I think both adding no super talents this season and waiting a couple of "extra" seasons before actually adding the greatest talents make a lot of sense.
I'll echo TheManxMissile for why, as adding them later should avoid the same riders dominating for 8-10 seasons in a row, with Phinney maybe being a good example of how it shouldn't be, a GT winner at the age of 23.
I think it is best to give a year before many top stars come in for the simple reason that I think we've added most of the top riders already the next ones coming through as Alka put in the first post are all 94/95's I think it wouldn't hurt to wait a year obviously though if anyone find we've missed a 22/23 year old rider who looks like he could hit the heights then having them in would be a plus.
On the maxing levels I think we need a 5th Lvl up so the leveling systems can go
I know this will mean talents will take longer to max's but I was thinking of possibly making the 5th lvl up a very specialized one by giving the riders endurance stats like in real life can only be achieved by racing the best and longest races so instead of them getting another 2 in hill etc.... they get upgrades in Flat, Stamina, Resistance, fighter and downhill and Recovery this would mean that teams could keep their rider in PCT/CT with good stats.
Using Bobridge as the best PCT talents maxed out last year as an example.
He would come back last year as this
Flat
Mou
Hill
TT
Stam
Res
Rec
Cob
Spr
Acc
Fig
Dow
Pro
71
69
79
77
72
72
67
53
69
78
64
64
77
73
69
79
77
74
74
69
53
69
80
66
66
77
He would still be a star at PCT level and Oz would probably keep him but it would mean he is not a fully maxed rider that he could be if given some PT race days or maybe just Grand Tour race days? I feel this can be achieved by keeping the Stats gains as usual but just decreases endurance stat increases and bringing them back to the 5th level.
I think we could look to Avenir with another perspective. Not being a race where we can see our youngsters compete but a kind of presentation of the new class of riders for the year.
If we cap any entry to 23 years (next year would be the class of '92) we will still have three/four years to max the riders (till 26/27 yo) and this is pretty much what happens in reality.
The Avenir could be a race raced in the off-season, just before the DB is published, raced by nations (as in real live) so we can have a look at our possible signing.
I think it's something that could help also to entertain the crowd while we wait for the new season to kick off.
Edited by ggDonovan on 26-01-2015 14:44
I planned to eventually add big talents this year. Then again I agree that we have too many big talents each year.
Should be limited to 1-2x Pot 7 and max of 10x Pot 6 eventually.
Eventually those are still too many though.
Adding additional years of evolution might not be a good idea. At the moment it already takes 3 years with another before training.
Quite a few talents will already need 4 seasons to max due to misplanning. So 5 before training.
It might be more realistic to evolve them slower. But it`s hard for the manager to wait 4-5 years for that. Spending money on talents would be very risky as you won`t get anything back for quite a long time. So even when just adding 1 talent to his team a year, you will have like 5 talents before the first could eventually become a good scorer.
ggDonovan wrote:
If we cap any entry to 23 years (next year would be the class of '92) we will still have three/four years to max the riders (till 26/27 yo) and this is pretty much what happens in reality.
Although I agree that we don't need any new super talents the following season, I don't feel that the minimum age for maxing out at 26/27 is more realistic than say 24/25.
I just went trough a couple of riders who topped last years CQ-ranking, and tracked down how they did when they were 23 of age.
As you can see, these riders could already at their 23th birth year challenge the best. Actually, Sagan, Quintana and Degenkolb was already among the 10 best in the world, ranking wise when they were 23 years old.
Therefore I wouldn't say it's unrealistic to add level 1-talents at around 20 years old, cause reality shows us that the best talents are competitive from a very young age.
(f.ex Sagan was ranked 8th best rider in the world already at 21 years of age)
Edited by Bjartne on 26-01-2015 15:23
That is true Bjartne, but then again riders like Sagan or Quintana are imo born twice in 20 years irl ( with these two maybe in 50 years) and if we have several of these "worldchangers" added yearly it can lead to big problems. IRL they can easily "end" like very early bloomers that will do shit when being 30 and that is something that cant be reproduced in game...
So yeah, being a worldbeater in 23 is possible, but i dont see it as viable for man-game in larger scale. Then again no problem in having few of these like every two-three years, but maybe rather just one (f.e. Benoot this year).
Fanboy edit: Sagan cant be used as comparsion, he was beating slovakian cycling opposition on supermarket bike as a kid. Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 26-01-2015 15:51
ggDonovan wrote:
If we cap any entry to 23 years (next year would be the class of '92) we will still have three/four years to max the riders (till 26/27 yo) and this is pretty much what happens in reality.
Although I agree that we don't need any new super talents the following season, I don't feel that the minimum age for maxing out at 26/27 is more realistic than say 24/25.
I just went trough a couple of riders who topped last years CQ-ranking, and tracked down how they did when they were 23 of age.
As you can see, these riders could already at their 23th birth year challenge the best. Actually, Sagan, Quintana and Degenkolb was already among the 10 best in the world, ranking wise when they were 23 years old.
Therefore I wouldn't say it's unrealistic to add level 1-talents at around 20 years old, cause reality shows us that the best talents are competitive from a very young age.
(f.ex Sagan was ranked 8th best rider in the world already at 21 years of age)
Yes and Horner won a vuelta with 41 yo.
These riders you pointed out are 9 riders from different years over a total of 500/600 riders that ride the WT each year.
For example, last year just no rider from the '91 was in the top 10. At top 20, Demare (11th), Top 50, 3 (Demare, Kelderman (41) and Wellens (49)) and five more in the top 100 (Yates (57), Formolo (76), Valgren Andersen (81), Barguil (84) and Coquard (86)). 8 out of 100.
It's impossible to contemplate every scenario and right now there is in cycling a great bunch of really talented young riders but it's not the normal thing.
IMO I prefer to have to wait a little bit for the greats than providing the teams with riders that will be in his prime for 8 years. I think 5 years is more than enough to enjoy a great rider.
The good thing of waiting until the 23 also could be that we can better scout those riders and set the correct attributes and potential to them.
Take Sagan as an example. Imagine we are back in 2013 and he is going to enter to the DB (he's from 1990). He already won the points classification and 4 stages from Le Tour, 3 stages in La Vuelta, more points jerseys and a lot of stages. He could enter in the DB almost maxed out. We don't loose that. I case the system fails we still can correct it by making these young talents enter to the DB with lvl 4 or even maxed with their current stats. This will only prevent the fact of having too many young riders that, because of the hype of they early years now are 24/25 yo beasts.
Here a list of, in my opinion underaged beasts (only 80+ on main stat):
I like your point in first paragraph ggDonovan, but i would not look so much into real life counterparts of man-game riders, as it is funny to have some sort of alternative reality where Madrazo can win the GT. I think that even with this, flow of the supertalents can be controlled to avoid inflation.
Also some of these "underaged beasts" you listed are very one-dimensional riders, that will never put the world on fire bar massive training, so i dont see problem with them being great in one aspect even at very young age...
Di Maggio
Ratiy
pure time trialers
Ulanowski
.
.
.
ggDonovan wrote:
If we cap any entry to 23 years (next year would be the class of '92) we will still have three/four years to max the riders (till 26/27 yo) and this is pretty much what happens in reality.
Although I agree that we don't need any new super talents the following season, I don't feel that the minimum age for maxing out at 26/27 is more realistic than say 24/25.
I just went trough a couple of riders who topped last years CQ-ranking, and tracked down how they did when they were 23 of age.
As you can see, these riders could already at their 23th birth year challenge the best. Actually, Sagan, Quintana and Degenkolb was already among the 10 best in the world, ranking wise when they were 23 years old.
Therefore I wouldn't say it's unrealistic to add level 1-talents at around 20 years old, cause reality shows us that the best talents are competitive from a very young age.
(f.ex Sagan was ranked 8th best rider in the world already at 21 years of age)
Yes and Horner won a vuelta with 41 yo.
These riders you pointed out are 9 riders from different years over a total of 500/600 riders that ride the WT each year.
For example, last year just no rider from the '91 was in the top 10. At top 20, Demare (11th), Top 50, 3 (Demare, Kelderman (41) and Wellens (49)) and just another one in the top 100 (Barguil (84)).
Well, you didn't mention those who were even younger than 23. Of course Sagan is an extreme case, but I still think my point is valid, seing that about 10% of the leading cyclists last year (top 100) was U-23 riders, and two of them achieved top-10 results in GTs and others overall wins in both PT and HC-stage races.
If we want the man-game to reflect this is another discussion. I just wanted to point out that it isn't that unusual to see young riders perform at a high level IRL.
I like as well to see riders like Madrazo being superstars of this universe but I might prefer loosing this than having underaged beasts.
Those unidimensional riders, are the ones that were autogenerated don't they? I agree those aren't the problem. We have also real live examples of this kind riders, you know: All you need is Bos
Bjartne wrote:
Well, you didn't mention those who were even younger than 23.
Right! Sorry, I didn't filter the years correctly. I'll look at it and update.
Edited by ggDonovan on 26-01-2015 16:24
SotD wrote:
The only problem with not putting young riders into the DB is that the Tour de l'Avenir would be pretty useless.
Avenir will always be a good race - doesn't matter if the best riders in it have 80 MO or 72 MO.
These things go in circles. The first Avenir had a really strong field, Gesink v Intxausti at the top. I'm not sure Intxausti was maxed then, but I think Gesink was.
Two years ago the Avenir field was pretty weak. The off-season that followed was the first where there was a real effort to add young riders again, and now 3 years on from those additions the 2015 Avenir field may be very strong again.
I agree with you, but if the best GC rider was 72 MO, I don't think the race would necessarily be good, as we all know that the shittier the riders are in the race, the better chance for a massive upset, fucked up AI with sprints and stuff like that.
So I do like that the best riders are 75-77 MO, as I think that gives the game a chance to use the AI wisely, and the 72MO guys are used as helpers or attackers, instead of GC riders.
He is a time trial rider, managing two top 5s in the Icelandic TT Championships, but isn't too promising on the road. He did manage 7th on the RR championship this year.
Kari Brynjolfsson
He is mainly a cyclocross rider, so he is used to rough roads, if not cobble stones. He has previously had 2 podiums in the RR and consistently strong results in the TT. He is also one of the few Icelandic riders to race outside Iceland on the road.
Helgi Pall Einarsson
A generic road race rider. Decent on the flat with no real specialities or strong results. Best result is a top ten in last year's road race.
Anton Örn Elfarsson
Mostly a strong track cyclist but he has had top tens in both the RR and TT before.
Runar Karl Elfarsson
Young road race rider who can do a decent TT. Could develop into a decent rider, but no real speciality.
Gunnlaugur Jonasson
Another solid time trial rider with strong results. He is a former TT champion and has made the podium many times
Gisli Olafsson
Someone who cycles mainly just for a hobby but still has some very impressive results, managing top 10s in the RR twice. This is why I put him down as a fighter.
Ingvar Omarsson
One of the best cyclists in Iceland at the moment, and could still develop some more. He does mountain biking but is mainly a climber/puncher, who is very strong down hill. He has won the RR for the last two years and this year came 3rd in the TT.
Oskar Omarsson
Another strong road race rider who this year came 3rd in the RR and is ranked among the best in the country. He is very good on the flat and like Ingvar, strong downhill.
David Thor Sigurdsson
Again, he is one of the best in Iceland, with two NCs and a 2nd place to his name. He could also still develop a little. Unlike Ingvar he is a sprinter, hence why he has not figured in the last two years.
Hlynur Thorsteinsson
I have been told that he is very good at trials, but not as strong on the road. He has managed a top ten in the RR though.
As SN said I have talked to him about these stats and hope no one finds them ridiculous. I would happily tone down my enthusiasm a little bit if people thought that was necessary, I just thought it would be nice to have Icelandic riders/team/race in the Man-Game. Since talking to SN I have had a go at potentials and XP points, with some help. Naturally I am not yet a master of the system so if anything is wrong, again just tell me. All of the stats are maxed stats, but for most of the riders those are current stats also.
Absolutely. And it really doesn't matter that they are slightly better than shit - Otherwise it wouldn't make sense to get them at all... Imo only 2 of the riders are worth having in the PCT, and none of them would be useful in the PT. One could probably be signed as a domestique, but even the sprinter would be useless in the PT as a leadout without a bit of training.
Riders like that I think is absolutely fair to implement in order for specific focus to get a bit of starting ground.
I believe we are just fine. We need these underaged talents in the game as well. But you know what, their price on the market will take it to the account - if they have 3 more years on the top than majority of other similar riders, it is really likely that rider is going to be more expensive than others.
I believe we should have something like semi-fixed system of number of riders in DB in every year of their births. We need to have around same number of good riders born in 1990 and quite the same number in 1991 because one day when they are 33 they will start to decline. If we have too many old riders in the future, suddenly we will have huge need for great riders and that will only bring problems. I believe we should add around the same number of good riders every year, it is quite the same as it is with drafts to NBA or NFL - one year is a little bit better or worse than the other, but all classes have after all around the same quality and the differences are small. It would not have been the best decision in my opinion to make this year 'a really bad one', it gives quite a big disadvantage to the new teams coming to the game. And it will give disadvantages to the current teams as well, when the current best riders will go out, we can likely have one day have a big need for great riders.
And I actually believe it is not necessarily a bad thing to have a lot of great riders. It is certainly way better than having a shortage of them, then some teams could even not have an option to spend their wage cup on, because there could be a situation when there are not any quality riders left on the market. When we remove great talents from this year's market, what than lefts for teams like Venchi or Puma last year and there are some examples of that this year as well. It is way better to have more quality riders to spend on, it gives more competition to current dominant riders, more quality riders are then left for PCT as well and so it gives teams there better chances to then stay in PT as well - without a star you have lowe chances to stay up, see Rothaus as an example.
I believe we should aim to have around the same drafts into the game every year and some big big talents should be part of that. Generation talents like Phinney or Madrazo, or even Eastman should be part of the game, the market will make their prices go sky high and that's how it should be. And training of riders I don't see as a big problem as the majority see that. Riders are trained because there is a need to make unique best riders to score big points, or there are examples of training riders which uses niches on the market. And an auto-correction of the market is a great thing.
And lastly the training gives the best chance to make the team like you want it. If the training will really be restricted, a part of the best fun of this game will be gone for me. Why? The last season I could simply hold on Uran and Henao, I could sell Coppel, buy Sagan with part of that money and then train Henao and Uran for the big money. I would really likely have better team than I have now. But the training allowed me to make one of my favs Velits a relevant star and thankfully to that I was able to bring in a big future star for my team in Hirt as well. The other people did something like that as well - for example Gustavovskiy with Costa, Venchi used that money they got to get them a unique rider like Van Stayen. I think it is great to have unique riders like this, but people who make them will pay for them as well. It will only be the season after the training, but wages of them will go really high.
There was some talk the training should be really restricted from the next season. I don't really like it. For now Bewley is so great rider he likely don't need another training, because he would then become so dominant, it would even hurt my team in long-term because of his wage. So I will want to train Sagan and König and in the long-term Vakoc and Hirt. They will one day replace Velits and Bewley when I sell them/they will decline. Yes, I could buy new riders then, but if I buy a Spanish or American one day to replace Bewley or Velits, it is never a happy thing for me, I would love to replace them with Sagan, Vakoc, a cobbler and Hirt for example. Hirt probably can quite easily replace Velits one day, but Sagan needs quite a big investment for a few years, to ever get close to a rider like Ponzi, Van Garderen or Van Stayen and I would love to have a rider like that oney day. And my real only chance how I could have one is to train a rider into that, especially if I would like to have my leaders from countries I like. If I won't be able to in the future, I seriously won't enjoy that in the best way how I could enjoy this great game.
And if we are believing the problem is having too many top top dominant riders like we have currently several MO85 riders, the solution could be quite easy, simply the price for that 84-85 ratings could then be higher for their wages. If you want a dominant rider, you have to pay for it. 1.8M or 2M for that training boost is expensive enough, but wages of some riders could be a little bit higher, if it is any problem. But I really don't think it is such a big problem how it is suggested - Team B&O, Santander and Swisscom are not really the best teams in PT. Festina is not the best team either and they will have harder time with their wages when Spilak's wages go up a little bit, only Vesuvio and Wikipedia are doing great and that's mainly because they have amazing deep quality of their teams and a lot of their riders are consistently overachieving. Aker and Tinkoff pay their prices with Hagen and Trofimov as well, same with me with Bewley. The best teams are with exception of Vesuvio Good Energy and Pokerstars, who have their team full of cost-effective riders. I believe we are just fine with the way we have this set up, we only need to refine it just a little bit.
P.S. Sorry about that length, decent wall of the text it is! Edited by Roman on 26-01-2015 21:08
I might be biased since I've some great talents in my team that finally starts maxing, but I think the game would benefit from having some less great talents coming up. I think this off season is a good one to add some good talents but not great talents (No Zabel/Zepuntke, but rather Anacona/Brenes level). I seem to recall (I might be forgetting someone) that in my first season only Guldhammer was a great talent. Didn't make the transfer season any less fun...
I would also say a more or less steady flow of talents is needed. Currently there may be too many great riders, can't reverse that, but if 1 world class rider would be added each year, there would be 10 world beaters active, and maxed, at any time. This includes GC riders, puncheurs, sprinters and everything else.
This would mean a small group of elite riders would emerge who need little training to stay on top. Behind them a larger group of great riders with either a great primary stat, or a slightly lower primary stat with better back-up stats, should be added. This group needs some more training to challenge the world beaters, but it would certainly be possible. I won't come up with exact numbers for the size of this group as I really have no idea what it should be.
After that an even larger group of possible PCT leaders/PT (luxury-)domestiques should be added. Will never become world beaters (unless a random idiot decides to spend millions on someone).
Finally the average riders, who in some cases could become leaders for the CT, should be added.
This way I expect there will be 2 world beating GC riders at any given time, and behind them maybe 5-8 riders who could beat them if they would get some decent training. Stat inflation could be kept to a minimum, but also the gameplay could become better if the differences in stats are a bit larger.
Final thing is potentials. There are way too many pot 5-6 riders who will decline very slowly. When adding new riders please consider making them pot 3-4 more often.
Manager of Team Popo4Ever p/b Morshynska in the PCM.Daily Man-Game
But what is a world beater? I think we need to define that. In my oppinion Phinney is a world beater, Bewley is a world beater... Is riders such as Herklotz in that category?
