|
2020-2021 Changes Discussion Thread
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 15-06-2021 15:53
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
SotD wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
SotD wrote:
Maybe we should look at the NC route decider. I would like to suggest that a route can’t be used 3/5 seasons.
So if we have a nation that always goes between Hill and mountain, the 5th year had to shuffle:
1. Hill
2. Mountain
3. Hill
4. Mountain
5. Flat
As a manager with interest in several small nations and limited rider pools, this is something i would not like!
Having the ability to keep NC's relevant to the available riders is a good thing, even if that means only using two on repeat.
There is the self-interest element, but that's hand-in-hand with having a democratic vote. And if 51% of managers from a bigger nation agree over 5 years to repeat the NC's then i'm happy with that.
If we were to fiddle with the democratic voting system, i'd rather see a simple 5-year rotation brought in instead. Top of the alphabet gets flat, next hill etc all the way down. Next season we just rotate. This would have a more effective way to open up NC's to most possible winners over a riders time under contract. (not saying we do this, i much prefer the current system, but if we want to force variety we might as well go all in)
Your points are basically why I want to implement the rule. To avoid a manager having monopoly on which rider is going to be NC.
If only one manager is picking, why does it matter if they go back and forth between two routes? I basically do this to try and get the NC onto a visible rider so hoyle's awesome unique NC's can have the best chance of being seen in reports. Not much fun to see it forced to a stagiere who might not even get a contract and who certainly won't make a report screenshot.
For the first few years in the game SN allowed me to pick which riders teamed-up for the Bulgarian NC's. He basically allowed me to hand pick the winner. But that's part of the reward of being the sole supporter of a nation!
And if two managers are agreeing on a vote, then it's by definition not a monopoly and isn't an issue. And if we have 5 managers going between two routes it's even less of an issue.
I just can't see why this would need changing to say 4 years of monopoly are good, 5 is just too many.
|
| |
|
|
| Fabianski |
Posted on 15-06-2021 16:38
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4700
Joined: 29-09-2018
PCM$: 185.00
|
I absolutely agree with Valverde and TMM. If only one manager cares about a given country, then why shouldn't he get the NC? One could even argue that the MG system isn't fair; I could basically try to promote riders of a given country, but all other managers could agree on picking an NC course that doesn't fit any of them, just to keep me from winning the NC.
I think the system we have right now is good in a vast majority of cases. The only thing we could do is to pick the least recently used terrain in case of a draw, but maybe that's already done (don't know if that case is explicitely stated somewhere).
|
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 15-06-2021 16:40
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16451
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10538.70
|
Of all is the issues with MG, I just don't think NC route selection is one of them to be honest.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 15-06-2021 18:03
|
World Champion
Posts: 12201
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
@TMM
If only one manager is picking isn’t he sure to win no matter the route?
I just feel like it doesn’t make sense that I should decide which Greek rider get’s to wear the jersey next season.
But it seems only I feel that way, so let’s just let it pass :-)
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 29-06-2021 10:32
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22247
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
V4: https://pcmdaily....st_V4.xlsx
There have been lots of work into the OVL stat, which is potentially a final one now but not yet guaranteed. Alongside the performance ratio addition, which can control wage demands a bit according to over- and underperformances, the OVL value needed to be looked at as well as the last change made some bigger changes for specific rider types (e.g. mo/hi hybrids), which were too extreme, in especially now where the hybrids stages became less due to looking carefully on the stage design.
On a first view, some OVL changes might look too big or too low but then you might also need to check between similar riders as they might go up or down similar.
It also changed the order slightly here and there for the terrains and the order is a lot closer to how riders perform in PCM, which I think is an improvement.
In short and probably by far not all changes I made, but the ones I still know. 
- Herklotz is the new best rider but a bit ahead of Phinney, then Madrazo and Lecuisinier. Think, this is pretty fair and in especially Herklotz was far too low seeing the performance and previous OVL. Sorry cio, but I think everyone agrees, that Herklotz is the strongest rider in the MG.
- Pure time trialists which are top class are going up quite a bit. This is due to time trialists, once being regular top5`s and there are specific races for those in all divisions, e.g. Würtz, Zmorka, Fiedler... are good scorers but were far behind in OVL in comparison to all other terrains. It doesn`t impact the regular time trialists though.
- Mo/Hi Hybrids are reduced again. Higher than their 2017/18 value most of the times, but lower than their 2019/20 values, where it was heavily increased.
- General stat balance changes for different terrains, which sort the riders a lot better imo. e.g. high flat and high acc is valued a lot more as those riders perform the best, both on hills or sprints basically, while it`s not as big for climbers as it was with PCM15
- I am pretty sure most of you will find riders, they think are now better and some others where you think, it might be too high or low now. But in comparison to other similar riders, I think in total it`s an improvement to the old OVL.
- If you really find a clear mistake, e.g. last year`s MAL/Beltran issue, please say so. For most I think the clear mistakes are gone and those more extreme cases then an be argued and explained. (I know, you might think about Gaviria for example...as his performance is far from his OVL and he got upped even. But this is also for some other reasons I think, such as riding in PCT but stat wise the OVL is fine I think and then a case for the wage performance ratio.
Edited by roturn on 29-06-2021 15:59
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 29-06-2021 11:11
|
World Champion
Posts: 14591
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9200.00
|
Yeah, here I come complaining about Gaviria again But he's the only guy at the top who went up instead of down in AVG. He's now the 4th best sprinter based on AVG, but at 81 sprint he's not going to beat the 84/83 SPR guys behind him.
Other than that, Verhelst went up quite a bit which I find strange as he doesn't fall into any of the categories that changed.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| Bikex |
Posted on 29-06-2021 11:21
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7269
Joined: 25-08-2012
PCM$: 600.00
|
I know a lot of thought went into this, but I have to say on the first impression I don't like the new OVL at all. Not sure if I have some time to look at it better in the next days but looking at my team I'd be kind of upset if I had to go into renewals with these OVL.
Darbinyan and Boonratanathanakorn, two riders who are helpers at best and score only very few points on PT level got bumped by ~1.5 which I don't see as justified. There is no way Boonratanathanakorn should be at 74,59 which would mean he can't be re-signed on base wage. Viviani, Marzuki and Leung are similarly getting too big increases in my opinion. They are good riders, but with their new OVL they. would become too expensive for sure. Even Reis' new OVL is 0.5 higher now, when with his old one he was probably already the worst performing rider in the game looking at his OVL.
On the other hand I'm very surprised that Quita's OVL got lowered by 0.72 when I would say he already had a rather low OVL.
I feel like the old OVL was not too bad. The only big problem imo was the overrating of some MO/HI hybrid riders. I don't understand why now there have too be so extreme changes implemented that will lead to new errors, instead of only fixing the (minor) flaws that were there with the old OVL. |
| |
|
|
| Bikex |
Posted on 29-06-2021 11:39
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7269
Joined: 25-08-2012
PCM$: 600.00
|
Compare Darbinyan to Yoeri Havik. There seems to be something quite off.
I think the problem might be similar to what caused the issue with the climber hybrids last year. Havik is probably considered as a sprinter and Darbinyan as a cobbler. However Havik would have a much higher OVL if he was considered a cobbler. You can't group the riders into categories by one stat but just have to give them the category that gives them the highest OVL. |
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 29-06-2021 11:49
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22247
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Btw. a small change is still made post V2. Top sprinters in general move a bit up as they so far were reduced a lot, which makes them a very low terrain OVL at the top. Not going for leadouts mainly.
@Ollfardh: Acc was a lot more important than sprint on many stages. e.g. Reinhardt with his 78/84. This is likely a reason why Gaviria is upped a lot more than others. Plus on paper he looks too good in comparison to performance, where performance formula will hit I guess.
For sprinters in especially the performance will hit more regularly than for other terrains I guess as OVL to performance will be a lot more different as with climbers or puncheurs.
Some lower level riders go up here and there, probably in case the formulas identify them as alrounders, e.g. Malecki or other things. Or it was simply too low before for other reasons. No idea on Verhelst right now to be honest. |
| |
|
|
| jandal7 |
Posted on 29-06-2021 11:52
|
World Champion
Posts: 11406
Joined: 17-12-2014
PCM$: 1120.00
|
This will just come across as a bit moany on my team, will say that I don't understand OVL as well as many people do and have never been involved in the debate publicly and have also only looked at my team. Also on the whole I think it's a almost always reasonable reflection of my team  But there are some clear issues just from reading your post, not even debating whether they are justified or not.Tthe changes you describe sometimes seem to be opposite in my team:
Surprised Bennett came out of the MO/HI lowering with a hefty bump instead. Could be a tough one as he has a difference of 5 between his MO and his HI so may not be counted as that archetype by the system, even though when you look at his results in Pologne and Japan hill stages vs how he is in high mountain races he clearly is in practice.
Areruya also received an increase when MO/HI were supposed to decrease, which is less easy to see why as he's 77/77 and couldn't be argued to be any other type of rider.
It doesn`t impact the regular time trialists though.
So why is a generic 78TT guy in Morne van Niekerk up by 1.12? Can't just be the flat stat surely with such a rise.
Spoiler Also Bazhkou is maybe a bit high a jump (+1.00) but maybe he was undervalued before, would agree with the bump if it was still PCM15 but disagree given how PCM18 refuses to treat him as a leader at all. He's quite an individual case though I suppose.
Overall (ahaha) I think it looks quite reasonable just looking at my guys and the valuation there
Spoiler - Debesay probably a tad high but understand he's such an individual case and does match up with multiple groups being targeted for increases so it's never going to be perfect for him 
- Rowe and Houle deserved that decrease.
- Bester definitely deserved that increase.
- Bennett probably fits or is slightly over, surprised but not necessarily disagreeing, however if the rationale is that MO/HI guys should be lower then I believe he should be classified in that group as that's how PCM sees him.
- Areruya shouldn't get an increase according to the logic of the announcement post, nevermind the debate on if he's that good?
- MVN a wee bit high I think? Bazhkou maybe too.
- Schomber way too low seeing how goated he will be next year but I'll let him prove it to the world first
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
5x  x5
2x  x2
2x  x2 |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-12-2024 11:58
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 29-06-2021 11:55
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22247
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Bikex wrote:
Compare Darbinyan to Yoeri Havik. There seems to be something quite off.
I think the problem might be similar to what caused the issue with the climber hybrids last year. Havik is probably considered as a sprinter and Darbinyan as a cobbler. However Havik would have a much higher OVL if he was considered a cobbler. You can't group the riders into categories by one stat but just have to give them the category that gives them the highest OVL.
I admit the Darbinyan/Havik is weird. This is one reason why I make it public as likely I never have checked exactly this example.
And also would need to go further into the formula as you are right, that Havik is a sprinter and Darbinyan a cobbler but still this isn`t the real reason as the OVL is already going into more than that and not only going for that one category.
and fixed btw. found the error in the formula. |
| |
|
|
| quadsas |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:07
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2522
Joined: 18-01-2013
PCM$: 300.00
|
| Giorgi Nareklishvili | DK - SVA Zalgiris | PCT | 74 | 68 | 69 | 78 | 70 | 74 | 69 | 67 | 66 | 67 | 76 | 58 | 76 | 75,71 |
I understand the idea definitely behind this increase, but as it's been mentioned that pure TTers shouldn't get a big increase, but this guy is pretty much a pure TTer, maybe reduce the weight of mo/hil for TTers a little bit more
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:08
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22247
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
jandal7 wrote:
Surprised Bennett came out of the MO/HI lowering with a hefty bump instead. Could be a tough one as he has a difference of 5 between his MO and his HI so may not be counted as that archetype by the system, even though when you look at his results in Pologne and Japan hill stages vs how he is in high mountain races he clearly is in practice.
The hybrids that were changed last time, were mid level 70`s, e.g. 76/77 or 75/78. So Bennett never went into that upping last time.
Areruya also received an increase when MO/HI were supposed to decrease, which is less easy to see why as he's 77/77 and couldn't be argued to be any other type of rider.
Probably similar here. The hybrid formula is gone, not sure if his 77/77 were impacted last time, but if so, it got reduced a bit but still went up for other reasons. Or he wasn`t impacted at all last time and not getting such reduction this time.
It doesn`t impact the regular time trialists though.
So why is a generic 78TT guy in Morne van Niekerk up by 1.12? Can't just be the flat stat surely with such a rise.
78 still is decent, not absolutely regular. He might still be impacted a bit by it, plus being good on the flat, which likely highered a bit also.
Plus I have him on +0,12, so almost identical?? Either one of the few changes I just made, also had him wrong?
Spoiler Also Bazhkou is maybe a bit high a jump (+1.00) but maybe he was undervalued before, would agree with the bump if it was still PCM15 but disagree given how PCM18 refuses to treat him as a leader at all. He's quite an individual case though I suppose.
Same here. He is 0.00 with me, likely was teh same error then I fixed bikex rider with.
Overall (ahaha) I think it looks quite reasonable just looking at my guys and the valuation there
Spoiler - Debesay probably a tad high but understand he's such an individual case and does match up with multiple groups being targeted for increases so it's never going to be perfect for him
- Rowe and Houle deserved that decrease.
- Bester definitely deserved that increase.
- Bennett probably fits or is slightly over, surprised but not necessarily disagreeing, however if the rationale is that MO/HI guys should be lower then I believe he should be classified in that group as that's how PCM sees him.
Not all Mo/Hi goes lower as said above. Wsa maybe not 100% clear in my opening text.
- Areruya shouldn't get an increase according to the logic of the announcement post, nevermind the debate on if he's that good?
- MVN a wee bit high I think? Bazhkou maybe too.
- Schomber way too low seeing how goated he will be next year but I'll let him prove it to the world first |
| |
|
|
| quadsas |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:09
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2522
Joined: 18-01-2013
PCM$: 300.00
|
quadsas wrote:
| Giorgi Nareklishvili | DK - SVA Zalgiris | PCT | 74 | 68 | 69 | 78 | 70 | 74 | 69 | 67 | 66 | 67 | 76 | 58 | 76 | 75,71 |
I understand the idea definitely behind this increase, but as it's been mentioned that pure TTers shouldn't get a big increase, but this guy is pretty much a pure TTer, maybe reduce the weight of mo/hil for TTers a little bit more
| Aime De Gendt | DK - SVA Zalgiris | PT | 75 | 62 | 72 | 68 | 76 | 74 | 68 | 73 | 65 | 69 | 76 | 66 | 70 | 75,19 |
I fat fingered again, but this is just not right at all. This is a level 4 rider as well, not even maxed
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:11
|
World Champion
Posts: 12201
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
Yeah, here I come complaining about Gaviria again But he's the only guy at the top who went up instead of down in AVG. He's now the 4th best sprinter based on AVG, but at 81 sprint he's not going to beat the 84/83 SPR guys behind him.
Other than that, Verhelst went up quite a bit which I find strange as he doesn't fall into any of the categories that changed.
I must admit, that I have Gaviria as a top 5-10 sprinter looking at how the sprinters behave. Atleast at PT level - but it does seem like he perform horrible at PCT level.
The problem with a rider such as Gaviria is the mixture of crazy high ACC and then good stats in FL, HI and COB. He is pretty much Degenkolb just with reverse SPR and ACC (But better in general). So having the same OVL seems OK to me. Especially since the best sprinters (highest SPR) doesn't get the best results as they used to. It doesn't matter much anymore whether your sprinter have 82, 83 or 84.
If anything I would argue that the OVL of sprinters is a little bit too high considering how many points they usually rack up - but they do have a lot more flexibility in planning than fe. GC riders does.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:12
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22247
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Those 3 that already posted. Please download V3 in the post above.
It fixes all your main concerns as it`s the same issue for all of them and something I thought about when working on it but then forgetting to add afterwards yesterday. |
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:15
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22247
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
SotD wrote:
If anything I would argue that the OVL of sprinters is a little bit too high considering how many points they usually rack up - but they do have a lot more flexibility in planning than fe. GC riders does.
It was too low I think actually as basically all top riders got upped here and there but sprinters all reduced mainly. It`s fixed a bit in V3. Planning wise you might be right, but when going too low, and most of them got a reduction of -0,5 to -1 even, their race days will go up incredibly, which also isn`t ideal. This would just result in even more races, where all the best sprinters are and planning becomes even more unimportant.
For sprinters as said, the performance ratio will be most important to fix their wage in case of shit seasons. Will look into the formula as well to improve that one as well. |
| |
|
|
| DubbelDekker |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:44
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2645
Joined: 20-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Just to be sure; the new OVL's in this sheet are including a performance modifier based on the current season so far, right?
Could you please also give us a column with the "pure" new OVL that isn't touched by performance? It is very hard to judge the new stat based OVL algorithm if we don't know to which degree a change is caused by the algorithm itself or by a performance modifier.
Edited by DubbelDekker on 29-06-2021 12:49
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 29-06-2021 12:49
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22247
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
DubbelDekker wrote:
Just to be sure; the new OVL's in this sheet are including a performance modifier based on the current season so far, right?
And is the performance modifier only based on 2020, or do earlier seasons play a role too?
No. That`s 2 different things.
The OVL is without any performance. It just still gets rid of some formulas, which were added back then when still using PCM15, which were adjusted in the last 1-2 years but still not really correct. Plus it adjusts changes from the last OVL updates, which were not accurate or by now are no longer needed as stage design changed.
The performance stuff is for renewals only. If one of your riders heavily under or overperformed, the performance formula will "identify" this and make him ask for more or less than he normally would, which is kind of how renewals should work I guess.
I guess you ask for Malecki.
The increase is due to decent alrounders in general went up in some way, e.g. Van der Poel as well for me. This is due to them hard to get dropped (not only Giro related, but in general), being good on most terrains but have no 78+ stat or something, which avoids them to get a decent overall but their value is a lot higher than many similar riders which then lack in 1 or 2 terrains. |
| |
|
|
| cio93 |
Posted on 29-06-2021 13:12
|
World Champion
Posts: 10845
Joined: 29-10-2007
PCM$: 500.00
|
I think there's an inherent risk with an OVL overhaul coinciding with a game version change.
The change from V2 to V3 is appreciated over here, as I wasn't quite on board with paying Ganna around 200-250k next season.
I know there's no point in me arguing over anything Herklotz related, but would like some clarification in that regard.
Would this crazy OVL increase at least mean this new performance formula doesn't trigger for him on top of it?
I very much fear his wage skyrocketing beyond whatever little reason there is left in things involving him anyway if the renewals process considers him to be the best rider in the game AND an overperformer this season on top of that.
That would basically force me to keep training him to keep his points-per-wage ratio sustainable.
(besides seriously frightening me that I'll fail to renew him with no feedback between rounds and the chance to insult a rider nowadays)
And one more thing I've noticed:
Yikui Niu doesn't have a single main stat above 74 and yet gains 1,45 points to total 74,67OVL now.
I really don't think 76STA and 75REC should push him that far above his actual level, particularly considering we still don't know exactly how much these two stats affect in-game performance.
Janvier Hadi, the exact rider I let go last transfers since Niu can take over his role now, is at least as good an allrounder on paper with 74mo/tt/sp compared to 74mo/sp/acc, yet loses one point with this change to be at 72,03OVL now.
(also I'm not sure Arndt should be this high considering his lack of TT kills most of his GC ambitions, yes he's a great allrounder but that's still a major part of his skill profile, particularly since there are very few MO classics and giving him a shot in HIL classics turned out awful)
Edited by cio93 on 29-06-2021 13:18
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
