|
[CT] Questions
|
| sammyt93 |
Posted on 22-12-2014 09:40
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3634
Joined: 03-07-2012
PCM$: 300.00
|
Would it be possible to add an alternative to training where teams can train a rider so his stats only increase for one race? I'd see it limited to CT and PCT teams. It could be used to make a rider better for a goal race as an alternative to editing them into good form for it and would be limited by how often you can use it in a season, was thinking only 2 or 3 times per team.
It would be cheaper then actual training and could be an incentive for the lower division teams to keep hold of some of their money so they can make a rider slightly better for a goal race giving them a better chance of passing that goal and of having more money the following season. If this was implemented and teams used it then less money would filter up to the PT so you would see less extreme training there as they wouldn't have as big budgets.
Obviously this wouldn't solve the problems by itself but it would add an extra dimension to the game and have a small impact something considered a problem. I'm not sure what percentage of the actual training fee these should cost but I was thinking like 10% so it's still a viable alternative but also removes a decent chunk of money from the game if used by a lot of managers.
|
| |
|
|
| Luis Leon Sanchez |
Posted on 22-12-2014 09:48
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5533
Joined: 12-06-2013
PCM$: 500.00
|
It wouldn't be a decent chunk though because with a CT budget you need most of it and only remaining CT teams from previous seasons would find it possible to do.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 22-12-2014 09:52
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
I like sammys idea. I think we had this discussed in previous seasons but can't remember the pro and contra.
Imo this adds a lot of more tactics and becomes less predictable. Plus it's realistic, if you for example want a home rider to perform well.
Example would be Bennett in Southland recently. Why not spend 1-2 mountain training for this one race. Would be pretty cool.
Also I would even say that this kind of training could go for all riders. Not only the maxed and U30.
We would only need to make sure we don't miss this in the dbs. So after planning a thread visible for all or at least for reporters would be needed, so that the reporter can quickly check before starting the race. |
| |
|
|
| Heine |
Posted on 22-12-2014 13:54
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4116
Joined: 08-04-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
One of the problems with not having fees etc for PCT/CT is trickling up. CT/PCT teams buy declining/weaker riders from the PT. We also in general want to lower prices, ofc we can just lower all budgets, but I would rather see new levels of strategy implemented. Fees will not be so high (I believe) that teams will not be able to renew everyone, but if they do they will have less money to use for transfers. Then you actually have to consider your options more. Today it is a no brainer most of the time to renew riders. I decided not to renew 3 riders last off season, for age reasons... This off-season I will most likely let 1 rider walk. Fees might change this... Maybe I will have to let Pozatto or Sella walk without renewing?
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 23-11-2024 02:11
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Mresuperstar |
Posted on 22-12-2014 14:00
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8058
Joined: 22-06-2009
PCM$: 650.00
|
roturn wrote:
I like sammys idea. I think we had this discussed in previous seasons but can't remember the pro and contra.
I bought it up last season during transfers.
It's in the reporters forum in 2014 Ideas. 
|
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 22-12-2014 23:25
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mresuperstar wrote:
roturn wrote:
I like sammys idea. I think we had this discussed in previous seasons but can't remember the pro and contra.
I bought it up last season during transfers.
It's in the reporters forum in 2014 Ideas.
I think the main downside is that a new DB would be needed for every race that someone had trained for.
|
| |
|
|
| sammyt93 |
Posted on 23-12-2014 11:13
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3634
Joined: 03-07-2012
PCM$: 300.00
|
You will know before the season starts which races riders have trained for so could create the db's far enough in advance that you can send them out when someone claims the race.
|
| |
|
|
| Luis Leon Sanchez |
Posted on 23-12-2014 11:15
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5533
Joined: 12-06-2013
PCM$: 500.00
|
It doesn't solve the bigger issue here. But it is not a bad idea.
|
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 23-12-2014 11:41
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
It's not a bad idea if somebody is willing to help by creating what could easily be well over 100 different CDBs.
---
Ok, so here's some Average budget stats from this season to maybe help the discussion.
| Division | Avg Budget | Salary Cap | Budget - Cap | | ProTour | € 5,157,429 | € 3,500,000 | € 1,657,429 | | PT relegated to PCT | € 3,848,500 | € 2,500,000 | € 1,348,500 | | PCT promoted to PT | € 5,204,875 | € 3,500,000 | € 1,704,875 | | Pro Continental | € 3,488,429 | € 2,500,000 | € 988,429 | | CT promoted to PCT | € 3,331,583 | € 2,500,000 | € 831,583 | | Continental | € 1,924,000 | € 1,250,000 | € 674,000 | | New CT | € 1,722,963 | € 1,250,000 | € 472,963 |
PT > PCT's average is slightly inflated by the fact that of the 4 teams, Bacardi had over a million left over from the previous season.
If wanting to reduce those amounts, I suppose one thing to look at could be the prize money for team standings. This year it ranged from 1 million to 430,000 in PT, 750,000 to 170,000 in PCT, and 500,000 to 90,000 in CT, decreasing at intervals position by position. That amount is then one of the variables that is affected by the previous season Goals multiplier.
|
| |
|
|
| beagle |
Posted on 23-12-2014 15:06
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4200
Joined: 06-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think I could help a bit, I like sammy´s idea as it´s not such dissimilar to my own. I´d like to only add, naturally fee for this special training will differ from race cathegory (the highest one for Tour, then Vuelta and Giro, monuments etc. to C2 races - according to PointsScales file).
Manager of Polar in Man-Game
|
| |
|
|
| fintas |
Posted on 23-12-2014 17:50
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2602
Joined: 21-03-2008
PCM$: 1200.00
|
Why not limit the training that every rider can receive per season.
ex:
Rider X -- Pot 7 -----> 1 stat per season
Rider y -- Pot 6 -----> 2 stats per season
Rider z -- Pot 5 -----> 3 stats per season
and so on.
And at the same time limit the amount of money that passes from one season to the other. if you leave for example 1 million by spending this season, the next will receive only 25% of that million.
|
| |
|
|
| tsmoha |
Posted on 23-12-2014 18:19
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 11819
Joined: 19-07-2010
PCM$: 300.00
|
Why should a pot7-rider be more limited than a pot5-rider? Imo, lower potential should actually lead to a more limited amount of possible training.
|
| |
|
|
| fintas |
Posted on 23-12-2014 18:31
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2602
Joined: 21-03-2008
PCM$: 1200.00
|
Because normally one Pot7 already have a much better stats, and the purpose of this debate is to end the absurd training that means that in the near future there are several riders with 85 in any stat
|
| |
|
|
| tsmoha |
Posted on 23-12-2014 18:35
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 11819
Joined: 19-07-2010
PCM$: 300.00
|
Hmmm, i don't mind a few 85 riders, but would avoid allowing to train less talented riders into 80+ riders, too. That's one reason for a few 79+ riders to suck way too often, as there's very much of those riders. Just my thought, of course. But i don't think it's realistic to turn a less potential into a great rider.
|
| |
|
|
| fintas |
Posted on 23-12-2014 18:40
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2602
Joined: 21-03-2008
PCM$: 1200.00
|
Perhaps the best way to limit the training is not by the potential but by AVG. Because hindsight my previous idea would value the low potential cyclists and this is not good at all
|
| |
|
|
| Heine |
Posted on 23-12-2014 19:33
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4116
Joined: 08-04-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Instead of making limits we can make the differences in price higher. So that it is still possible to train to 85 if you want to, but you will have to offer a lot. While at the same time making the lower stats cheaper. So poeple get more likely to train the weaker riders (also making training more a possibility for PCT/CT teams instead of all the money ending up in PT)
|
| |
|
|
| Smowz |
Posted on 27-12-2014 19:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6479
Joined: 09-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
SN's finances table confirms to me that it is not so much as PT teams (including relegated ones) get too much money to begin with but actually end up gathering the money as it filters up and then dump it all on uber training of their top end riders.
I have an alternative idea on training:
Remove training from money altogether. Each team is instead assigned training points based on goals (set for current season and gained from previous season).
What does this leave finances for - riders renewels, transfers between teams and some of the other ideas said. I do wonder whether you would include free agent fees for riders over 250K wage from free agency. But also an overall reduction of spare money beyond wage cap may well be welcome - personally I believe that the transfers between teams ieaves some areas of grey.
Away from training and another issue is the amount of races - in the reporters section there has been talk in fact confirmed I think by SN before to try and condense the season further. One thing that needs looking at is the general length of stage races. Many pretour races can be reduced to 4 or 5 stages.
Basque and Qatar for example could easily be four stage races. Suisse, Dauphine, PN, Tirreno, Volta, TONE etc. could easily be 5 stage races. When it comes to GT's could they be squeezed down to 15 stages? It is generally where reporters come unstuck is the stage races. The question is how recovery would be effected?
Something else I thought I would put out there is to place ITT's and TTT's always at stage one? The exception of course is GT's where there should be a later one.
|
| |
|
|
| knockout |
Posted on 27-12-2014 19:37
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7735
Joined: 21-12-2010
PCM$: 400.00
|
Smowz wrote:
Something else I thought I would put out there is to place ITT's and TTT's always at stage one? The exception of course is GT's where there should be a later one.
I don't think that's a good idea. Imo it destroys the variety of stage races a bit because stage racer with great TT will score more points on a race with
"TT-sprint-sprint-hill-mountain" than on a "mountain-hill-sprint-sprint-TT" course. The other way round for pure climbers.
A Big Thank You To All MG Reporters! |
| |
|
|
| Smowz |
Posted on 27-12-2014 20:47
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6479
Joined: 09-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
The problem is with the TT at the end the pure TT guys don't perform at all.
|
| |
|
|
| tsmoha |
Posted on 27-12-2014 20:53
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 11819
Joined: 19-07-2010
PCM$: 300.00
|
Smowz wrote:
The problem is with the TT at the end the pure TT guys don't perform at all.
Had a similar idea in mind. Maybe not all TTs at stage one, but definitely take care of a well balanced early-TT-schedule in some more races.
|
| |
|
