|
2013 Stat Increases / Decreases / Training
|
| OlegTinkov |
Posted on 26-10-2012 19:14
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2666
Joined: 31-12-2007
PCM$: 450.00
|
Solution: Just let people train whatever they want, and than at the end of the season randomly pick ~5% of the trained riders as dopers and kick him out of the db everybody happy! 
|
| |
|
|
| mb2612 |
Posted on 26-10-2012 19:26
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5759
Joined: 18-05-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
So the topic seemed to be focussed on Madrazo and Ventoso for a while, so I thought I would chip in.
Ventoso has nothing to worry about, the best sprinter has an average of 81, so they can train their hill stat to 71, still giving Ventoso a significant advantage. The riders who are not helped, are the sprinters with 65 sprint, who suddenly could find themselves with lots more competition.
Madrazo, I guess could be better off, but the marginal gains don't really make sense to me. It would cost 750,000 to make Madrazo a 71 flat, giving no obvious benefit. It would cost the same to make Lopez Garcia 77 Hill, which, given he is my hilly leader, will give me quite a few more points. It would cost 1.6 million to make Madrazo a 71 sprint, yet only 1.4 million to make Tenorio an 82 mountain. Again, I know which I would rather do.
As such I can only see two reasons for spending this money on Madrazo:
1) I have a spare 100,000 at the end of the transfer season, so up his sprint by one in lieu of finding anything else to do with it. I can't see Madrazo becoming a 62 sprint significantly changing anything.
2) There is a cobbled stage in the tour, in which case I would probably spend a million making Madrazo a 65 Cobble. I don't know if people think this is abusing the rules, but I don't think such a stage is likely, so this event will probably not occur.
EDIT: Actually SotD, I think your idea is very good, if you add a 10% penalty to every time you train the same stat on a rider in the off season, then that would start to become punitive after a while, but would still allow the rule change to achieve it's desired effect.
Edited by mb2612 on 26-10-2012 19:30
 [url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182] Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
Please assume I am joking unless otherwise stated |
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 26-10-2012 19:37
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Can somebody 100% verify how it`s correct.
100k up to the point when the stat is 10 less than the avg or up to 65. |
| |
|
|
| Gustavovskiy |
Posted on 26-10-2012 19:42
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6036
Joined: 20-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Well you can't say that you didn't buy a rider in a past season just because you weren't aware this chance would be implemented now. I certainly didn't imagine I would be able to train an already maxed rider when SN brought the Training concept to the game. You are one of the oldest around SotD, you should know that the game mutates every year. Obviously some will benefit more than others, you'll just have to adapt and make sure you can balance that difference with better tactics.
That said I must admit I find it a bit exaggerated for a manager to be able to raise a rider stat from 55 to 65 for just 1 million, though. I fear 100.000€ per stat might be slightly low.
(...) No one says you have to make him go from 58 to 65 in one season. No one else climbs that much in one seasons training.
Real life Wiggins?
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 26-10-2012 19:45
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
People, give examples of riders then. And say how they'd gain points because of it! Don't just say metaphorical examples without having looked at riders.
And yes, Lavoine could improve in both hill and mountain, but I don't think the spending of 500,000 for hills, or 400,000 for mountains improvements before the average cost takes over, would give a great return in terms of ranking points.
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk]  [/url] |
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 26-10-2012 19:51
|
World Champion
Posts: 12187
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
I know I didn't Gustavovskiy. That isn't the point. I have riders that could be potentially interesting with the new changes, as Lavoine. He would fit my french plans very well, and to spend 900K on him becoming 73FL, 62MO, 62HI and then perhaps another Sprint stat would go very well down my book, but the fact is that I bought a fairly shitty rider, and his wage is according to it (65K). I don't think it is fair to other managers that I will have a sprinter that is now actually capable of winning a Tour de France stage, and placing himself regularly in the top 5 on flat stages, while their similar sprinters cost 150K in wages. That would give me an 85K advantage, which could be used ontop of my salary cap on a slightly better GT rider or so.
It's all just a theoretical option, but it does exist. If we go with the idea I made in the previous post it would cost me 2mil to get him to 62/62 MO/HI, which imo is slightly more realistic giving the fact that it's actually a big jump to get a total of +7 in "survival skills". Those are his primary weaknesses which means he is usually a bit tired going into the final 1/4th. (Obviously he could be well off with more resistance aswell).
Would I spend 2million on making him a better surviver? No. Would I spend 2million on making him a better surviver and a better sprinter? Probably. Would I spend 900K on making him a better surviver? Absolutely.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 03:50
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 26-10-2012 19:57
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
That's the same advantage that anyone gains having a rider who's just gone up a level.
Last year's results affect the new wage demand. But the rider has new stats. Look at Bakelants for proof of that!
Plus, Lavoine scored 200+ points this season - what makes you think he'll accept 65k wage this year? He might go up significantly.
Plus, he'd only be out of "sink" with "similar sprinters" (who wouldn't be very similar if they cost 150k) until next season. And it would have cost you 900,000. So that's 900,000 not spent on some other rider getting trained, or you not buying in someone good.
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:03
|
World Champion
Posts: 12187
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
You might be right rjc. I don't know... It would make him fairly close to Vanderbiest though (Still not as good, but quite close), and he outscored him by a lot two seasons in a row at a 200K higher wage. Could Lavoine score that amount of points then I would have been 4th and not 5th (I think - Or very close atleast). And 200K more to spend on another rider that could score almost the same amount.
Like I said I don't know whether or not it will be a problem, but I could see it being a problem, and I can't understand why we want riders to improve quite drastically at a very low cost. Why not put in that interest rate like I said? that would make a natural "stop" at 4-5 stat increase pr. season. +10 for a rider is too much imo.
If I had Mr. Mohs I wouldn't hesitate to spend 1,6mil on making him 60Mo and 65HI. It would make him very very strong, which a rider such as Max Richeze couldn't even dream on getting, despite having a shorter path to the same stats. He needs to train 3SPR, 3ACC, while Mohs needs to train 16stats.
The difference in this case is 6,6millions.
|
| |
|
|
| Gustavovskiy |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:07
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6036
Joined: 20-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
rjc's post says it all. Wages are evaluated after the results from past season, and that goes for everyone, so I can't see where it isn't fair.
Great stats + low wage is the goal everyone tries to achieve prior to the beginning of the season. Why shouldn't you be allowed to conquer that if everyone else is trying to do the same? 
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I understand your concern, truly I do. Though I suspect you give other managers too much respect in terms of their cunning.
As a manager, you explore every single avenue open to you to get the best out of your team. You also do you renewals exceptionally well. All proof of your experience in the game. Other managers might not do renewals as well (hence higher wage, but not much difference in stats).
And I did also look at Mohs tonight. Yes, he could be an ideal candidate for this method, but that's still 1.6 million spent on him. It's a lot of money!
Or the manager could spend 1.8 million and get his sprint stat up one more.
I know which I'd prefer!
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| Alakagom |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:19
|
World Champion
Posts: 10891
Joined: 19-11-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Definitely the boost to the hill / mo rather than just one measly sprint point in my opinion.
I think not many people actually see how massively hill stat impacts the game. It means more energy for the sprinter at the end of a stage, and almost every stage has few uphill gradients in it. And that energy is usually much more important than one point of sprint would.
Edited by Alakagom on 26-10-2012 20:21
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:24
|
World Champion
Posts: 12187
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
I know they are. But if you can make a rider score 500points more than he would have otherwise by spending a million on him, that is a good investment in THIS season.
To me, this season will always be the major concern. Obviously I'm looking to the future aswell, but not too long, because you can't control it further than 2 seasons anyway (I can't atleast).
I am going to accept these rules of course, no doubt in that. I just feel they would be better with a slight tweak a la the one I suggested (Not necessarily that one, but something like it). That would make it interesting to train Mohs better, but not interesting to give him 16-20points here and now. That is too much. That is altering the entire description of the rider. And that I don't like. You can train a rider better, sure. You can also make him less bad at something, sure. But you cannot change a sprinter who will kill himself climbing a bug, into a sprinter that will be able to survive a mediocre mountain stage in the front group of 50-60 rider in just one season. Or atleast I think that is too much.
When you buy David Lopez Garcia you are aware of the fact that he is never going to win any stage race because he will lose 5-6 minutes on every possible sight of a TT. But whoops. Now he can become 65TT, and all of a sudden he can realistically beat Marzano, who would normally beat him. Again these are just examples picked out in the air, I haven't studied the DB into details to see which riders are the best examples, and I know both of the ones I mention now cannot be trained, so it's purely a stat-example.
Like I said, I will accept the fact that this is implemented, and I won't waste anymore of your time here. You know how I feel
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:27
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I accept your points, I do indeed.
Though Lopez Garcia is too old
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk] [/url] |
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:30
|
World Champion
Posts: 12187
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
So is Marzano
And thanks for taking the time to correspond with my "concerns".
|
| |
|
|
| fenian_1234 |
Posted on 26-10-2012 20:44
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4790
Joined: 06-12-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Looking at Vespa, I'd probably use it to boost a Ginanni/Pozzo's sub 65 stats on the cheap. Make Pozzo a faster finisher and Ginanni a bit more likely to attack.
If Gatto or Gavazzi were good enough to win sprints, I'd boost there MO/HIL stats to try and get them to be up there in the end of tough flat stages. As the'yre not, could use it to boost their fighter stats to try and get good sprinters into breaks.
I think this is the way most managers will end up using it - spare cash to boost riders stats on the cheap. Not sure about rule change to allow people to do this - though SotD's tax idea would limit it.
|
| |
|
|
| tyriion |
Posted on 28-10-2012 14:29
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1510
Joined: 29-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Just been looking at the xp system and I fail to see where the PCT comes in when it comes to rider development. It seems you have to start your lvl 1 rider in a CT team, get him up 2 levels in a season and from then on it's off to the PT.
I guess with 5 xp levels and wanting to keep the GTs and PT races separated in terms of rider dev the PCT doesn't have a big role in that. Is that intentional? I would have expected lvl 3 riders to be best served racing for a PCT team and thus gaining the most in HC races.
Check out my ManGame team here
|
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 28-10-2012 14:31
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
PCT teams will be able to ride in C2 races. Just like how CT teams will be able to ride in C1 races.
--
And there will likely be some changes to the new training addition.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 28-10-2012 14:32
|
| |
|
|
| mb2612 |
Posted on 08-12-2012 22:27
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5759
Joined: 18-05-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Does anyone have a version of this file which works in Open Office, the file SN attached had N/A for half the entries.
Thanks
[url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182] Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
Please assume I am joking unless otherwise stated |
| |
|
|
| Spilak23 |
Posted on 08-12-2012 22:49
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 22-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
https://www.mediafire.com/view/?v2jkx3...3old2bdiq5
|
| |
|
|
| mb2612 |
Posted on 08-12-2012 23:18
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5759
Joined: 18-05-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Thanks
[url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182] Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
Please assume I am joking unless otherwise stated |
| |
|
