As stat gains are decided right now, probably good to know that PCM22 is going to be used next year for the ManGame.
In especially the possibility to reduce the impact of daily form in both ways makes it a decent step.
In especially in secondary stats such as TT/PRL the daily impact was in a huge range, which didn`t make sense and led to random results. But also in mountains or sprints the big impact of daily form did lead to results, that are not always according to the OVL and wage of that rider.
Thanks for the info. Looking forward to have some PRL/TT randomness reduced, for sure - guess the range within which daily form is acceptable is still being tested?
Before deciding on the stat gains, I'd like to know if there are some known implications of the version change considering the stat matrix? At one point it was mentioned that energy stats - especially stamina - would have a bigger impact than now. Well, it would be a bigger impact than "not at all", but how much? Will those stats finally matter a bit, or can they still be pretty much ignored?
What about acceleration? Does it still not have any impact on attacks, but only for sprints? Is the Mo/Hi mechanism unchanged?
Sorry for asking all that stuff - and it's obvious that if there aren't any tests, there won't be answers - but if there are some important findings, I'd like to know about them.
Last but not least, huge thanks to the team working on the version change behind the scenes already!
As regards the daily form, it will either be +/- 2 or +/- 3. For the other points, think there are others who can answer better as I have only recently got started with PCM 22.
Sounds good, I defnitely wouldn't get rid of it entirely. I would even suggest a -2/+5 range (assuming it's still the case that the higher numbers are much more rare) so we can still have the surprise performances we all love without the favourites completely failing.
Ollfardh wrote:
Sounds good, I defnitely wouldn't get rid of it entirely. I would even suggest a -2/+5 range (assuming it's still the case that the higher numbers are much more rare) so we can still have the surprise performances we all love without the favourites completely failing.
While I'm OK with surprises, I think that especially for prologues and TTs we shouldn't go for +5, probably not even for +4. In those disciplines, the stat gain with great daily form is much higher than for Mo/Hi, meaning we could still see 65 Prl riders winning prologues. Which is what I personally really wouldn't like to see anymore.
Having different values for + and - could be interesting, though - a try with +4/-2 instead of +3/-3 might be worth it. Overperformances would be more likely, complete failures more unlikely. Although, as said before, I'm not sure it solves the issue with Prl/TT randomness.
ivaneurope wrote:
Guess my TTT dominance was finally put to an end. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted
You have a good TTT team which is doing well. It has nothing to do with randomness/daily form. If the new change is implemented and your TTT outfit remains, it would mean even more chance of you winning them.
Fabianski wrote:
Before deciding on the stat gains, I'd like to know if there are some known implications of the version change considering the stat matrix? At one point it was mentioned that energy stats - especially stamina - would have a bigger impact than now. Well, it would be a bigger impact than "not at all", but how much? Will those stats finally matter a bit, or can they still be pretty much ignored?
What about acceleration? Does it still not have any impact on attacks, but only for sprints? Is the Mo/Hi mechanism unchanged?
I can answer a few of these.
Stamina and resistance: First, it's important to note that both stamina and resistance only come into effect later in the race. This is not determined by length of race or anything (I think at one point or maybe even up to PCM20, stamina only came into effect after the 200km mark, this is no longer the case). Instead, it's about the green bar. How quickly that decreases is, as far as I can tell, determined by the main stats in the terrain that you're currently riding in. The lower the green bar, the more stamina and resistance affect two things:
Stamina now determines how quickly the yellow bar decreases. In that way, it is similar to how resistance worked so far. If two riders have the same stats as each other, but one has a higher stamina value, then that rider will be able to hold steady high-ish efforts - efforts between 65 and 85 - for longer (again, as long as the green bar has taken enough of a hit).
Resistance on the other hand is now responsible for the red bar, so efforts above 85. A rider with higher resistance empties the red bar slower, meaning they can attack longer, and the red bar regenerates quicker, meaning they can attack more often. This is a mechanic that didn't exist in this way before, at least I don't think so. At one point, acceleration also determined how quickly the red bar decreases, this is definitively not the case in PCM22.
Speaking of acceleration, it is not true that it only works for sprints. It's possible that I myself contributed to that misconception because that's what my earliest tests indicated. However, at that point I hadn't noticed that there's now a slider which regulates how intensely you want to attack. If that slider is at 0, then acceleration indeed doesn't really matter at all. But if you attack with more intensity, acceleration is actually pretty powerful. To illustrate using an example from a sprint (which I think is roughly equivalent to attacking with the highest intensity), when I let one rider with 80 sprint and 70 acceleration sprint against one with 70 sprint and 80 acceleration, the latter won because the initial burst was so strong that the 80 sprint guy couldn't catch up. I assume this is different when you compare 80/78 to 78/80, but I haven't tested that yet.
I also don't know if the AI uses different attacking intensities at various points, or if they for instance always attack with 50 intensity or something like that. But my impression is that acceleration stats do matter when AI races against AI.
Can't speak too much on the hill/mountain ratio. Just anecdotally, I recently played a career with a puncheur that ended up at 75 mountain, 82 hill and I was able to win the hilly versions of Lombardia but decisively failed on the mountaineous routes. Mountain stat definetely still helps in races like the Ardennes, but you could still perform well without a high mountain stat.
As for daily form, it is not possible to adjust the positive and negative values differently. You can only set the range, but it'll always be the same in both directions. However, because we're playing without random fitness, and therefore with fitness levels always at 100%, it's already skewed towards positive daily form.
For instance, at -3 daily form, a rider typically doesn't incur a malus on the main stat (i.e. mountain on a mountain stat) and around minus 2 to 4 on res/sta and secondary stats like flat. Even on just +1, riders already get a bonus of 3 on the main stats and 3-4 on sta/res. On +2, it can be a bonus of 3 or 4 on the main stats and +5 to 6 on sta/res stats, while on +3 that's up to plus 4 to 5 for the main stat and up to plus 8 for sta/res and plus ~3 for flat/dowhhill etc.
So, with a range of +-3, for two riders of identical stats on paper, the difference in main stats can go up to 5, while the difference in sta/res can go up to 12, and up to 4-5 for flat, downhill or sprint. For a range of +-2, that is reduced to 3-4 for main stats, 7 or 8 in sta/res and around 3 for flat etc. (note that on a flat or cobble stage, those become the main stats and what is flat in this example becomes mountain or hill and so on).
However, it seems to me like good daily form is less likely than bad daily form. This is not a super large sample size, but I just now wanted to check the exact boost values for this, and I needed to start 12 races just to find one +3 form, even +2 was fairly rare, while there were at least one or two -2 and/or -3 almost every time, and for the vast majority there were more negative than positive forms. Meaning the maximum difference described above is possible, but rarely actually reached.
Hope this helps. If there's anything specific that y'all would want to have tested, let me know. I think others have started to do some tests with specifically the MG database as well.
I re-read the daily form stuff and realized it might be a bit confusing, so I figured I'd make a table:
Daily Form
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
Main stats
0
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
Sta/Res
-3
-1
0
+2
+3
+5
+8
Secondary stats
-1
-1
0
0
+1
+2
+3
Note that main stats are things like sprint, TT/Prl, cobbles, mountain and hill, depending on the terrain of the day. Mountain and hill are pretty much tied together, so on both mountain and hill stages, they are raised equally. Secondary stats are then "the other main stats" that aren't the main stats in any given race, as well as downhill, fighter, recovery etc. Also, these numbers aren't perfectly consistent every time, but there're at most deviations of +-1.
And of course when I started one more race to do this table, immediately there's another +3 and there are more positive than negative daily forms. So while most of my sample still supports what I wrote before, take it with a grain of salt
redordead wrote:
So high RES sprinters should be much better, because they can sprint a lot longer?
The sentiment is correct, and magnified the longer/harder the race is, but I would have to test the degree of "much better" and "a lot longer" further. When I tested the impact on the red bar during attacks, the difference was notable but small, but that was also with the low intensity attacks. I can do some testing later or at some point this weekend.
And also, since this is mediated by the green bar, a sprinter with a high flat stat, or with a better mo/hill combination if there are some climbs before the finish, could still well outperform a sprinter with higher resistance whose green bar has deteriorated further.
Thanks a lot for your great work and explanations, cunego!
Given the table, I'd prefer to stay with +/-2; especially the fact that the max difference for energy stats about double by going to +/-3 isn't great.
If I understand correctly, PRL is considered to be a main stat as well? In my experience, it rather behaved like Sta/Res, i.e. bonus for good daily form could easily be in the two-digits area. Which wouldn't be the case now, so that's a good thing.
Is there actually a ceiling for stats including bonuses? Or will an 85 climber get the same +3 bonus as a 70 climber?
And another question about main/secondary stats: will climbers with low flat stat suffer on a fast-paced pan-flat stage with just a tough final climb? Or will Fl not matter at all for the green bar, given that it's a mountain stage?
Sorry for all those questions, but unfortunately I currently don't have the time to do tests on my own. If someone else does them, I'm happy to find out the results; otherwise we'll all find out during the next season
Fabianski wrote:
If I understand correctly, PRL is considered to be a main stat as well? In my experience, it rather behaved like Sta/Res, i.e. bonus for good daily form could easily be in the two-digits area.
I did a quick check on a 7.6km TT. You're correct, PRL is more in line with Sta/Res. A +3 daily form gives +5 on TT, but +8 on PRL. Unfortunately, it is not possible to change the range of daily form within a race, otherwise we could have reduced it to 0 or +-1 in prologues, but I suppose this is another argument for +-2.
Fabianski wrote:
Is there actually a ceiling for stats including bonuses? Or will an 85 climber get the same +3 bonus as a 70 climber?
It is displayed the same. But I don't know if the game actually recognizes stat boosts over 85 or if the engine caps it. Could be tested, I suppose.
Fabianski wrote:
And another question about main/secondary stats: will climbers with low flat stat suffer on a fast-paced pan-flat stage with just a tough final climb? Or will Fl not matter at all for the green bar, given that it's a mountain stage?
Things like flat and mountain determine the speed that a rider has on that terrain at any given effort. That means that if a rider with 80 flat and one with 70 flat both ride at dot 75 effort (as an example), the 80 flat rider will slowly gain time on the 70 flat rider. Following from that, if the 70 flat rider wants to ride at the same pace as the 80 flat rider, he needs to go at a higher effort, thus spending more green bar. This is a bit less pronounced when both ride in a peloton, but should still be noticeable.
Guess jph and I will have to worship at the altar of STA now rather than RES? Should have been paying more attention to future game editions the last couple of statgains sessions.
Not having a go, I think it's fine to keep moving, just funny after how much of a cult of RES me and others have cultivated we have to move on to a new stat
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
Couldn't let this rest, so I turned the home office into a PCM office Here are a few more test results.
Resistance and sprint duration:
Two riders, both with 80 sprint/acc and 70 in all other stats except one has 80 resistance (Rider B). Entirely flat stage, they ride alone behind the peloton for 150km. Nearing the finish, their green bars are at approximately 50%. The first thing to note is that Rider B has more red bar available still to him. It's not a huge difference, I'd say around 90% compared to 80%, but noticeable. They both start sprinting at the same time, and the red bars decrease similar speed, but ever so slightly slower for Rider B. The bigger impact is that Rider B had a bit more red bar left. Combined, he ends up in front when both are at the end of their red bar. The difference small but significant, as you can see in the screenshot below.
I then set both of them to dot effort 3 to let them recover their red bar. As you can also see in the screenshot, Rider B (Yates) recovers more red bar in the same time span. Would this be a hill or mountain stage, he could attack again quicker/more forceful sooner than Sobrero.
To give you an impression of the impact of resistance, here is the difference between an 80/80 sprinter and a 78/78 sprinter with all other stats including resistance at 70 on the same stage.
In this case, 10 points in resistance are a bit more valuable than 2 points in spr/acc, but this is of course after a lot of effort. Had they stayed in the pack until the end, the difference in red bar wouldn't have been as big, if any at all, in the first example, while it would have been fuller for both in the second example, giving the better sprinter even more time to extend his lead. I hope this gives some perspective.
Mountain and hill:
Four riders, mountain/hill combinations of 80/70, 70/80, 80/80 and 70/70, all other stats at 70. First test, a stage with a MTF (6-8% most of the climb) after an entirely flat run-in. They enter the climb with the green bar at around 45%. I put them at dot 70 and the 80 climbers immediately leave the other two behind. Note that the bars decrease exactly as quickly between the two duos, so those are exclusively affected by the effort, not any stats. Among the duos, there was no difference between 70 and 80 hill, so that doesn't have an impact at a steady pace. However, when I let them attack at medium intensity, the 80 hill riders of the respective duos gained a very small advantage, around as much as between the sprinters in the picture above, but not so much that they got a time gap. So hill seems to affect attacking even on climbs, but not a whole lot.
Secondly, I let those four riders ride the Amstel Gold Race. I dropped them behind the peloton and then just let them ride at dot 65 (just enough that the yellow bar drops very slowly). In the first half of the race, across a bunch of short climbs, the two 80 mountain guys left the other two behind and gained around 1'20 on them. I gradually raise the effort up to 85, still no difference between the guys with 70 and 80 hill. The next few hills are ridden at dot 93. Here, the two hill guys are clearly stronger, but over a bunch of easy hills, they don't get a gap. It is only on one longer, steep hill, that they can really separate.
I let all four regroup, then have them attack on flat roads and there's zero difference, as it should be. Then I let them attack on an easy-ish hill and the two 80 hill guys go clear, with ever so slight advantages for the 80 moutain guys between them. Same on a steeper hill. When riding over hills at something like dot 30, there's no difference, in contrast to when riding at dot 65, so at low efforts, neither hill nor mountain seem to come into play.
For the final test, I went back to the MTF, this time with the 4 Mo/Hi guys. I simply let them rush into the climb at 95 effort from the very beginning. As expected, the two 80 hill riders go clear. Then, as soon as the red bar is empty, the 80 mountain guys immediately leave their hill counterparts behind and the 80/70 guy soon overtakes the 70/80 guy.
Very long story short: Hill and mountain are primarily dependent on intensity. At high intensity, pretty much whenever the red bar is used including attacks, so long as it's any sort of climb, hill stat is the distinguishing stat, with only little impact from mountain. On lower and middle efforts when the red bar isn't used, it's mountain with little impact from hill. I think it's been that way for a while, but I suppose it's good to have it confirmed again.
Interesting move! In the long run, I'm certain it will be a good one.
My quick two cents on things that everyone deserves to be aware of after 1000+ hours in the game:
1) TT's could become more HIL-skewed again after the MO-focused period recently.
The AI now alternates between hard efforts (mostly up any inclines, but there also might still be some randomness involved) and regeneration on easier bits and particularly downhills.
It seems the speed difference between the ~60, ~70 and ~80 effort brackets has been reduced, which allowes for more varied AI than the "dot 75 from start to end" behavior we've seen in prior PCMs.
This should allow punchy riders to actually utilize their skill with 85+ efforts again.
2) Leadouts might become even more random and infuriating.
This I cannot comment on with certainty, as the number of stages I've played without setting up an own sprint train can likely be counted on one hand even after like 40+ seasons, and those always change the dynamics.
But particularly when few teammates are around after a tougher stage or due to random splits, it can happen that the initial leadout consists of a single rouleur riding right ahead of the sprint favorite with basically empty bars.
There are still regular sprint trains, particularly in easy stages, but it might not be THE dominant form of sprint prep anymore, and possibly not as pronounced as before as well when they do happen.
If everyone can draw decent conclusions from the first season on PCM22, we might see a leadout meta shakeup.
3) Favorites stick together like crazy.
This goes for all kinds of profiles, the main 10-15 favorites all ride next to each other stuck together like a big hair ball for most of the stage, right at the front of the peloton.
This should decrease random negative outlier results by favorites because they're always well-positioned, but it might have a negative effect in that many favorites no longer utilize the protection feature for most of the race.
This also at times makes it hard for riders to move to the front of the peloton for any reason, and just like IRL, can randomly push sprinters far down the field if they happen to get stuck behind a dropping rider or face a technical section of road.
4) ACC is real, guys!
As cunego said, a good acceleration might win you more races than a good sprint now (providing the rider still cares to sprint).
It's indeed nearly impossible to make up the difference - particularly in the short 1.5km sprints - against good ACC riders. He's not exaggerating.
If we want to preserve the importance of SPR, we might have to be even more careful about using technical finishes where the sprint efforts can be interrupted, and ACC might have to play a bigger role in OVL/wage formulas.
Thank you for the additional info! Don't love that description of sprints, but it sounds possible to adapt, and maybe it works differently with the MG DB. From my experience, AI teams rarely bring riders that could form a decent sprint train to races, but I didn't pay close attention to it in my careers so far, to be honest.
One last input from me for now: I've created a very basic MG DB for PCM22. Those of you who have the game and want to test how it functions with our specific stat matrix, just put this in the Mod folder and select it ingame. It gives an error message of course, and some minishirts don't show up for some reason, but jerseys and equipment (which makes the whole file a bit larger) work and everything seems to be playable.
It's based on the default DB because I figured that would make the least amount of trouble, so race names are off (Tour d'Helvetie etc), and it's only default races not MG races, but I think that's good enough for testing purposes. Cyclist IDs are the same so renamed startlists should work. If you don't have access to startlists but want to test a specific race, let us know and a reporter can provide it. I think it would be nice to have even more reference points heading into stat choices and transfers, so any effort towards that would be appreciated.
I'm happy to give that DB an extensive try and will see whether the findings correlate with my experiences or whether the presence of a player changes the dynamics significantly enough to withdraw my assessment!
Thanks to everyone for the work. Don't have anything to add to the thing, but a quick suggestion : if anyone of you spots a promotion on PCM 22, please tell us. As a reporter who don't have PCM 22 yet, that'd be a great help.
“...the secret of the Great Stories is that they have no secrets. The Great Stories are the ones you have heard and want to hear again. The ones you can enter anywhere and inhabit comfortably."
A. Roy
