|
2020 Organisation Update
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 11-08-2020 13:52
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
At this point, I'm down for whatever. A lot of guys won't make it through renewals for me anyway. After this year, at least I know a bit more or what to expect from this game, even if it took a relegation to figure it out.
I do think a couple of the suggested stat gains types could be expedited for next season. Maybe hold off on the new hybrid ones which can alter game balance - but the ones that are just slight improvements on underpowered options could be implemented easier imo.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| Fabianski |
Posted on 11-08-2020 14:30
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4670
Joined: 29-09-2018
PCM$: 185.00
|
I won't comment on OVL, given that I just finished my first year and don't know how it used to work.
Concerning the stat gains, I'd be in favor of a hilly stage racer profile. Or how could you get a Bobridge-like rider with the current stat gains (high hill, high TT)? Of course, training is required to get where he is, but with hill and TT combined you can't really get there. Or I just missed something, which could well be the case given my lack of experience 
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 11-08-2020 14:36
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Fabianski wrote:
I won't comment on OVL, given that I just finished my first year and don't know how it used to work.
Concerning the stat gains, I'd be in favor of a hilly stage racer profile. Or how could you get a Bobridge-like rider with the current stat gains (high hill, high TT)? Of course, training is required to get where he is, but with hill and TT combined you can't really get there. Or I just missed something, which could well be the case given my lack of experience
Obviously hard to do someone like him from scratch without training and with starter stats that are not too strong to take other options instead.
It still could be possible with e.g. stage racer stat gains depending on starter stats.
Or a combination over the 4 stat gains with Fabian, TT, hill, stage race.
But I agree, it is hard to make those kind of riders without more training, Bobridge actually also got lots of training in total to become that rider. |
| |
|
|
| DubbelDekker |
Posted on 11-08-2020 15:31
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2633
Joined: 20-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
roturn wrote:
Regarding an OVL change, which potentially could come, it would basically change the whole DB in between +1 to -2 in comparison to their old OVL.
In this test having a higher OVL would be riders with less acc, e.g. climbers that are doing better in PCM18 than with PCM15 such as Madrazo, Tenorio, Ratiy, Nibali and so on.
Being at the bottom of this list pure puncheurs with high acc such as Lutsenko/Mohoric but also riders such as Bobridge is impacted.
Sprinters in general go down a bit.
Do you think, such change would be the one needed?
Rider wise the kind of stageracer/climbers going up and the puncheurs going down make sense regarding the rankings.
Sprinters are always difficult but would work kind of decent as well this way.
- Some high ACC non-sprinters do have slightly inflated OVL's and that's something we can't fix with calendar / stage design. So that's definitely a good one to tweak. But it's a delicate balance, because riders like Herklotz, Taaramäe, Hagen, Phinney also have solid ACC and they all had a great season if you look at their points and OVL. Anything close to -2 OVL would be way too much, even for a case like Lutsenko.
- How much of an OVL drop pure puncheurs deserve depends on the amount of races that get added for them. A guy like Bobridge definitely needs some adjustment. Luckily he's affected by both the ACC as well as the pure puncheur buff. But so is Hagen...damn this is tricky.
- Madrazo does deserve a higher wage. He only finished 7th in the individual rankings though. +1 OVL would put him at number 2 in terms of OVL, right behind Taaramäe, and that's too much.
- Sprinters are indeed hard because their performance seems quite random. Some of them greatly under-performed in relation to their OVL, but a rider like Groenewegen did amazing. Dropping his OVL and wage would skew this even more, but on the other hand he might have a completely different season next year.
So all things considered I think your suggestions of what to change are fine, but I'd narrow the -2 to +1 range a bit.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 12-08-2020 08:48
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
I have made lots of changes to the OVL now and am not too unhappy with the outcome.
I tried to first keep a balance of the top riders having them as much in order as their strength in game, which due to the complexity is not always easy to find but balance should be alright.
With ACC being a lot less important as in PCM15, riders that got a high OVL due to their ACC are getting a reduction, while others with e.g. higher FL/RES are increased.
By saying this, the formulas are way more complex, so that there is no simply factor, meaning, whoever has a high RES/FL stat automatically goes up now.
Also there were some small adjustments regarding pure and hilly sprinters to bring those a bit more in balance.
And also, which is kind of impacted by that hill sprinter area as well is the pure sprinters vs climbers vs hybrids.
Examples:
- Pure climbers with lower acc often get an higher OVL as acc is not as important (e.g. Nibali, Ratiy)
- Pure puncheurs often get reduced a bit, while at the same time hybrids go up or remain the same. While the stage design should help as well to balance this, it was needed as there surely will also be stages, that in PCM15 had favoured the pure puncheurs, while in PCM18 it still is going to be a bit of an hybrid stage.
...probably couple more which are less strong, which I now forget.
In addition to this, the performance formula still comes into play as it makes a nice balance season for season with riders underperforming potentially accepting less. |
| |
|
|
| DubbelDekker |
Posted on 12-08-2020 09:26
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2633
Joined: 20-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Sounds good. I'm confident that these changes in combination with the various systems already in place will produce a nicely balanced 2020 season.
|
| |
|
|
| ivaneurope |
Posted on 12-08-2020 09:31
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2933
Joined: 09-05-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
I am not sure underperforming riders will accept less.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 14:25
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 12-08-2020 09:42
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Well. Obviously it`s about what you offer them as there is no limite to the max.
But in theory specific riders, that are defined by the new formula, definitely will be able to be offered less than without that formula. |
| |
|
|
| AbhishekLFC |
Posted on 12-08-2020 10:04
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 11677
Joined: 27-07-2015
PCM$: 1861.50
|
Think those OVL changes make sense. Thanks for looking into it
Still think under-performance is too subjective to be put into formula, but I'm willing to see how it plays out in this off-season.
|
| |
|
|
| redordead |
Posted on 12-08-2020 10:09
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4881
Joined: 18-10-2017
PCM$: 200.00
|
roturn wrote:
Well. Obviously it`s about what you offer them as there is no limite to the max.
But in theory specific riders, that are defined by the new formula, definitely will be able to be offered less than without that formula.
Does the underperformance formula effect just the offer the rider will accept or does it also lower the rider's initial demand?
"I am a cyclist, I may not be the best, but that is what I strive to be. I may never get there, but I will never quit trying." - Tadej Pogačar
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 12-08-2020 10:25
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
The formula should be very objective actually taking results/OVL/wage/FA etc. in.
Nothing coming from my side as subjective impressions as otherwise PT riders would have been in focus a lot more for example. |
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 12-08-2020 10:27
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
redordead wrote:
roturn wrote:
Well. Obviously it`s about what you offer them as there is no limite to the max.
But in theory specific riders, that are defined by the new formula, definitely will be able to be offered less than without that formula.
Does the underperformance formula effect just the offer the rider will accept or does it also lower the rider's initial demand?
Wanted to write this once the renewals thread is up.
It only impacts the accept offer.
The demand/request of the rider is unchanged and so can be close to the accept offer/can be quite a bit away from it and so even when being quite high, doesn`t necessarily mean anything. |
| |
|
|
| redordead |
Posted on 12-08-2020 10:32
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4881
Joined: 18-10-2017
PCM$: 200.00
|
roturn wrote:
redordead wrote:
roturn wrote:
Well. Obviously it`s about what you offer them as there is no limite to the max.
But in theory specific riders, that are defined by the new formula, definitely will be able to be offered less than without that formula.
Does the underperformance formula effect just the offer the rider will accept or does it also lower the rider's initial demand?
Wanted to write this once the renewals thread is up.
It only impacts the accept offer.
The demand/request of the rider is unchanged and so can be close to the accept offer/can be quite a bit away from it and so even when being quite high, doesn`t necessarily mean anything.
It's gonna be my first "real" renewals this time 
Sorry for jumping the gun on that question, but thanks for the answer |
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 12-08-2020 12:42
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
I wasn't gonna jump in, but I might as well.
I for one like the underperformance adjustments in renewals in addition to the OVL changes. The OVL changes do make sense, no argument there. But performance as a factor in what wage a rider can negotiate makes a ton of sense, and it covers all scenarios, especially ones that don't fit the OVL mold. I mean, if a rider doesn't perform one year, they won't make as much money the next. It's basically the most realistic thing there could be.
For instance, the OVL changes make sense for me with a guy like Juul-Jensen, who had been boosted by acceleration. They might be enoguh to cover his decline. They don't explain Kragh Andersen though. AKA had great flat and resistance, yet he had a much worse season in PCM 18. Without accounting for performance in wages, he'd actually be asking for a significant raise, which would no make sense.
So I see no problem with someone's performance affecting their wage demands. But maybe that's just cause my team's situation would benefit from it.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 12-08-2020 15:37
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
DubbelDekker wrote:
- Madrazo does deserve a higher wage. He only finished 7th in the individual rankings though. +1 OVL would put him at number 2 in terms of OVL, right behind Taaramäe, and that's too much.
With riders around Madrazo decrease actually, he could be up to no.1 in OVL next season being the only 85 climber left pre training!
Incredible amount of top riders decrease this season including:
Taaramae, Hagen, Spilak, Bewley, Pluchkin, Ponzi, Kritskiy!
Before decrease, indeed the others were stronger. Training will surely mix it up a bit again. |
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 12-08-2020 16:06
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
Will the new OVL take the increased importance of MO into account for all riders? Even if you fix if for the puncheurs, for the spinters and cobblers with a decent hill but extremely low MO stats it also made a visible impact this season.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 12-08-2020 16:40
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
All rider types are adjusted with the new OVL taking into account, which stats became less important and which are more important. |
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 14-08-2020 10:46
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Other than the OVL formulas, which are basically done now and can be presented in the pre renewals DB, it`s about waiting for the stat gain choices now to get to decreases/gains for renewals, which is by now prepared.
At the same time the calendar is slowly worked on, which then leads towards goals/budgets etc. and also new rider additions are then added for the transfers DB and most likely not already in the renewals DB.
So while some steps surely take some time on my/our side as well, the earlier everyone is sending back their choices, the earlier the next steps can come. |
| |
|
|
| Sykkel_Freak |
Posted on 14-08-2020 12:02
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2073
Joined: 11-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
As discussed last year, I hope deadlines will be used more actively this off-season so we can avoid the long hold-ups that we’ve sometimes seen. While it would be preferable not to have them, I think it’s been shown enough times that they are a necessary evil.
|
| |
|
|
| Fabianski |
Posted on 14-08-2020 12:05
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4670
Joined: 29-09-2018
PCM$: 185.00
|
Just an input on the deadline thing: As I struggled to see in which order things needed to be done last year, it'd be nice to have kind of a timetable for this, with the deadlines clearly visible once they're communicated. Especially as a newbie it's non-trivial to understand the order of actions to take.
|
| |
|
