|
ICL17 - General | Development
|
| Croatia14 |
Posted on 04-02-2017 22:57
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 9099
Joined: 13-03-2013
PCM$: 2100.00
|
Ideas for the new season
I have already been thinking a little bit about what to change for the next season. These ideas will not all be implemented, but it would be nice to get some oppinions on all of this.
Minimum Wage
Yes please! For me it was obvious to sign roleplay riders eventhough I could've well used another captain instead of Evans, Sanchez, Scarponi and stuff...this would be much more senseful with this option - but isn't it kind of a gentleman's agreement already not to sign these <60 AVG riders if possible?
BuyOut Clauses
I love this: Give us freedom for creativity in terms of loan deals, re-buy clauses, and other possible agreements...this is a nice idea to go there!
I like the idea of unmanaged U23 teams only partly - the results are already pretty random in CT and it would become worse by having more teams...
Instead: How about giving the teams more spaces in their dev team rosters, and increase the budget for every rider signed by 1 "minimum wage amount", so that the system can't be abused to generate money. That would also implement a linear increase of race days for those teams for CT as well.
Energy Stats Development
In generally a really good idea from this season on, but...
..."I'll also plan to increase the energy stats in retrospect for the development of the last season, so this will not harm any riders compared to others." - Please please please don't do that! Training plans are developed with long-term thoughts, that'd really destroy some tactics from back then.
World Cup
Carbon Sports disagrees to the following: "The normal rankings are usually only for teams/riders interesting that focus on stage races. So far every time a stage racer won here. With the World Cup the gap in budget could be closed for teams focusing on classics."
And I disagree with the non-interest in the world cup - give us the time to prepare one offseason really, then teams will be specialized for this more (if they play it smart)
I really like the jersey idea!
World Tour Rankings
100% agree - there we also skip the tactics of sending minor leaders mostly to C1 races which really hurts the CT in many races
Press Articles
like the idea, but not in terms of budget...but maybe an increase of scouting abilities by your subjective judgement of Press Articles?
Scouting System
good idea! scouting should have more of a value for sure!
|
| |
|
|
| matt17br |
Posted on 04-02-2017 23:10
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 10525
Joined: 28-09-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
but isn't it kind of a gentleman's agreement already not to sign these <60 AVG riders if possible?
Then I'm sure me and jaxika are not gentlemen 
|
| |
|
|
| Bikex |
Posted on 05-02-2017 12:07
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7255
Joined: 25-08-2012
PCM$: 600.00
|
Thanks for all the ideas and oppinions on all the matters. Here some answers and clarifications, please keep commenting. 
Minimum Wage
I've put my idea not into good words. The Min Wage of leaders will not be increased by much. Just so it will make them ask for a little more in renewals, but their wages will still be way above the min wage. Lowering the min wage for domestiques is already part of the formulas I tested, so this will happen as well.
@knockout: I like the idea of lowering the min wage after 2 rounds of FA, I'll think of a way on how to add it to the game.
@Croatia: It might be a gentlemen's agreement, but as long there is the option to save money by hiring lots of crap riders, there are managers that'll do it and I can't blame them, I can only fix the rules.
BuyOut Clauses
TMM is right this would be kind of a loan system, but the team the rider is riding for is always paying the wage, which doesn't matter as there is no salary cap. Compensation can be paid through transfer fees and the rebuy clause. Rich teams hoarding riders could be a problem indeed, but I think a team that tries that will have troubles as they make themselves an easy target for stealing attempts.
I have to put some thought into this. If this system would be introduced with flaws, it could easily be abused.
@Croatia: I think more teams will generally lead to less random results, due to the PCM AI, but your idea with increasing the sizes of dev teams could also work. However I'm not sure how much additionally file editing this will require of me, when the budget changes through the # of riders in the dev team and the race days as well.
Energy Stats Development
I have made a spelling error here, I meant to say last seasons, so nothing to worry about Ollfardh.
@Croatia: I doubt this would destroy long term plannings. The compensations will be for every rider and based on how much they developed. A stage racer will get a higher REC compensation and a classics rider a higher STA. I'll base the exact compensation on how much the riders have developed in the energy stats since the first season.
World Cup
@TMM: https://pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread....st_1188170 -> #11
@knockout: Don't worry no rider of yours will win it this season anyways, so you won't get the punishment of one of your riders wearing a prestigious jersey. 
@Ollfardh: Can you please elaborate on how you'd like the rankings formula to be changed?
Prize Money will be added from next season onwards, I'll see how high it will be.
World Tour Rankings
This is also decided then. Possibly anyone has a good idea on how the Prestige Rankings can be made interesting in another way for WT teams, please speak up. But in the end that is not very important, as WT teams still can profit from CT races like already stated in the response to jaxika.
Press Articles
This idea seems to have the biggest opposition. Maybe there should be some rules on how the press articles should be: e.g. A minimum of 50 words. 50 words is already more than an unmotivated 3-liner, but is by no means an impertinence. The articles would also only give a very small bonus, so a team that does not do them has no huge disadvantage. I think I'll test this in the next season and if it gets only negative reactions it will be removed again.
Scouting System
Adding a few more races for the regens seems like the most popular idea. I think I'll add it. The problem I see here, though is that usually in a race there is only space for max 200 riders but there are about 1500 regens produced, so not any rider will be able to race. Also already based on the startlists it will be easy to figure out who the most promising riders are(only the good will be selected). |
| |
|
|
| Croatia14 |
Posted on 06-02-2017 10:10
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 9099
Joined: 13-03-2013
PCM$: 2100.00
|
to the Scouting System: the problem I see with that is that somebody has to race these races, which might lead to more work for a spare part of the game...
another idea for that could be a stagiare system in any way - with possibilities either for a dev team or the main team
to the Energy Stats Developement: still a horrible idea in my eyes to do it backwards - I based a lot of my (also long-term) signings on their energy stats in comparison to other guys...especially a guy like Wilco Kelderman would really be hurt by that, and if known otherwise (that other riders get a balance for their current Sta/Res/Rec disadvantage) I'd most likely not would've invested that much money in him and instead sold him...
so for me a clear yes to add it from now on, but we should in no way go backwards in time to work on that! because, as already stated, it would hurt some already made long term plans
in other terms: I'd give Tony Martin his 82 TT back, as he is clearly not too dominant with that anymore, especially looking at the progression other guys will make
furthermore: may I ask what the point of the 82 borders are? cause like this it's like having the border of 85 just 3 points laid down, but kind of the same effect as before: in some years we'll have a stat cumulation at 82 (I guess)
|
| |
|
|
| Bikex |
Posted on 06-02-2017 12:00
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7255
Joined: 25-08-2012
PCM$: 600.00
|
Croatia14 wrote:
to the Scouting System: the problem I see with that is that somebody has to race these races, which might lead to more work for a spare part of the game...
another idea for that could be a stagiare system in any way - with possibilities either for a dev team or the main team
A stagiare system would be much more work than some additional races. I anyways already make a db with the regens for the U21 WC race.
Croatia14 wrote:
to the Energy Stats Developement: still a horrible idea in my eyes to do it backwards - I based a lot of my (also long-term) signings on their energy stats in comparison to other guys...especially a guy like Wilco Kelderman would really be hurt by that, and if known otherwise (that other riders get a balance for their current Sta/Res/Rec disadvantage) I'd most likely not would've invested that much money in him and instead sold him...
so for me a clear yes to add it from now on, but we should in no way go backwards in time to work on that! because, as already stated, it would hurt some already made long term plans
Okay now I get your point. But I think it would be at least equally unfair to not give the energy stats compensations for riders that went through the years with the most development in the last years compared to talents that still go through this phase.
Croatia14 wrote:in other terms: I'd give Tony Martin his 82 TT back, as he is clearly not too dominant with that anymore, especially looking at the progression other guys will make
furthermore: may I ask what the point of the 82 borders are? cause like this it's like having the border of 85 just 3 points laid down, but kind of the same effect as before: in some years we'll have a stat cumulation at 82 (I guess)
I'll consider giving Martin his TT back when we get to the rider developments.
The borders are just a way to balance the database. If they weren't there I'm sure knockout would've trained Kittel already to 84 sprint as an example. The borders should prevent too dominant riders. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 08:50
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Bikex |
Posted on 06-02-2017 12:03
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7255
Joined: 25-08-2012
PCM$: 600.00
|
Scouting: Round 2
Download this:https://www.mediafire.com/?n4c1bgu22d...gu22dmo7fc
Round 2 works almost the exact same way as Round 1. There are only two new things:
#1 Scout a rider more accurate than you did before
If you want to know more about a rider than you know already, place In colums W and X how you scouted him before (don't forget that or the excel sheet will make you pay more than you have to). Then add in columns Y and Z to what level of scouting you want to get him now in Potential or Stats. You will have to pay the difference between what you already payed for scouting the rider and what you have to pay for the level you are getting the rider on.
#2 Sign a rider
If you already decided to sign a rider, put 1 in column AA, where it says "Sign". A young rider will get a wage of 100. You can pay the full wage out of your scouting budget, but only can use the half of that for wages. Check in table "Teams" how much you can use. Place next to the 1 in column AA, in column AB how much of the riders wage you want to pay out of your scouting budget. It can be anything between 0 and 100. The rest will be payed out of your budget for next season.
If two managers bid on the same talent, there will be a silent auction, I will ask you by PM to make a second bid on the rider's wage. The higher second bid will get the rider. If two or more bids are the same a random generator will decide. Should the wage end up higher than 100, you still can only pay 100 out of the talent budget.
If you are done, go to table "PM" and send columns A-I to me. |
| |
|
|
| Croatia14 |
Posted on 06-02-2017 14:33
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 9099
Joined: 13-03-2013
PCM$: 2100.00
|
to Scouting: okay, if the more work is okay then go for it - as the solution sounds decent 
to Energy Stats: really really disagree - everbody had the option to simulate how riders might develop with the sheets and were aware of the developement terms - resulting in these squads - as said, a lot of deals would've been done in other terms by me, and riders like Kelderman, Uran (that were brought in for their Energy stats mainly) would lose in worth through this, which I'd really dislike
to Stat borders: possible point - but like this races become more and more of a lottery I'd guess - and f.e. training Demare in sprint was horrible, cause he could've grown better if trained 3 seasons as puncheur (and thus got to 82 sprint) rather than just be trained further as a sprinter (1 year, a lot worse back-up stats by that) and then reach his stat border and don't progress anymore...that's kind of a weak point I see in this current system
|
| |
|
|
| Bikex |
Posted on 06-02-2017 15:36
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7255
Joined: 25-08-2012
PCM$: 600.00
|
Croatia14 wrote:
to Scouting: okay, if the more work is okay then go for it - as the solution sounds decent
to Energy Stats: really really disagree - everbody had the option to simulate how riders might develop with the sheets and were aware of the developement terms - resulting in these squads - as said, a lot of deals would've been done in other terms by me, and riders like Kelderman, Uran (that were brought in for their Energy stats mainly) would lose in worth through this, which I'd really dislike
to Stat borders: possible point - but like this races become more and more of a lottery I'd guess - and f.e. training Demare in sprint was horrible, cause he could've grown better if trained 3 seasons as puncheur (and thus got to 82 sprint) rather than just be trained further as a sprinter (1 year, a lot worse back-up stats by that) and then reach his stat border and don't progress anymore...that's kind of a weak point I see in this current system
Energy Stats: Maybe I can figure out a compromise, but any way it'll be done there will be teams profiting more than others. Also it's not like you totally wasted your money on Uran and Kelderman. The former got you a Giro podium and Wilco was a strong rider for your team already for 2 seasons.
Stat Borders: If that's a weak point you see, then I'm happy to tell you this point is no existing problem in the current development system. The formulas are designed the way that the most a top talent can achieve in a main stat through natural progression is 81. Besides Demare there is, I think, only one other rider that will get to 82 in his main stat. No rider ever was limited in his natural progression by hitting a too high stat. The stat limit is only to prevent managers making their riders OP through research training.
On your other point: Part of the development system is also that riders rarely become superstars, so also in the future it will be quite unlikely that there will be hoards of riders with the best main stats. Even if that would happen, I can always react by increasing the stat border. |
| |
|
|
| Croatia14 |
Posted on 06-02-2017 17:25
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 9099
Joined: 13-03-2013
PCM$: 2100.00
|
Bikex wrote:
Croatia14 wrote:
to Scouting: okay, if the more work is okay then go for it - as the solution sounds decent
to Energy Stats: really really disagree - everbody had the option to simulate how riders might develop with the sheets and were aware of the developement terms - resulting in these squads - as said, a lot of deals would've been done in other terms by me, and riders like Kelderman, Uran (that were brought in for their Energy stats mainly) would lose in worth through this, which I'd really dislike
to Stat borders: possible point - but like this races become more and more of a lottery I'd guess - and f.e. training Demare in sprint was horrible, cause he could've grown better if trained 3 seasons as puncheur (and thus got to 82 sprint) rather than just be trained further as a sprinter (1 year, a lot worse back-up stats by that) and then reach his stat border and don't progress anymore...that's kind of a weak point I see in this current system
Energy Stats: Maybe I can figure out a compromise, but any way it'll be done there will be teams profiting more than others. Also it's not like you totally wasted your money on Uran and Kelderman. The former got you a Giro podium and Wilco was a strong rider for your team already for 2 seasons.
Stat Borders: If that's a weak point you see, then I'm happy to tell you this point is no existing problem in the current development system. The formulas are designed the way that the most a top talent can achieve in a main stat through natural progression is 81. Besides Demare there is, I think, only one other rider that will get to 82 in his main stat. No rider ever was limited in his natural progression by hitting a too high stat. The stat limit is only to prevent managers making their riders OP through research training.
On your other point: Part of the development system is also that riders rarely become superstars, so also in the future it will be quite unlikely that there will be hoards of riders with the best main stats. Even if that would happen, I can always react by increasing the stat border.
Energy Stats: well it might be the best solution, still I'd say that it would be only fair to not go into the past by making adjustments like these but only focus on the present & future
Stat Borders: perfect
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 06-02-2017 17:31
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
I massively disagree with Croatia there, I did not raise several young riders only to see them passed by others because the new ones will have better development.
But to be clear, let's make a simplified example. Let's say cobble training is +8 cobble and +2 stamina. Would you change the training to say +6 cobble and +4 stamina or +8 cobble and +4 stamina? So add extra training or just change the distribution?
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| jaxika |
Posted on 06-02-2017 17:32
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3148
Joined: 16-07-2008
PCM$: 9200.00
|
Energy Stats: well it might be the best solution, still I'd say that it would be only fair to not go into the past by making adjustments like these but only focus on the present & future
Even i didnt defended so well against the minimal wage |
| |
|
|
| Croatia14 |
Posted on 06-02-2017 18:05
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 9099
Joined: 13-03-2013
PCM$: 2100.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
I massively disagree with Croatia there, I did not raise several young riders only to see them passed by others because the new ones will have better development.
well yours still develop and the stat borders won't change!? so at the end it's not decicive when the rider is introduced to the game, only the point of developement of energy stats will come earlier after this...
I'm also happy with changes containing the RES/STA/REC limit of riders, I'm only against changing the actual stats
|
| |
|
|
| knockout |
Posted on 08-02-2017 21:22
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7735
Joined: 21-12-2010
PCM$: 400.00
|
@Bikex: Can we delay this round of scouting until we know how we adjust the minimum wages of our riders? It's difficult to estimate the need/budget for young riders if you cannot estimate how much your team will demand...
Bikex wrote:
I'll consider giving Martin his TT back when we get to the rider developments.
The borders are just a way to balance the database. If they weren't there I'm sure knockout would've trained Kittel already to 84 sprint as an example. The borders should prevent too dominant riders.
Propably not as long as others would not have trained their sprinters. Never had the money to train someone extensive and should i decide to train someone next season it would more likely than not be someone else like Geyer.
If anything i would have trained Sagan back towards the top puncheurs as that was what he was when i acuired him before you reduced his stats (getting more annoyed with every passing season as I never wanted as a sprinter :/ )
I'm a fan of giving Martin his old stats back btw
Croatia14 wrote:
World Cup
Carbon Sports disagrees to the following: "The normal rankings are usually only for teams/riders interesting that focus on stage races. So far every time a stage racer won here. With the World Cup the gap in budget could be closed for teams focusing on classics."
Hehe 
I don't. I focus a lot on stage races. Just take a look at my GT squads this season. I had Kittel for the Giro, Sagan for the Tour and Betancur for the Vuelta. All 3 of them are in the top 21 riders by AVG
And back when I won the Prestige Ranking (ICL14) I even had two proper stage racers in Henao and König.
Nuff said.
A Big Thank You To All MG Reporters! |
| |
|
|
| PeterRyder |
Posted on 09-02-2017 16:12
|
Domestique
Posts: 540
Joined: 16-04-2014
PCM$: 200.00
|
May I use my talent focus to sign a rider? Or is it necessary for anything else?
|
| |
|
|
| PeterRyder |
Posted on 14-02-2017 11:56
|
Domestique
Posts: 540
Joined: 16-04-2014
PCM$: 200.00
|
PeterRyder wrote:
May I use my talent focus to sign a rider? Or is it necessary for anything else?
I need an answer so I can deliver my scouting round.
|
| |
|
|
| Croatia14 |
Posted on 14-02-2017 12:10
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 9099
Joined: 13-03-2013
PCM$: 2100.00
|
you can use half of your talent focus for that - the other half needs to be done for scouting potential or stats |
| |
|
|
| knockout |
Posted on 14-02-2017 17:00
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7735
Joined: 21-12-2010
PCM$: 400.00
|
knockout wrote:
@Bikex: Can we delay this round of scouting until we know how we adjust the minimum wages of our riders? It's difficult to estimate the need/budget for young riders if you cannot estimate how much your team will demand...
Bump
A Big Thank You To All MG Reporters! |
| |
|
|
| Bikex |
Posted on 16-02-2017 10:05
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7255
Joined: 25-08-2012
PCM$: 600.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
I massively disagree with Croatia there, I did not raise several young riders only to see them passed by others because the new ones will have better development.
But to be clear, let's make a simplified example. Let's say cobble training is +8 cobble and +2 stamina. Would you change the training to say +6 cobble and +4 stamina or +8 cobble and +4 stamina? So add extra training or just change the distribution?
Any other stat development would stay the same, so it would be more like your second example. However I won't change the numbers in the trainingstable, but just add a multiplicator in the formulas.
@Croatia: you are right the stat borders wouldn't change, but the way the development is designed a 25year old rider wouldn't be able to reach his full potential if the stats aren't improved in retrospect.
@knockout: I don't have much time to think about the min wage formula at the moment but maybe I can post an idea before the scouting deadline.
If Martin gets his old stats back maybe Sagan should also get his?
Still no deadline for round 2 of scouting as I need to get through my exams first. |
| |
|
|
| Croatia14 |
Posted on 16-02-2017 11:36
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 9099
Joined: 13-03-2013
PCM$: 2100.00
|
"If Martin gets his old stats back maybe Sagan should also get his?" - well, if there hasn't been a too big compensation for the stat decrease I'd say yes
To the discussion of stats: well, that is an issue indeed then - If you say that it's really needed then do it, still massively breaks my long term plans...especially in terms of the signed riders - so I'd still favour a solution without changing something in retroperspect, to not affect long term plans: I mean, I did plenty of analyses and did let guys go because I thought that they'll never reach fully potential (Vanmarcke trade ). So still a wrong decision to affect that for the past, but a great idea for the present & future. |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 16-02-2017 11:42
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
Croatia14 wrote:
So still a wrong decision to affect that for the past, but a great idea for the present & future.
Well unfortunately it will effect the past no matter what, even if it's a non-direct effect. Making future riders "better" automatically makes pre-existing riders "worse". So any change will impact existing riders.
In the same way a rankings change for the future could devalue certain riders. Or various other changes will all impact on pre-existing aspects of the game and previous plans.
A good manager finds ways to adapt and re-plan going forwards
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
