Maybe we can put it to a vote in the off season. Personally I don't see how having crashes actually happening in the game changes the fundementals of the debate. Its literally the reason why this feature is turned on and exists, so that leaders are affected too.
"It’s a little bit scary when Contador attacks." - Tommy V
Ripley wrote:
Because dominox's PC is cursed we might have to talk about turning off crashes again.
I agree there has been quite a few crashes recently throwing out good riders out of contention. Even Komisarek got 3 weeks waste on Tour because he had a crash on stage 3 and later he only tried to finish basically on 2 stages.
On the other hand I can't change crash ratio (which is at 50%) mid season because... well, we got most of the season covered already. I agree partially with Shonak and we can have a vote off season about it. Of course it all depends what Bikex will have to say about it also. But from what I see recently, I'm more now into turning crashes off than leaving them at lower ratio. There are just surprisingly too many important riders crashing out in my races. And I'm not doing it on purpose!
Agree to put it to a vote later. Especially if that stuff that I seem to remember maybe got found in MG a couple of years ago about equipment affecting crash likelihood has any possible truth to it.
24/02/21 - kandesbunzler said “I don't drink famous people."
15/08/22 - SotD said "Your [jandal's] humour is overrated"
11/06/24 - knockout said "Winning is fine I guess. Truth be told this felt completely unimportant." [ICL] Santos-Euskadi | [PT] Xero Racing
IIRC crashed were eliminated from the MG after someone found out the way they were implemented in the game disadvantaged some teams (had something to do with equipment and random values which lasted the entire race, so some teams had multiple crashes in a race while others had none.)
I'm generally in favor of crashes being active as long as the implementation of crashing in the game is fair, but the discovery there was that Cyanide had some unchangeable game mechanic that didn't make crashing fair.
EDIT: This is the discussion I was talking about: EDIT: This is what I was talking about: https://pcmdaily....st_1279934
(MG was still using PCM 15 at the time I believe)
Its important for this discussion to remember that crashing is not an equal chance for all riders, this unfairness should be taken into account when deciding.
The post offers an explanation but roturn makes it very very clear that it is one of the interpretation of a cdb table. To me reads like a theory and is not proven at all, so please do not treat it as clear proof bc it is far from that.
"It’s a little bit scary when Contador attacks." - Tommy V
Okay, did some testing if difficulty change is affecting rider performance. And I got to few really interesting conclusions. Answer is really complicated - yes, and probably no.
I did test runs in two different one day races:
- Palm Classic for sprinters
- Course du Lac d'Annecy for mountain specialists
- 15 races simulated on normal
- 15 races simulated on extreme to see if there is any difference at all
- 12 top sprinters from 81 to 79 in sprint on startlist
- 10 top climbers from 82-79 in mountain on startlist
- I also removed best and worst performance from each rider. By that I mean if someone got for example: 1,1,2,2,4,6 in places, I removed 6th and one 1st place from counting. Therefore counted results would be 1,2,2,4.
In table in order: name, sprint stat, acc stat, average result, difficulty
In both runs 8 top 5 finishes - normal - 3 times 5th, 3 times 4th. On extreme 4 times 3rd, once 2nd. There is your difference. No counted wins on both occasions.
N. Bouhanni
81
81
3,23
normal
4,85
extreme
Main difference is that on normal it counted 4 wins. None on extreme. Also lowest counted place was 6th twice on normal... 4 times 7th on extreme.
M. Cavendish
81
81
5,46
normal
2,85
extreme
5 counted victories on extreme, none on normal.
M. Kittel
81
82
3,38
normal
2,77
extreme
5 counted victories on extreme, 2 on normal.
B. Coquard
80
82
3,69
normal
6,15
extreme
Much worse performance on extreme overall... but 3rd place... 5 times on extreme. On the other hand 6 times 2nd place on normal.
G. Nizzolo
80
78
12,54
normal
8,23
extreme
Definitely much better results. Only 3 top 10 counted finishes on normal... only 2 outside top 10 finishes on extreme. Too consistent over 15 races to not saying difficulty change didn't influence his performance.
A. Guardini
80
80
7,77
normal
8,08
extreme
Numbers quite similar, but results spread was a bit higher.
J. Alaphilippe
79
80
9,15
normal
10,62
extreme
Again very similar results, if you remove 2 17th positions from extreme runs.
C. Ewan
79
79
12,46
normal
10,00
extreme
Definitely better results.
L. Howard
79
78
19,54
normal
16,54
extreme
Average place says it all.
J. Degenkolb
79
80
7,23
normal
7,92
extreme
Except two or three a bit weaker results on extreme, quite similar.
Now climbers... I'll post picture because main results are simple... Everywhere worse average on extreme difficulty except Herklotz who had same average, and Bardet/Nibali who surprisingly had better results on average.
Shonak wrote:
The post offers an explanation but roturn makes it very very clear that it is one of the interpretation of a cdb table. To me reads like a theory and is not proven at all, so please do not treat it as clear proof bc it is far from that.
To be honest if there is a theory that there is a even a small chance that crashes are uneven from people who know what they are talking about, and it isn't 100% disproved, then I think that's worth eliminating crashes just for the risk that they may be coded to affect different teams differently. But that's a discussion for when the vote happens I suppose.
24/02/21 - kandesbunzler said “I don't drink famous people."
15/08/22 - SotD said "Your [jandal's] humour is overrated"
11/06/24 - knockout said "Winning is fine I guess. Truth be told this felt completely unimportant." [ICL] Santos-Euskadi | [PT] Xero Racing
About the difficulty: I wouldn't expect any difference in the results, it is applied equally to all riders. Hard (factor 1.025) simply adds +2 to all stats, extreme (1.05) +4. The latter only for stats 70+, below it's +3, so all it does is open a confusng gap between 69 and 70:
normal
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
extreme
69
70
71
72
74
75
76
77
About crashes: A discussion for next season, like everything in this thread. I don't find roturn's MG post that convincing, essentially the claim is that a random factor is applied as a race is loading and that determines who will crash, but as long as it's random it doesn't make a difference when the game decides this.
I'm just saying I would argue with the assumption that crashes are random. And I could argue that PCM is random enough without crashes, due to AI and daily form. And that the final standings will more accurately reflect our squad composition, transfers, season planning, etc, the stuff we actually do.
