|
2016 Planning: Rider Form
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 22-11-2015 16:33
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
Roman wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
The more this thread talks about lowering my sacred Garby to 78 mtn, the more I am against this idea. 
Absolutely not a relevant argument, all riders would get worse, so all riders would still have the same comparable quality as before...
Yeah but 79 just seems like such a cooler number
Edit: On another note, if you don't have Tier 1 leaders, than the two months where your leader is -1 can be devastating, as your rider can be passed in skill by a dozen others (which I guess is the point - you have to plan for that). But it could also make it more boring, which could decrease activity by managers during this time. And anything that could damage activity should be treated with caution.
Edited by baseballlover312 on 22-11-2015 16:57
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| OlegTinkov |
Posted on 22-11-2015 17:12
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2666
Joined: 31-12-2007
PCM$: 450.00
|
No!
I really would prefer all stats to be constant throughout the season, because basically this Rider Form is temporarily training. Feels like the Training Camps in-game, which I also don't like/never use myself when I'm playing. The randomness versus things you can control as a manager in the ManGame are in my opinion perfectly balanced at this point. For me it feels totally unrealistic to tell every rider of your team when to be "in form" and that they also will deliver, I don't want to be Bruyneel!
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 22-11-2015 18:31
|
World Champion
Posts: 12188
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
And thanks for a good laugh with listing opponents for Bewley, they cant touch him though. (and some of these figures are wrong).
Which ones?
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 22-11-2015 18:41
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
SotD wrote:
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
And thanks for a good laugh with listing opponents for Bewley, they cant touch him though. (and some of these figures are wrong).
Which ones?
Now i got it, that you already listed others bar Bewley with +1 form. 
|
| |
|
|
| aidanvn13 |
Posted on 22-11-2015 18:53
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2797
Joined: 06-11-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
I'm with Oleg on this one. Although a Form Schedule will allow more control over rider fitness (like a training schedule would in real life), I think the game and rider performance does already have a big level of unpredictability to it. Some races riders just don't show, others they punch above their weight or simply finish more or less where we could expect. I'll take Eastman for example after the season he had:
Nowhere in Volta Catalunya. (Should've gotten Top 5/Top10)
Nowhere in Corsica (Top 10 capable)
Top 10 in Kenya Classic
Top 15 in Andorra (could've done top 10, but not too bad)
Top 5 in Bulgaria
Top 5 in Int. Oesterreich
Top 5/10 in some other mountain classics
As you can see, there are definite "peak" races for him and other races where he was just a no-show for no apparent reason. For role playing purposes I like to say that he was just "out of shape" for those races.
|
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 22-11-2015 21:30
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
I've only skimmed this thread thus far. I voted yes for this because some sort of form should be added if only to make the PT more tactical than it currently is (as compared to the lower divisions).
Maybe the problem is that the trade off isn't big enough? What about - 1 for each of the two months before and - 1 for the month after? Or the other way around?
Also obvious not a compulsory thing.
|
| |
|
|
| beagle |
Posted on 22-11-2015 21:34
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4200
Joined: 06-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I didn´t go through whole discussion. so I could miss something important.
But YES, I like basic concept announced on page 1.
Manager of Polar in Man-Game
|
| |
|
|
| maxime86 |
Posted on 22-11-2015 22:31
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2950
Joined: 01-03-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Hi, I haven't exactly read through everything completely but he'res my basic opinion
The idea is nice and seemed really complicated at first but isn't, however, I'd like to +1 Oleg's point, it feels like rider training which i dont love using
also, this is artificially trying to produce more randomness which i i dont really agree with
again that's just me |
| |
|
|
| Roextro |
Posted on 22-11-2015 22:38
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2370
Joined: 24-01-2014
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think it would just add more work to planning and I don't think it would make a huge difference. Plus the 85 thing would make it unfair so it's a no from me |
| |
|
|
| Marcovdw |
Posted on 23-11-2015 06:32
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7593
Joined: 04-07-2012
PCM$: 15345.00
|
No, I don't think we should downgrade everyone by one stat just so we can introduce a new feature. That just doesn't feel right to me.
Besides, I would've been against it anyways. Let the game decide when someone has form.
|
| |
|
|
| Kentaurus |
Posted on 23-11-2015 18:33
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3999
Joined: 26-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Okay so I'm still in favor of this plan, but I'd like to organize it a bit since many things might have been lost, or people skimming through just coming in.
Currently the ideas I'm seeing most prevalent are:
Riders can go +1 for all stats for a month, but also must have a month or more of -1 in all stats (down months must have at least as many racedays as the up month).
Due to PCM15s handling of stats over 85 (no benefits) all riders would get their stats reduced by 1 (minimum is still 55). All other aspects of the game related to stats would get scaled as well. (IE training costs, overall, wages would all be adjusted so that the costs associated with these riders does not change).
I think the general consensus is against doing anything beyond +1 and -1 at this point.
AZTECA - NBCSN  |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 08:27
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Kentaurus |
Posted on 23-11-2015 18:36
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3999
Joined: 26-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
OlegTinkov wrote:
Feels like the Training Camps in-game, which I also don't like/never use myself when I'm playing.
The reason this community as a whole is against training camps is because the computer AI doesn't use them creating an unfair advantage. Here it would be against other humans who are capable of using this tactically.
AZTECA - NBCSN |
| |
|
|
| Shonak |
Posted on 21-01-2016 10:56
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15615
Joined: 16-07-2013
PCM$: 350.00
|
Has there been a decision about this idea yet? Poll says no but the discussion has been largely in favor of it when you disregard the teenage angst of the 85ers.
Me personally likes the idea but the inclusion of it will make my Game-theory planning/thinking ("A will do that, B probably select those guys" ) pure nightmare, so I'm sorta against it. It'd definitely add quality to the racing and reports tho, and the overall season.
(This may also give Team of the Year award a whole new dimension)
"It’s a little bit scary when Contador attacks." - Tommy V
|
| |
|
|
| Jakstar22 |
Posted on 21-01-2016 12:41
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7294
Joined: 11-04-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
I like the idea! I think it would add another element to the mangame!!
|
| |
|
