I thought it may be a good idea to start this thread already as the season starts so that we can collect as soon as something comes to our mind. I'd propose that we also collect the key ideas of the proposals and the proposer in this post.
sammyt93 wrote:
If we have Avoid Relegation Goal for PT and top 15 goal in a 18 Team CT division then an Avoid relegation goal for PCT should also exist.
Even if we just raise all PCT Team standing goals by 1 point and have 1 more minimum goal point needed I feel it would make sense to add it in.
Top 20 isn't far off avoid relegation for PCT, so option here would more be to change that.
CT team standings goals should perhaps be reconsidered, given the gradual decline in division size.
Certainly would want to avoid changing the min/max boundaries, and more focus on balancing of scales within.
I think we should extend the transfer by a few days. i know the final days of transfers used to be pretty boring and calm for most managers when there were 2 week long windows but we have once again seen several big talents like Kämna or Aranburu being short one overbid from the silent bidding.
Why?
1. It doesnt really delay the start of the season a lot. teams that are finished early can start planning their season already. The time can be saved at other places like planning deadlines etc
2. Late min wage overbids and similar actions can extend FA auctions a lot and so managers sometimes managers are at barely any fault for big wage riders running close to the end of transfers. I think those should still have a bit more time to restructure the rest of the roster to fit those riders in etc and even if only 10% of managers are still looking for changes at the end of transfers, so what?
3. The short transfer window is exploitable by CT and PCT teams in talent auctions. BBL got both Aranburu and Kämna for high wages really late in transfers. PT teams need to loan those out to develop them from level 1, otherwise the signings make absolutely no sense for them. By dragging out the auctions to the point where there would be a silent auction if another team overbids, the (p)ct team can effectively eliminate PT teams from these auctions because at that point it is impossible to loan him out. And one cannot blame the involved managers for not being decisive enough in the bidding because i doubt anyone expected Kämna to go close to 280k either.
Note: I took BBL as an example because he was in two such auctions. I absolutely dont want to suggest he deliberately delayed those auctions. In fact, everyone who has followed his transfer season knows that he only went after those once every other plan failed.
I dont think it has happened previously but i think that is a loophole that we should close before it happens because it makes sense for pct teams to use it after a certain point.
I think we should extend the transfer by a few days. i know the final days of transfers used to be pretty boring and calm for most managers when there were 2 week long windows but we have once again seen several big talents like Kämna or Aranburu being short one overbid from the silent bidding.
Why?
1. It doesnt really delay the start of the season a lot. teams that are finished early can start planning their season already. The time can be saved at other places like planning deadlines etc
2. Late min wage overbids and similar actions can extend FA auctions a lot and so managers sometimes managers are at barely any fault for big wage riders running close to the end of transfers. I think those should still have a bit more time to restructure the rest of the roster to fit those riders in etc and even if only 10% of managers are still looking for changes at the end of transfers, so what?
3. The short transfer window is exploitable by CT and PCT teams in talent auctions. BBL got both Aranburu and Kämna for high wages really late in transfers. PT teams need to loan those out to develop them from level 1, otherwise the signings make absolutely no sense for them. By dragging out the auctions to the point where there would be a silent auction if another team overbids, the (p)ct team can effectively eliminate PT teams from these auctions because at that point it is impossible to loan him out. And one cannot blame the involved managers for not being decisive enough in the bidding because i doubt anyone expected Kämna to go close to 280k either.
Note: I took BBL as an example because he was in two such auctions. I absolutely dont want to suggest he deliberately delayed those auctions. In fact, everyone who has followed his transfer season knows that he only went after those once every other plan failed.
I dont think it has happened previously but i think that is a loophole that we should close before it happens because it makes sense for pct teams to use it after a certain point.
I agree 100%.
I definitely can see how that loophole is created and how my bids exploited it. Surely I bid high on Kamna knowing I could get him 1->3 myself. Thinking about it now, my PT competitors, even if they could afford an overbid, would have been screwed then because they couldn't loan him out. I'm not sure a longer window totally closes this loophole, but it diminishes it.
A bigger reason to go back to two weeks is what made me make moves like that to begin with - a longer window encourages more selling and risk taking. When we moved to the ten day window from two weeks, the reason was that very little activity occurred in the final days. However, the DB and markets were much different then. The last couple of years, we've seen transfers, especially for money, go down considerably. Far fewer sellers and far fewer opportunities.
In turn, fewer sellers and a non-existent cash market means teams can't change their plans and starts selling halfway through the transfer season, because they can't count on flipping that money for another leader, as they aren't available. It's a vicious cycle.
Because of my position as a desperate and frantic buyer, I contacted a lot of people who were both actively selling and not actively selling in the second half of the window. What I found is that a good number of teams were willing to part ways with certain assets and change their look, but they were afraid there wasn't enough time to find a way to use that money. This is a result of the market primarily, as well as my earlier failures, but the shorter window didn't help. Surely more managers could have been contacted and convinced to buy/sell if there was more time, just like I got some people to consider selling. But as it was, many of the big players kind of shut down by mid week and were afraid to act, lest they sell someone without being able to obtain a replacement.
Obviously, I'd be lying if I said that having more deals and movement wouldn't have helped me personally, but I think it would also help the game overall. If trends from this year continue, we're headed for a situation where the only deals that get done are swaps between established leaders, especially as DB deflation takes shape. I think it would be more fun to keep those later, riskier moves in the game.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy
Restarting this thread in order to help the planning process for next season. We welcome any suggestions you may have, with the current ideas part of the planning:
PCM 18 and AI
The current plan is to continue to use PCM 18 for next season, unless there is a benefit to be gained from adopting PCM 19. We will look at how we can design profiles so that hill stages don't disadvantage pure puncheurs too greatly, although we anticipate that managers will likely adapt to the changed Mountain/Hill AI when building their teams anyway.
OVL Calculation
We will consider whether the calculation should be changed for high HIL/low MO riders to lessen their disadvantage, although any change is likely to be small. Additionally, we will consider other changes to the formula where disadvantages have been identified.
Stat Gain Categories
Ideas for new stat gain categories would be welcomed. We can't promise that changes will be made, but we would like to bring as much variety to rider development as possible so workable suggestions will definitely be considered in depth.
More planning is starting currently in the MG Support forum, and we hope to reach the off-season at some point in early to mid-August. Looking forward to hearing your suggestions and ideas!
Although it probably wouldn't be a very popular option with the AI changes, I'm still waiting for the stat gain category based on stage racer with simply MO and HIL switched that we keep talking about for a few years now.
Sprinters & Grand Tours
As a sprint focused team, GT's are almost worthless to me vs focusing on more shorter races.
Idea 1: Change Points Jersey Scales
Quite simple really, change the points scales for the Points Jersey to better suit sprinters vs GC favorites. Knowing that unless i can dominate all sprint stages, or offer a Demare style HL/SP combo, i am going to massively struggle to win the Points jersey. And the Points jersey is the only real reason to send a sprinter to a GT.
Idea 2: Either remove OTL, or Change RD cost for Sprinters to attend
If you're a climber, puncher or GC rider you will 100% finish because you cannot crash. This applies toshorter stage races too. If you are a sprinter with a low MO, you cannot guarantee this finish but are still paying the same RD cost. This is rather unfair in my eyes!
But TMM, why don't you just send a better MO sprinter or train them up? Well for the first reason i mentioned, my sprinters would still be better off racing more classics or short stage races where they are more likely to contest Points/Youth/GC classifications and get a far superior PPRD result.
I know we probably can't remove the OTL part from the game, but cutting RD cost for sprinters would help balance this. Maybe 15-18 days instead of 21 (i've not really though detail on the numbers yet), or if a rider does go OTL you can get some sort of compensation for next season?
These ideas are both offered to try and ecourage more sprinters to the GT's so we see something more like IRL with the top guys coming to the Tour. They all want the Green Jersey, but in the MG it's just not worth it for a sprinter.
DubbelDekker wrote:
I'd like a Fighterv2 where we remove the TT, Prologue and Cobble points and add some Mountain. And move some of the Stamina into Recovery.
Basically to create GT breakaway riders.
I think Fighter in general should just be buffed a bit. We could have a lot of well rounded, interesting domestique types, but fighter very rarely justifies sacrificing a main stat or two for that versatility. This could also help with stat inflation because those versatile riders will have less main stats - meaning they will be solid domestique/breakaway types instead of lousy tertiary leaders that just crowd the field.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy
I actually feel that under the new engine, many of these options need a revamp, or simply a buff to give at least a little in other base stats and help create more rounded riders. This won't suddenly make them strong enough to win where they shouldn't, but it will keep them in races they should be able to perform.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the typical TT rider with a good hill stat extremely rare in the MG at this point and no real talents to really shine through. I mean we can just make sure there's not many of those type of races, but personally race like those are really interesting to watch and good entertainment
sgdanny wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the typical TT rider with a good hill stat extremely rare in the MG at this point and no real talents to really shine through. I mean we can just make sure there's not many of those type of races, but personally race like those are really interesting to watch and good entertainment
Not sure hill/TT will really be much of a thing going forward because it seems mountain plays more of a role in "hilly" TT's than hill. If I had to guess I'd say it's because in a TT heartrates are not going to go up enough that often for hill to matter. At least from what I've seen.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy
cio93 wrote:
Although it probably wouldn't be a very popular option with the AI changes, I'm still waiting for the stat gain category based on stage racer with simply MO and HIL switched that we keep talking about for a few years now.
I've been thinking a similar thing, and have tested out what it would look like in practice for a few riders. The thing to note is that it would give +9 HIL to pot 5 riders from Level 1, whereas currently they're limited to +8 HIL.
Fl
Mo
Hil
TT
Sta
Res
Rec
Cob
Sp
Acc
Ftr
Dh
Prl
Setiawa
Andreas Odie Purnama
68
67
78
76
76
72
72
57
61
68
75
66
76
Ponce
Joel
69
71
77
76
72
73
76
64
62
67
69
69
74
Mano
Yuttana
71
70
77
79
72
73
74
62
60
66
69
72
77
Hänninen
Jaako
70
73
77
76
74
75
79
55
63
70
69
67
76
Storer
Michael
71
72
79
75
75
74
74
58
63
68
69
66
78
Yates
Joel
69
67
77
75
75
75
75
63
61
65
69
68
75
Pietikäinen
Sauli
68
66
75
75
73
74
75
58
59
67
69
66
75
Ganna
Filippo
72
71
75
80
74
79
71
66
69
73
72
74
82
Kiriakidis
Ioannidis
68
72
75
76
72
73
74
62
63
71
70
73
76
Yamamoto
Masaki
70
71
76
76
68
69
70
57
67
70
68
67
74
Dunbar
Eddie
69
75
78
77
74
77
78
58
60
68
62
71
77
Daniel
Gregory
74
67
75
76
75
74
72
55
56
69
72
69
75
Oliveira
Ivo
69
70
75
78
76
72
67
61
70
73
67
68
78
Gidich
Yevgeniy
73
75
80
76
79
78
74
55
62
73
74
67
77
Kaczmarek
Jakub
72
67
76
75
74
75
72
69
63
69
68
67
76
Cavagna
Remi
76
65
76
76
75
74
73
71
73
71
60
63
76
The question I would then ask, looking at those riders, is whether they would be too strong if we added Hilly Stage Race training in the suggested format?
DubbelDekker wrote:
I'd like a Fighterv2 where we remove the TT, Prologue and Cobble points and add some Mountain. And move some of the Stamina into Recovery.
Basically to create GT breakaway riders.
Is that not what Climber V1 does now? We could look at adjusting Fighter for sure, but don't know if we'd be adding anything different if we changed it like that.
Edited by jph27 on 03-06-2020 20:34
HILL plays almost no role in a TT at this point in the game, simply due to how the mechanics work (HILL is red bar effort, which you don't really use in a TT). Hill really just needs to be viewed as attacking ability up a climb (any climb), similar to how the old ACC was viewed.
Somebody already posted about the HI stage racer so I'll add my other two normal suggestions for development paths:
Classics Type Change
The option of a classics rider is very appealing to many but the training type isn't to me and others because of one thing in particular: the low ACC gains. The acceleration stat is key in both cobbled and hilly races and it just makes the classics type unfairly weak - though the effect isn't as awful, though still bad imo, with PCM18. I think with the absence here of MON/SPR as secondary stats for these riders - especially in PCM18 where MON means more for puncheurs - it's only fair they have a good acceleration stat to make them competitive.
Let's take a look at a level one Kasperkiewicz for example:
Last
First
FLA
MON
HIL
TT
STA
RES
REC
COB
SPR
ACC
FTR
DH
PRL
Kaspa
Prem
69
66
70
70
68
70
67
72
56
65
76
67
72
Pretty clearly a cobbler with skills in the hills, and I think that trek (or whoever ended up getting him) should get the choice of a slightly more hybrid rider vs a pure cobblist (still good uphill). He's obviously not the punchiest tool in the shed but I think the hybrid option deserves to be punchier than this:
Last
First
FLA
MON
HIL
TT
STA
RES
REC
COB
SPR
ACC
FTR
DH
PRL
Kaspa
Prem
76
66
75
70
75
75
70
80
56
66
84
70
72
For reference his cobbles training, which gives equal ACC:
Last
First
FLA
MON
HIL
TT
STA
RES
REC
COB
SPR
ACC
FTR
DH
PRL
Kaspa
Prem
76
66
73
70
76
77
70
81
63
66
77
68
72
I would want a slight decrease in COB gains for pot 6/7 (as he only has one difference) and fighter gains to return the increase in acceleration - that would make sense and make sure classics doesn't become the clear better option for any cobbler with good hill or acc at level 1 - if Kasperkiewicz had 70-73ACC with that first training, but only 79 vs 81 COB, that gives food for thought and makes both options viable, neither overpowered. Since it is already weaker in backups in fact I think it may still be weaker than cobbles here, given the small difference in HIL. Plus the sprint upgrades, so maybe the COB is fine. I don't know
1 gain for pot 5-7 and none in general is ridiculous for a classics rider! Think of guys like GVA, VDP, Benoot, Valgren, Gilbert, etc. in real life and in real PCM DBs, they have acceleration to be competitive in the hilly stuff especially but also as a skill in the cobbled classics. Kaspa would have never been able to put his hill ability to use really had he been trained classics and that goes for most that don't start with 70+ACC (and all of them, I presume, end up being trained one way as they clearly have top class potential ) As said before, the effect may be lessened in PCM18 (maybe a study of results this year as has already been happening in the PCM18 AI thread would show by how much) but they still don't get enough in my eyes to make this a viable option for leaders or for fighters - maybe it is a bit for domestiques for guys who want them all-around.
Fighter Type Upgrade
I completely understand that the flat stat is the main stat for fighters. But the fact that they gain not much in SPR, COB and HIL is an injustice in my eyes. I know I talk about him a lot but a good example is my rider Novardianto when he was level 2:
Last
First
FLA
MON
HIL
TT
STA
RES
REC
COB
SPR
ACC
FTR
DH
PRL
Novardianto
Jamalidin
72
61
68
68
69
74
71
69
67
75
74
68
71
He currently has a great (expect FL is too high...) skillset for CT breaks with decent skills on different terrains and in a sprint. Currently the best way for him to be trained to become an alright P(C)T level barodeur is Track-SPR, to give him flat skills, a decent sprint, good flat and a nice acc. But the fact is he'll never be a good to great barodeur because the fighter type, which is absolutely what he needs, offers him no weapons in his arsenal. Every properly solid breakaway specialist should either be multifaceted with low 70s stats in cob/hi/spr or really good in one terrain - like a KoM hunter with mid 70s MON and high acc/ftr (which I agree is what CV1, possibly with better FTR, should fill rather than a second fighter class). Classics is not an option for breakaways even with sacrificing sprint as it gives no acc (above). Currently track-spr (which he is being trained turns him into a good flat rider and domestique:
Last
First
FLA
MON
HIL
TT
STA
RES
REC
COB
SPR
ACC
FTR
DH
PRL
Novardianto
Jamalidin
76
61
68
68
70
78
74
69
73
79
74
68
75
Thanks to his current skillset but doesn't do him justice as an all-around baroudeur - he doesn't even get to have a high 70s fighter stat as he should for a good baroudeur. I get he isn't destined to be one of the best, given he is pot2, but surely (even sacrificing RES and SPR slightly) he deserves something like this:
Last
First
FLA
MON
HIL
TT
STA
RES
REC
COB
SPR
ACC
FTR
DH
PRL
Novardianto
Jamalidin
76
61
71
68
72
77
72
71
70
79
78
69
71
That is the fighter training for him, with two more points on hill, cobbles and sprint. I would give more but he's a pot 2 so any more could be making the category kinda OP, and he shouldn't be a top tier fighter with pot 2, and useful for leaders. I would also consider adding some MON at least but then it really could become an OP category for training lvl1 major talents to become all-around gods. With these stats he's not going to win anything in any level from the favourite's group but becomes a solid baroudeur without being one of the best - I doubt in anything but FLA, RES, and ACC he'd be the best in whichever breakaway he joined as this would (hopefully) be in PCT or PT for his career.
Obviously this change won't affect Jams at all as he is done developing after this season, so this is certainly not me being upset one of my riders isn't going to be as good as I want him to be.
I am not sure exactly what the upgrades here would look like - that'd be for the people making these to decide. But I think none of these are rocking the boat, and improve the system without being anywhere near overpowered.
In general PCM will need riders with better MO of all types, to get a stronger pack and reduce the number of riders to abandon. As mountain will play into (almost) any stage.
2 > 3, 3>4, 4 > Max
All types of development all levels MO+1 (+3 MO), unless of course they already get more, this will reduce the need to go mountain on a rider, unless you actually want to make a climber, getting more varied lower level riders.
Tamijo wrote:
In general PCM will need riders with better MO of all types, to get a stronger pack and reduce the number of riders to abandon. As mountain will play into (almost) any stage.
2 > 3, 3>4, 4 > Max
All types of development all levels MO+1 (+3 MO), unless of course they already get more, this will reduce the need to go mountain on a rider, unless you actually want to make a climber, getting more varied lower level riders.
The same could really be said for Flat as well... I think that is the biggest thing plaguing sprints right now as well, too many bad flats riders, really struggle to catch up to breakaways when they should.
DubbelDekker wrote:
I'd like a Fighterv2 where we remove the TT, Prologue and Cobble points and add some Mountain. And move some of the Stamina into Recovery.
Basically to create GT breakaway riders.
Is that not what Climber V1 does now? We could look at adjusting Fighter for sure, but don't know if we'd be adding anything different if we changed it like that.
It is close to what Climberv1 does, but the key difference is that Climberv1 gives hardly any Flat. I'd like a fighter training type that gives a moderate amount of both Flat and Mountain.
I will look into stat gain stuff as well.
But one point must be kept in mind. For special riders, which breakaway riders clearly are, there might not be a single stat gain training but a combination of 2-3.
e.g. a combination of mo/flat is wanted, than a combination of climber v1, stage racer, hill, fighter, classics could be used from level 1 to level 4 to actually reach that kind of rider.
I will test a few new options with mountain and flat in one training option, but not sure, this will work out better really.
