redordead wrote:


I don't really agree that the bottom rider is useless, both versions have slightly below average energy stats. But even the bottom one has great flat and acceleration along with a solid sprint and hill stat.

The top option is a very good rider, as it's not that often you get a rider with 78 flat and 70 hill as a combo along with the acceleration. I don't think it should be too "easy" to make a rider like that.

To make better all round riders it should be encouraged to use different stat gains to give them the necessary stats you want. For example to make a flat rider a better climber you can use Climberv1 to retain FT/AC and add MO/HI and in turn sacrifice a point or two in FL.

Sometimes I look at the fighter stat gain and think that the cobble gain is mostly useless. So maybe add another fighter gain that replaces CB with MO and maybe a few other adjustments. Or simply replace it entirely. But I don't think we should have it all in one stat gain.

redordead wrote:



To make better all round riders it should be encouraged to use different stat gains to give them the necessary stats you want. For example to make a flat rider a better climber you can use Climberv1 to retain FT/AC and add MO/HI and in turn sacrifice a point or two in FL.

quadsas wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to rework Fighter stat gains

roturn wrote:
Post Season DB: https://www.dropb...mlubbzyihb

Croatia14 wrote:
Comparing Davide Gabburo to both Mario Vogt and Coen Vermeltfoort makes me really question whether the changes to the average have gone into the right direction.

TheManxMissile wrote:
Seeing the various rider dev posts, it just reminds me how we are still facing years of inflation ahead. Barely anything coming in below a 77 at all.

I know we won't do a re-set, but i'm calling that we take an aggressive stance in the off-season. We need to pro-actively remove & reduce riders released or from teams that disband. And we need to commit to not increasing any single FA, unless we have also reduced two others by an equal amount (eg. a rider goes up from 65 to 75, we must drop two 75's to 65).

Probably too late for this year, but i'd also propose that for future years any new addition of a rider is balanced by a removal of a rider. This is in addition to some of the above mentioned cutting, to bring the overall DB size down and help releive the stats pressure on the mid-tier and lower-tier riders at a PCT/CT level.

As i see things only this active culling of the DB will allow us to tackle inflation in a time frame that actually benefits the game, and still allows us to keep adding new talents into the DB that can also become competitive.

baseballlover312 wrote:


Agreed. it was my understanding that jph's talent plan included culling or dramatically decreasing all or most of the current FA's. Was that ever confirmed or denied?

quadsas wrote:
I would like way more statgain options, as they would allow managers to make more varied riders, rather than every 69 mo rider at level 1 becoming 78 mo guy in the end.

TheManxMissile wrote:
And we need to commit to not increasing any single FA, unless we have also reduced two others by an equal amount (eg. a rider goes up from 65 to 75, we must drop two 75's to 65)

TheManxMissile wrote:
Seeing the various rider dev posts, it just reminds me how we are still facing years of inflation ahead. Barely anything coming in below a 77 at all.

I know we won't do a re-set, but i'm calling that we take an aggressive stance in the off-season. We need to pro-actively remove & reduce riders released or from teams that disband. And we need to commit to not increasing any single FA, unless we have also reduced two others by an equal amount (eg. a rider goes up from 65 to 75, we must drop two 75's to 65).

Probably too late for this year, but i'd also propose that for future years any new addition of a rider is balanced by a removal of a rider. This is in addition to some of the above mentioned cutting, to bring the overall DB size down and help releive the stats pressure on the mid-tier and lower-tier riders at a PCT/CT level.

As i see things only this active culling of the DB will allow us to tackle inflation in a time frame that actually benefits the game, and still allows us to keep adding new talents into the DB that can also become competitive.

roturn wrote:
As jph already said, some things are in plannings which aren`t even far off from TMM`s post.

- There won`t be any upped FA`s I think (not yet finalised and need to check over jph`s file still, but not really planning to), although I agree to knockout`s point, that in some cases, it even helps.
- Riders from the FA pool, which weren`t picked up recently, will be edited downwards or upped a level without stat gain. This doesn`t impact FAs post renewals or from disbanding teams (except those in the next point) as those FAs need to stay strong for promoted teams etc. to give them a chance to pick up leaer quality.
- Riders from disbanding teams not necessarily gain xp or stat increases but are getting older. Less stat increases in total a season this way.
- Many of those actually are already replaced by new rider additions, which always replace old or awful riders, the total rider list this way remains same.

- Other than that I still plan to add the new fighter stat gain replacing the old one. A little bit weaker as your suggestion in lower potentials 1-3/4 but basically the same. This obviously brings up more stat increases as before, but less in main stats. Reason for the lower potentials is that some riders which start with great stats are low in potential to avoid becoming 78+ but still being very all around from scratch already. e.g. Van der Poel. If having the fighter for low pot as well, those riders would still become a lot stronger than supposed.
- I also would love to have a lot more stat gains and lots of freedom there. Problem is, it`s already a huge task with the number of options right now. When doing a lot more options or even full freedom, it would take days/weeks for me to handle all the input plus likely taking even longer to get all responses.





BTW: You really should now send in your stat gain options! Otherwise there will be a punishment very soon as it stops me from moving on to the next part, which is all prepared already.

[url=https://pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=58168&pid=1396402#post_1396402]baseballlover312 wrote:
Talents losing stat gains in disbanding teams with absent managers also makes sense and should help with inflation. I'd feel bad doing it for all disbanding teams though. The few teams that openly announce their departure and stay active through the season should still get stat gains I think. It is a nice gesture to them that their dev guys live on, and maybe give them a reason to come check back. But for teams with completely absent management, stunted development makes total sense and I think it's a good plan.
Actually this exactly was the plan.

Also, if you haven't gotten your stat gains in by now, I think they should be forfeited or your team should already incur a penalty. I waited like a month to do mine, which I thought was pretty exorbitant at the time, and I felt bad. Yet, I still submitted it almost 3 months ago. We're going on 4 months since they've been out. Don't think there's any need to extend a deadline further imo.
Kind of agree here! Though with OVL formula being slightly changed in between and calendar/renewal file work taking place right now, it was not needed so far.
That said, reason for sending them out during the season was to normally avoid having any wait time and with the work being in the final parts, the responses must come immediately now as time was as you said easily enough.