|
Statgains Overhaul - 2026
|
| ManGame-Admin |
Posted on 04-11-2025 08:04
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 1451
Joined: 28-05-2011
PCM$: 500.00
|
IMPORTANT: The statgains overhaul will come into effect from the end of the 2026 season, i.e. these upgrades will not be available for the 2025 end of season statgains. The idea of making the changes public already is to allow managers to plan ahead wherever applicable.
These changes are NOT final. Please use this thread to discuss the proposed statgains. Suggestions from managers will be considered for further changes to the statgains.
Link: https://pcmdaily....6%20v2.xls
How to read the file
1) The tables on the top left of each tab in the spreadsheet are the old gains.
2) The tables on the top right of each tab are the new proposed gain.
3) The tables on the bottom right of each tab are the respective changes per individual stat.
4) There are two new statgains paths added - Climbing MM and Punchy MM.
5) MM stat is introduced for each type of statgain.
6) The only change in the Decreases tab is the addition of the MM column.
Also please note that MM will be an independent stat from the 2027 season. It will remain linked to Mountain and Hill stats in the 2026 season, as it is currently with the formula (MO+HI)/2.
A big thank you to jt for the comprehensive overview and review of how the stats work in PCM 2024. Thank you to Nemo as well for getting us started with this.
Edited by AbhishekLFC on 23-11-2025 08:09
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 04-11-2025 08:49
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15023
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 11500.00
|
I'm ok with keeping it simple with (MO+HI)/2.
I don't know if big changes can be brought to the table or not, but since we're talking about it.. MG statgain system always seemed to be missing something for me. Personally, I found the ICL statgain system far superior. Since that game is dead now, perhaps (with Bikex's permission) it's worth taking a look at?
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 05-12-2025 07:47
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| AbhishekLFC |
Posted on 04-11-2025 08:53
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 12680
Joined: 27-07-2015
PCM$: 1961.50
|
Please redownload the file. There is a small correction made.
|
| |
|
|
| Sykkel_Freak |
Posted on 04-11-2025 13:46
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2129
Joined: 11-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Thanks for this, overall looks good I think. One observation though, I think downhill in the Climberv2 training needs to be dialled back a lot, or that climbing talents are added with lower downhill in general going forward. With the current talent pool, and assuming the updated training was implemented from this season, I'm counting 176 riders with potential for 80+ downhill, of which 26 riders can reach 85.
|
| |
|
|
| jt1109 |
Posted on 04-11-2025 14:04
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3484
Joined: 23-07-2008
PCM$: 600.00
|
just a point first if anyone wants any explanation as to what each stat is currently doing or would like a test doing on a particular test let us know here and i'll get round to them when we can.
Currently, the only stat we are stuck on is Resistance in Sprints as the findings are inconclusive.
Sykkel_Freak wrote:
Thanks for this, overall looks good I think. One observation though, I think downhill in the Climberv2 training needs to be dialled back a lot, or that climbing talents are added with lower downhill in general going forward. With the current talent pool, and assuming the updated training was implemented from this season, I'm counting 176 riders with potential for 80+ downhill, of which 26 riders can reach 85.
So currently this has been done intentionally to provide V2 with a boost and compensate for no TT and little HI boost that you get for this training. If you wished to go down this path, you would have the disadvantage in those stats which are likely to give gaps/ create gaps in stage races, whereas Downhill, while looking great on a spreadsheet, will rarely create a gap in game and is not a "Meta" attribute. So we have seen this as a good trade off for those wanting to create a good climber but knowing they will not have the overall balance of a stage racer |
| |
|
|
| quadsas |
Posted on 04-11-2025 14:36
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2727
Joined: 18-01-2013
PCM$: 300.00
|
Why is basic TT the most nerfed statgain? It was worse in mostly every way to Stage Race anyways
|
| |
|
|
| Sykkel_Freak |
Posted on 04-11-2025 14:40
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2129
Joined: 11-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
jt1109 wrote:
So currently this has been done intentionally to provide V2 with a boost and compensate for no TT and little HI boost that you get for this training. If you wished to go down this path, you would have the disadvantage in those stats which are likely to give gaps/ create gaps in stage races, whereas Downhill, while looking great on a spreadsheet, will rarely create a gap in game and is not a "Meta" attribute. So we have seen this as a good trade off for those wanting to create a good climber but knowing they will not have the overall balance of a stage racer
Been years since I played PCM, but while it may not create gaps often, does it not help with recovery of the yellow/red bar when there are multiple mountain passes?
|
| |
|
|
| jt1109 |
Posted on 04-11-2025 15:05
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3484
Joined: 23-07-2008
PCM$: 600.00
|
Sykkel_Freak wrote:
jt1109 wrote:
So currently this has been done intentionally to provide V2 with a boost and compensate for no TT and little HI boost that you get for this training. If you wished to go down this path, you would have the disadvantage in those stats which are likely to give gaps/ create gaps in stage races, whereas Downhill, while looking great on a spreadsheet, will rarely create a gap in game and is not a "Meta" attribute. So we have seen this as a good trade off for those wanting to create a good climber but knowing they will not have the overall balance of a stage racer
Been years since I played PCM, but while it may not create gaps often, does it not help with recovery of the yellow/red bar when there are multiple mountain passes?
So, downhill affects the speed a rider can go. So if two riders were both on dot at 85, the rider with the higher downhill would go faster as long as the gradient is below (I believe 4%). If both riders are in a group maintaining position, the rider with higher downhill would see a benefit if he had a lower effort level, but wouldn't be sure the A.I. is clever enough to move the effort down low enough to see an effect
This effect makes no difference in the number of descents in a race. |
| |
|
|
| AbhishekLFC |
Posted on 04-11-2025 16:09
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 12680
Joined: 27-07-2015
PCM$: 1961.50
|
quadsas wrote:
Why is basic TT the most nerfed statgain? It was worse in mostly every way to Stage Race anyways
The idea is to make TT riders even more specialized in their own area as it is probably the most lucrative type of rider in the game at the moment.
Having said this, point taken and we'll consider how to balance TT vs Stage Racers better.
|
| |
|
|
| Fabianski |
Posted on 04-11-2025 16:34
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5234
Joined: 29-09-2018
PCM$: 185.00
|
jt1109 wrote:
Sykkel_Freak wrote:
jt1109 wrote:
So currently this has been done intentionally to provide V2 with a boost and compensate for no TT and little HI boost that you get for this training. If you wished to go down this path, you would have the disadvantage in those stats which are likely to give gaps/ create gaps in stage races, whereas Downhill, while looking great on a spreadsheet, will rarely create a gap in game and is not a "Meta" attribute. So we have seen this as a good trade off for those wanting to create a good climber but knowing they will not have the overall balance of a stage racer
Been years since I played PCM, but while it may not create gaps often, does it not help with recovery of the yellow/red bar when there are multiple mountain passes?
So, downhill affects the speed a rider can go. So if two riders were both on dot at 85, the rider with the higher downhill would go faster as long as the gradient is below (I believe 4%). If both riders are in a group maintaining position, the rider with higher downhill would see a benefit if he had a lower effort level, but wouldn't be sure the A.I. is clever enough to move the effort down low enough to see an effect
This effect makes no difference in the number of descents in a race.
My experience is that it does affect yellow/red bar recovery, pretty much in a similar way as Flat. An 80Fl rider can recover while a 60Fl rider is depleting his bar at a given speed, and it's the same with downhills. An 80DH rider will need to pedal far less than a 60DH rider and will recover his bars much faster, whereas the latter might even spend additional energy to keep up. This obviously depends on the slope of the downhill and the speed of the group, but from my experience, I'd definitely say that great DH is a plus in particular in multi-mountain stages.
In general, I think the new stat gains are pretty balanced, although I share quadsas' feelings about the TT gains. Sadly, they're just a little late for my riders, in particular for Christen it'd have been great to have the additional Sta gains (for Track Sprint) this year already... So I'll still need to pick a path that's not optimal for him overall, in order for him to end up with low-70s Sta instead of sub-70s. Well, not that I would particularly care anymore, but his future manager would surely be happy if the new gains were already there... But that's life I guess, he's just one year too old 
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 04-11-2025 16:49
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15023
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 11500.00
|
AbhishekLFC wrote:
quadsas wrote:
Why is basic TT the most nerfed statgain? It was worse in mostly every way to Stage Race anyways
The idea is to make TT riders even more specialized in their own area as it is probably the most lucrative type of rider in the game at the moment.
Having said this, point taken and we'll consider how to balance TT vs Stage Racers better.
Isn't that more because of the TT heavy calendar (compared to real life) and less to do with training?
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| AbhishekLFC |
Posted on 04-11-2025 17:21
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 12680
Joined: 27-07-2015
PCM$: 1961.50
|
Ollfardh wrote:
AbhishekLFC wrote:
quadsas wrote:
Why is basic TT the most nerfed statgain? It was worse in mostly every way to Stage Race anyways
The idea is to make TT riders even more specialized in their own area as it is probably the most lucrative type of rider in the game at the moment.
Having said this, point taken and we'll consider how to balance TT vs Stage Racers better.
Isn't that more because of the TT heavy calendar (compared to real life) and less to do with training?
It is a combination of all factors mentioned.
|
| |
|
|
| AbhishekLFC |
Posted on 04-11-2025 17:23
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 12680
Joined: 27-07-2015
PCM$: 1961.50
|
Ollfardh wrote:
I don't know if big changes can be brought to the table or not, but since we're talking about it.. MG statgain system always seemed to be missing something for me. Personally, I found the ICL statgain system far superior. Since that game is dead now, perhaps (with Bikex's permission) it's worth taking a look at?
Don't think we currently have the bandwidth to rework the whole system with the help available. If someone can come up with the new system, it can be considered.
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 04-11-2025 17:54
|
World Champion
Posts: 12630
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
While I agree DH might not be all that interesting right now, it might be in future games. I don’t see any point in making a potential problem with upping a rather unnessesary stat option.
Haven’t come around to look in depth with anything else yet, so will come back with Thoughts.
A Big Thanks for the effort of doing this though!!
|
| |
|
|
| jt1109 |
Posted on 04-11-2025 18:44
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3484
Joined: 23-07-2008
PCM$: 600.00
|
Fabianski wrote:
jt1109 wrote:
Sykkel_Freak wrote:
jt1109 wrote:
So currently this has been done intentionally to provide V2 with a boost and compensate for no TT and little HI boost that you get for this training. If you wished to go down this path, you would have the disadvantage in those stats which are likely to give gaps/ create gaps in stage races, whereas Downhill, while looking great on a spreadsheet, will rarely create a gap in game and is not a "Meta" attribute. So we have seen this as a good trade off for those wanting to create a good climber but knowing they will not have the overall balance of a stage racer
Been years since I played PCM, but while it may not create gaps often, does it not help with recovery of the yellow/red bar when there are multiple mountain passes?
So, downhill affects the speed a rider can go. So if two riders were both on dot at 85, the rider with the higher downhill would go faster as long as the gradient is below (I believe 4%). If both riders are in a group maintaining position, the rider with higher downhill would see a benefit if he had a lower effort level, but wouldn't be sure the A.I. is clever enough to move the effort down low enough to see an effect
This effect makes no difference in the number of descents in a race.
My experience is that it does affect yellow/red bar recovery, pretty much in a similar way as Flat. An 80Fl rider can recover while a 60Fl rider is depleting his bar at a given speed, and it's the same with downhills. An 80DH rider will need to pedal far less than a 60DH rider and will recover his bars much faster, whereas the latter might even spend additional energy to keep up. This obviously depends on the slope of the downhill and the speed of the group, but from my experience, I'd definitely say that great DH is a plus in particular in multi-mountain stages.
Yep this is spot on as to what it's doing but only when on "DOT", The effect is not a major help if you have maintain position. see test below two riders on maintain position one with 60 one with 85 downhill. The latter gets a minimal advantage if at all.
SotD wrote:
While I agree DH might not be all that interesting right now, it might be in future games. I don’t see any point in making a potential problem with upping a rather unnessesary stat option.
Completely understand this, the idea was to give this particular increase a USP compared to Climber MM / Stage racer, which currently, even with the Downhill and Fighter gains, is still a better option for most riders. Although, as Sykkel points out, there are a lot of riders that "could" hit plus 80 downhill, that would involve a sacrifice in other more important stat areas, which is the trade off. However, we are more than happy to look at other alternatives to diversify the Climber V1 if needed to differentiate this from the other upgrades  |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 04-11-2025 19:44
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 17833
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
Couple of thoughts:
Time Trial - Ouch! Surely a better way to balance this would be a calendar change, or an OVL change, an RD change, a Wage change, rather than further tanking an already weak path? Coming from a position of building mostly regional and low skill riders, this path is just kinda ass. Hybridization should be a choice, not the default, and for low Pot/low stat TT'ers it's really not worth looking at this path at all.
ClimberV2 - Compensating it by upping gains in stats we then agree don't actually do anything... So it's not compensated at all? Given the existence of v1, Stage Racer, Climbing MM and Punchy MM would a better option be to remove v2 entirely and replace it with some kind of MO/MM-CB option or a more FL-MO option? Something to build out stage race support that isn't purely a TTT squad route via Stage Racer?
Overall I like the vast majority of suggestions. Especially a lot of the boosting at low potentials! Yes, gimmie more low Pot riders added at higher XP levels, so much more fun for diversity, spreading out the stat curves, and making decreases matter.
|
| |
|
|
| Ulrich Ulriksen |
Posted on 05-11-2025 04:06
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 3914
Joined: 02-11-2010
PCM$: 300.00
|
Lowering the TT resistance was my main contribution to this and it seems to be an unpopular one. So here is my thoughts:
- I don't know the counts by dev path but the mangame has a huge number of TTers so I am not sure how that path can be so weak Yes stage race is better overall but if you really want a TTer then I think you need to go with a TT path.
- We want to have races with a TT that aren't TT races but TTs create so much bigger time gaps than other stages any non-GT race with a TT is liable to become a TT race (see this year's PN). This is a constant challenge for us in race design. Having spent a bunch of time on this I am not sure there are a lot more calendar fixes we can do without eliminating TTs from all races that aren't supposed to be TT races or making them all really short.
- If you compare the resistance stat to a regular DB the mangame is particularly overpowered (also stamina), I am guessing this is some of the reason we don't get gaps. By lowering the resistance I was hoping it would reduce the ability of TT guys to hold on in non-TT races while also reducing the overall resistance level in the peloton.
- This in turn would force the manager to choose between a specialized TT rider on the TT path or a more well rounded rider by the stage race path.
I would not be opposed to lowering the TT gain in the SR path a little to balance.
Man Game: McCormick Pro Cycling |
| |
|
|
| Eden95 |
Posted on 05-11-2025 11:45
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4615
Joined: 05-10-2010
PCM$: 1000.00
|
Ulrich Ulriksen wrote:
- We want to have races with a TT that aren't TT races but TTs create so much bigger time gaps than other stages any non-GT race with a TT is liable to become a TT race (see this year's PN). This is a constant challenge for us in race design. Having spent a bunch of time on this I am not sure there are a lot more calendar fixes we can do without eliminating TTs from all races that aren't supposed to be TT races or making them all really short.
I would say PN became a ‘TT race’ due to other aspects - the hilly stages had zero selection namely. That’s a game version problem - if a similar route is used for PN or TA next season, making the hilly stages harder is an easy fix. Even now it’s very apparent hilly stages aren’t producing gaps really at all in this version, and addressing that will go a long way to solving other problems.
Indosat - ANZ HQ
"This Schleck sandwich is going to cause serious indigestion for Evans" - Phil Liggett |
| |
|
|
| Caspi |
Posted on 05-11-2025 13:14
|
Domestique
Posts: 705
Joined: 22-09-2022
PCM$: 15500.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
ClimberV2 - (...) would a better option be to (...) replace it with some kind of MO/MM-CB option (...)?
Perhaps a solution could be to just take 1 or 2 point(s) from downhill and move to cobbles?
|
| |
|
|
| jt1109 |
Posted on 05-11-2025 13:19
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3484
Joined: 23-07-2008
PCM$: 600.00
|
Caspi wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
ClimberV2 - (...) would a better option be to (...) replace it with some kind of MO/MM-CB option (...)?
Perhaps a solution could be to just take 1 or 2 point(s) from downhill and move to cobbles?
Just to keep you up to date we quite like the idea of an all round climber cob upgrade path and are going to look into if it's possible, great suggestion TMM |
| |
|
