|
Ideas for 2011
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 30-10-2009 14:52
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
For the salary cap thing, i think remove it completely, lower budgets massively, remove training and make the differences between team budgets bigger
Salary caps will probably change a little from last season, but they are here to stay for now.
Also, its hard to massively lower budgets and yet increase the differences in budgets that the teams have.
|
| |
|
|
| mrlol |
Posted on 30-10-2009 15:39
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5005
Joined: 24-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Increasing the difference between budgets would be an extremely stupid thing to do. PT and CT budgets have grown towards eachother last season + the salary cap does it's job as well to level out differences between PT and CT.
After all, we want every manager to be able to reach the top some day. |
| |
|
|
| mb2612 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 15:40
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5759
Joined: 18-05-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think you missunderstand my system rjc:
Essentially, there will be a cap on how much you can gain, meaning that spilak won't be able to max out immediately. Also you normalise it based on the points gain from this year so growth stays roughly similar. It would mean that talents spend more time at lower levels as they will take some time to get going.
As far as your idea goes, it looks pretty good now that I understand. My only problems are with reverse implementation, i.e. what are you going to do about riders who this year and last year raced PT, but aren't maxxed out. You would probably have to count up race days. Also it does give a pretty big advantage to CT teams who get GT wild cards.
 [url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182] Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
Please assume I am joking unless otherwise stated |
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 30-10-2009 16:02
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
sorry i meant to write lower the gap in budgets
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 30-10-2009 16:58
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think training should be removed
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 17:23
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I don't think training should be removed, however I do think the amount of money teams have should be reduced. (Apart from my teams which should both be given extra).
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk]  [/url] |
| |
|
|
| mrlol |
Posted on 30-10-2009 18:01
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5005
Joined: 24-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
I think training should be removed
rjc_43 wrote:
I do think the amount of money teams have should be reduced.
Any arguments?
Edited by mrlol on 30-10-2009 18:22
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 18:58
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yes.
I was going to mention about how new teams could buy great riders that should be, for instance in the pro tour rather than continental tour, but upon more thought about it, I realised it was as fair as the system could be in introducing new teams. Obviously it wouldn't have been fair to limit new teams salary caps further, or to limit their total money. Even though to teams who'd been around for a while percieved the system as unfair to them. Or I certainly did. But I know that that's just my perception of it, and in actuality, it is fair. At the end of the day, I too could have spent 1 million on one rider who was awesome, but then the rest of my squad would be weaker and older than the guys I have now.
So my second point is this:
As much as I hate to admit it, there was too much training. I, for one, certainly like the idea of training, it helped me turn Hermans from a great domestique, into one of my team leaders. Albeit I've overrated him at times, but he is certainly doing me proud now I helped his hill stat a bit.
However, I still managed to put 2.5 million euros/pounds/currency into training. And I know, having looked at some other teams training plans, that most teams could put in 2 million or so into training someone, or the entire team. Whilst it DOES help train those weaker into someone more useful, I think it was slightly abused in it's usage of training those already insanely strong, into something stronger. Rather than leveling the playing field, it just rose it. Every strong rider just seemed to get stronger, and the average just turned into poor. I certainly think there should be some kind of limit either on the training - it can't be used on riders over a certain average, or used to boost a stat past a certain point, or a limit of the amount of money able to be used. If teams only had 1 million spare to spend on training, then real thought into who to train would have to be undertaken, rather than going, "I'll train my leader into awesomeness, and then the entire team as well, so my leader gets even better, oh and as an after thought, I'll boost my second leader as well".
I just think there was a little too much money floating around. Sure, maybe the money should be there for people to play with in transfers, but maybe there should be a cap on the amount of training undertaken, or the amount that can be spent on it.
I don't know which approach would be best, I just think that eventually there will be far too many good riders.
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 30-10-2009 19:04
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
yeah, training will just lead to far too many good riders for it to be interesting
|
| |
|
|
| Levi4life |
Posted on 30-10-2009 19:07
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4882
Joined: 16-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I like the idea of not being able to train anyone over a certain average, or perhaps over a certain age, though average would be more fair.
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 19:11
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
The training over a certain age - well that's not allowed over 32 anyway. Unless it's team training, which personally I think should be removed.
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 00:00
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Levi4life |
Posted on 30-10-2009 19:14
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4882
Joined: 16-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I don't think anyone really benefited from team TT training, because everyone did it.
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 19:18
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Apart from the teams who didn't do it, who therefore suffered.
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| Levi4life |
Posted on 30-10-2009 19:20
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4882
Joined: 16-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
did your team not do Team TT training?
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 19:23
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yes, I did. But only because I wanted to train Hermans in hills AND TTs. Which I don't think should be allowed. I think you should only be allowed to select one or a few guys to train each season, otherwise everyone will just increase in stats, and there would be no use to training, other than to keep up with everyone else. Training should be there to make guys more unique.
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| fenian_1234 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 20:07
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4790
Joined: 06-12-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
I'd definitely agree on the point that there was far too money floating around for training. I initially misunderstood the transfer system and was really scrimping to try and have 1m for training.
Then it turned out I had 3m - which I couldn't believe - and that was then just party time for Ginanni.
Money well spent so far though. 
I disagree on lots of strong riders making it dull - the best races for me so far this season have been when Ginanni has taken on the likes of Gilbert, Valverde and Kirchen. The dull races have been the GT's. Cunego and Schleck were just too dominant. |
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 20:20
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I haven't said there are too many strong riders this season. I was meaning in the coming seasons, where we could potentially end up with say 50 odd guys with 80+ hills, or mountains, or etc...
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| dave92 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 20:21
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2946
Joined: 21-04-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
i would say that training should be limited based on the specific stat. For example, training could would not be able to increase any single stat to or over 80. Perhaps the age limit should be brought down a few years to 30 or so.
|
| |
|
|
| fenian_1234 |
Posted on 30-10-2009 20:36
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4790
Joined: 06-12-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
One other idea - and a controversial one - would be that riders who win either a GT or a monument, get a small stat decrease to reflect a loss in their motivation to win.
|
| |
|
|
| mrlol |
Posted on 30-10-2009 20:49
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5005
Joined: 24-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
fenian_1234 wrote:
One other idea - and a controversial one - would be that riders who win either a GT or a monument, get a small stat decrease to reflect a loss in their motivation to win.
sorry.
edit; little more serious; Lance had the motivation for a comeback, right?
Edited by mrlol on 30-10-2009 20:50
|
| |
|
