Avianca | 317 | | 13 | Darwin Atapuma | COL | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/ino.png | Indosat - ANZ | 309 | | 14 | Jakub Novak | CZE | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/ioc.png | In-n-Out Cycling Team Powered By Carrefour | 307 | | 15 | Andrey Zeits | KAZ | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/nns.png | Netia - Norske Skog | 295 | | 16 | Andrew Tennant | GBR | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/sva.png | Strava | 289 | | 17 | Abolfazl Gilanipoor | IRN | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/cpl.png | Compal-Merida | 288 | | 18 | Jose Mendes | POR | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/sev.png | Severstal-Mercator | 271 | | 19 | Kirill Pozdnyakov | RUS | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/npn.png | Novatek-Panarmenian.net | 242 | | 20 | Pierre Rolland | FRA | pcmdaily.com/images/mg/micro/gen.png | Generali - Kronenbourg 1664 | 232 |
Now I will admit at CT things do seem skewed - not quite sure why this is? Was the balance off for C2? Was it harder to find good quality stage racers?
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:16
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
Anything that makes the game more complicated is something we should avoid at all costs imo. Also i havent paid 1.550 000 on wages for someone who can be suddenly not the best climber around, because somebody will make 84 guy an 86 for GT...while i would be mad to make Pluchkin 86 for one GT and 84 for another, not knowing the startlist.
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 22-11-2015 09:27
|
| |
|
|
| trekbmc |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:39
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7366
Joined: 11-07-2014
PCM$: 700.00
|
SotD wrote:
trekbmc wrote:
+2s can make CT teams too good though, say if my team had that they will be 79 - 78 - 77 - 77 - 76 - 76 - 75 HL which seems kind of OP, even if I only have one month I can select them in such a way so that I have at least a 76 rider all year, or some sprinters would become amazing and able to win C1 races, etc. seems like you can get to a point where each team is amazing and just picks a month to win in, which is not realistic at all, I don't think it can be higher than +1.
Well most other team will have the same... Or atleast have the same opportunity to do so.
Especially in the CT where a lot of teams are new.
My point got lost in my example. really saying that a lot of top hill contenders are rated 75, they can challenge 77 rated Zeits and even Mendes but once you get Zeits on 79 (potentially with Sinketiz 78 in there) and Mendes on 80, it gets a lot less likely and takes away unpredictability, rather than adding it as was one of the points made for the form idea.
My point really is that it would lead to just being able to pick a month where your rider would dominate because it's just too much in the CT.
"What done is, is one." - Benji Naesen
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:47
|
World Champion
Posts: 12188
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
@trekbmc
Yeah. In those races where they are 80/79. Sure. But when they go down to 75/76 in all other races, they surely aren't the best anymore 
But I am also against +/- 2 - Atleast in the testseason...
But I fear that even with +/- 1 Some teams will get a benefit that weren't calculated all that well when we decided to implement it.
Like I said previously I only want to consider this a good idea if all riders are forced down -1 in all stats, to avoid any debates as to whether 86 means anything or not.
And by forcing everyone down -1 the training cost should move that way aswell, meaning that training a rider from 83 to 84 should now cost what 84 to 85 costed before. Otherwise you penalise those having already spent money...
|
| |
|
|
| trekbmc |
Posted on 22-11-2015 09:57
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7366
Joined: 11-07-2014
PCM$: 700.00
|
@SotD: Sounds like we agree then about the +2 thing.
You're right about them not being the best after but it sounds like too much gain and even for me this season I could have just peaked a different rider almost every month and cover 6 months with a top punchuer and either way Mendes would have been too good I think.
And I'm 90% sure there is no difference for going up to 86 in PCM15 (although there is in PCM14) so I think you'd be right about having to move all the stats down 1 if it were to be implemented.
-
As a whole I'm on the fence about wether or not I like the idea earlier i said I did but now I'm not sure. I don't know
"What done is, is one." - Benji Naesen
|
| |
|
