|
General Career Discussion
|
| Jesleyh |
Posted on 21-05-2013 15:21
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15274
Joined: 21-07-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
eple wrote:
Jesleyh wrote:
Yeah, Lampre is a bit old, but Scarponi is the only climber that starts declining within the first 3 seasons, and you can easily do some transfers. 
And Garmin is a nice team to do a career with, for sure.
Alright, is it set like that in the DB? I thought the start of decline in stats was largely random, or decided upon game start?
Age 34. Set in every DB, also original I think.
Although people with current Age 38 get Age 39 set, Age 36 get Age 37 set etc, to limit the decline at the first year.
Feyenoord(football) and Kelderman fanboy
PCMdaily Awards: 12x nomination, 9x runner-up, 0x win.
|
| |
|
|
| eple |
Posted on 21-05-2013 19:25
|
Stagiare
Posts: 173
Joined: 17-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Thanks, I went with Lampre - Merida. Weaker leaders compared to Euskatel, but I like the squad a whole lot more.
Had a surprising start in Tour Down Under. Sent Palini, Ulissi and Richeze with a few of the weakest riders and didn't really expect much. Came back with 5 stage wins (Ulissi x 3, Richeze x 2) and three 2nd places. Ulissi won GC and sprinters jersey(and youth jersey obv). He lost the climbers jersey on the last stage, but all in all absolutely fantastic start.
I guess I got my guys more fit than what the AI managed!
|
| |
|
|
| lluuiiggii |
Posted on 21-05-2013 20:39
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8542
Joined: 30-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Jesleyh wrote:
Age 34. Set in every DB, also original I think.
Nah, PCMDaily DB. Original has most riders in 33, but several of them with 32, 31, 30 or even 29 (and some with more than 33 ofc).
|
| |
|
|
| Jesleyh |
Posted on 21-05-2013 20:40
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15274
Joined: 21-07-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
lluuiiggii wrote:
Jesleyh wrote:
Age 34. Set in every DB, also original I think.
Nah, PCMDaily DB. Original has most riders in 33, but several of them with 32, 31, 30 or even 29 (and some with more than 33 ofc).
Oh okay. Guess I'm so fixed on the Daily DB, that I can't think of other options anymore 
But is the original randomized or just set limits per rider?
Feyenoord(football) and Kelderman fanboy
PCMdaily Awards: 12x nomination, 9x runner-up, 0x win.
|
| |
|
|
| lluuiiggii |
Posted on 21-05-2013 20:55
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8542
Joined: 30-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Jesleyh wrote:
lluuiiggii wrote:
Jesleyh wrote:
Age 34. Set in every DB, also original I think.
Nah, PCMDaily DB. Original has most riders in 33, but several of them with 32, 31, 30 or even 29 (and some with more than 33 ofc).
Oh okay. Guess I'm so fixed on the Daily DB, that I can't think of other options anymore
But is the original randomized or just set limits per rider?
It's set per rider in the DB, but if you're asking how did they get to these values, then my guess is randomized (Hesjedal has age of decline of 30 - career big win came with 31)
|
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 22-05-2013 09:34
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
Whenever I have a new database, I always set Jens Voigt's age of decline to 50  |
| |
|
|
| eple |
Posted on 22-05-2013 13:12
|
Stagiare
Posts: 173
Joined: 17-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Petacchi has already lost a bunch of stat points.
I have a question, but it's slightly off topic so please excuse me. I always set the rider development to 1, but find development to be painfully slow still. On every save that I check with Lachis Editor the coeff_f_carac_evolution in DNY_manager is set to 0.
Previously I have usually changed this to 1, but this has resulted in some weird development, i.e. where a talented rider stays unchanged for almost a full seasons and then suddenly jump 5-7 avr points in one go towards the end of the season. Should this number stay at 0?
Edited by eple on 22-05-2013 13:14
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 23-11-2024 15:00
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 22-05-2013 13:58
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
eple wrote:
I always set the rider development to 1, but find development to be painfully slow still.
You're joking right?
But anyway setting it to 1 does not equal guaranteed rapid development. Behind that the defining values are still randomized to an extent. You can edit them but if you set development to 1 you really should not need to. Make sure you're training your riders correctly.
As anyone will tell you 0.5 generates a noticeable rate of development and many people find that too fast and unrealistic. Myself and Kentaurus set the development lower still, as should everyone planning on a 3+season game, to prevent inflation and build realism.
|
| |
|
|
| ShortsNL |
Posted on 22-05-2013 14:18
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 898
Joined: 17-11-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
One could argue what is better: a lower growth rate with the current declining ages in place or a higher growth rate with lower declining ages in place. When tuned correctly together either, they should prevent stats inflation and only influence the speed at which the riders in the datababe 'cycle' (no pun intended).
In the DB I am currently using, age decline was set to 34, yet generated young riders often have lower declining ages in the range of 28-31. At 0.5 growth rate, this did cause strong stats inflation after 2-3 seasons, but I think it will balance out for me in the long run when the generation of generated riders completely takes over. |
| |
|
|
| eple |
Posted on 22-05-2013 14:40
|
Stagiare
Posts: 173
Joined: 17-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
eple wrote:
I always set the rider development to 1, but find development to be painfully slow still.
You're joking right?
But anyway setting it to 1 does not equal guaranteed rapid development. Behind that the defining values are still randomized to an extent. You can edit them but if you set development to 1 you really should not need to. Make sure you're training your riders correctly.
As anyone will tell you 0.5 generates a noticeable rate of development and many people find that too fast and unrealistic. Myself and Kentaurus set the development lower still, as should everyone planning on a 3+season game, to prevent inflation and build realism.
No joke, at 1 evolution I rarely see stats go up more than 1 point pr season and I make sure I have great coaches and they are not overworked. So it's kind of frustrating to have a future great rider with a low starting ability needing more years to reach his potential than what time he has got before his stats start to decline.
Chances are I might have been unlucky with the random luck of the draw, or maybe I'm impatient. What I do see though is riders declining quickly when they reach that wall. I.e. assigning a 33 y/o leader for the vuelta at the start of the season might see him turn too weak to compete by the time it starts.
Anyways, I guess what I'm wondering is if the value you select at game start is different from the coeff_f_carac_evolution in DNY_manager, and why this value is always 0? Is it a bug on my end, or is it supposed to be like that? So far in my current game I haven't changed it and I've seen a few riders increase/decrease in one attribute, but I'm only in April so way too early to tell. |
| |
|
|
| Jesleyh |
Posted on 22-05-2013 15:25
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15274
Joined: 21-07-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yeah, you've probably been unlucky. On 0,5/0,6, I saw a few guys going up 5/6 stat points in a season. You have to be lucky, the random table thing goes from 1 to 5, and 5 is really like 10 times faster than 1(not exactly know how much).
0,5 is clearly enough(did 0,7 once, and that was surely too much for me)
At my careers, coeff_f_carac_evolution is 0 as well, so it's not a bug. Not sure why it is like that, though
Feyenoord(football) and Kelderman fanboy
PCMdaily Awards: 12x nomination, 9x runner-up, 0x win.
|
| |
|
|
| wogsrus |
Posted on 22-05-2013 15:46
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1200
Joined: 12-01-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Completed up to Tirreno.
Goss won TDU. It was the flat version where stage with Old Willunga Hill wasn't finished on.
Kelderman finished 2nd at Paris Nice, and both Goss and Gerrans finished top 3 at a very flat Tirreno. |
| |
|
|
| eple |
Posted on 22-05-2013 16:01
|
Stagiare
Posts: 173
Joined: 17-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Wow, that crazy. Now I understand why TMM asked if I was kidding. I'll be patient this time then I guess and see how it goes. When I changed the value of coeff_f_carac_evolution to 1 the balance became all wonky after a season or two.
Just one more question. When I have the leaders jersey I have a problem with breakaways on hilly/mountain stages. No other teams will lift a finger so I have to set the pace the entire time. Usually I'll let 2 or 3 guys sit in front and go on 50% effort after a break has been established (2-3 minutes), and then I adjust effort accordingly to keep them within a safe distance (I let the gap grow but not as much as i.e. 10 min). The problem is that in the early part of the race more and more riders jump onto the break and often I end up chasing a break with 10-20 riders, and it's very hard to pull back in with this Lampre team, as I don't have very strong helpers. Often, by the time the other race favorites start to attack only my leader has energy left and he has to fend them of on his own. So far it's gone okay, but I assume when I get to the Giro and recovery rate starts to make a big difference I won't be able to manage it. So how do you avoid the heavily populated breakaway? Should I just chase like a mad man at first until everyone is so tired of attacking that they let a small one go? |
| |
|
|
| Jesleyh |
Posted on 22-05-2013 16:08
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15274
Joined: 21-07-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Easy one. Try to get a guy in the break. They don't see you solo responsible for the break then, others will relay as well(In my experience, but I mainly play .1 & .2 races).
Also, you can go for KoM fights when having someone in the break.
And sometimes, you should just let the break go. Some stages are just 'designed'(not really ofc, but you know what I mean ) to let the break win, but ofc only do that if they're not even a minor GC threat. Also, when you let the break go, you can go for a result with the guy you put in it
Avoiding a heavily populated break is hard though. Chasing the break until a small one gets away instead of a big one is the only solution I think. That doesn't necassarily have to take that long, sometimes that still happens when everybody has a lot of energy left.
Feyenoord(football) and Kelderman fanboy
PCMdaily Awards: 12x nomination, 9x runner-up, 0x win.
|
| |
|
|
| eple |
Posted on 22-05-2013 16:24
|
Stagiare
Posts: 173
Joined: 17-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Whenever I send a guy into a breakaway the other teams usually go crazy (unless he is too weak to win anything). I guess I'm not the one chasing at that point though, so at least that would be valuable.
And as for the big break there is always that one guy in it who is like 5-6 minutes behind my leader 
Paris-Roubaix up next, and can't wait for the Giro. Pozzato has won Milan-San Remo, Ronde Vlaanderen, E3 and placesd 3rd in Gent-Wevelgem so far.. a bit surprised. I'm guessing it's down to good fitness cos he has been able to catch up to and ride away from Cancellara & Boonen in the last 10-20km of the races.
eple attached the following image:
Edited by eple on 22-05-2013 16:27
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 22-05-2013 16:47
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
eple wrote:
Paris-Roubaix up next, and can't wait for the Giro. Pozzato has won Milan-San Remo, Ronde Vlaanderen, E3 and placesd 3rd in Gent-Wevelgem so far.. a bit surprised. I'm guessing it's down to good fitness cos he has been able to catch up to and ride away from Cancellara & Boonen in the last 10-20km of the races.
I would recommend going up a difficulty level if you are doing that well with Pozzo....
|
| |
|
|
| Abelbaba |
Posted on 22-05-2013 17:03
|
Domestique
Posts: 537
Joined: 13-12-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
eple wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
eple wrote:
I always set the rider development to 1, but find development to be painfully slow still.
You're joking right?
But anyway setting it to 1 does not equal guaranteed rapid development. Behind that the defining values are still randomized to an extent. You can edit them but if you set development to 1 you really should not need to. Make sure you're training your riders correctly.
As anyone will tell you 0.5 generates a noticeable rate of development and many people find that too fast and unrealistic. Myself and Kentaurus set the development lower still, as should everyone planning on a 3+season game, to prevent inflation and build realism.
No joke, at 1 evolution I rarely see stats go up more than 1 point pr season and I make sure I have great coaches and they are not overworked. So it's kind of frustrating to have a future great rider with a low starting ability needing more years to reach his potential than what time he has got before his stats start to decline.
Chances are I might have been unlucky with the random luck of the draw, or maybe I'm impatient. What I do see though is riders declining quickly when they reach that wall. I.e. assigning a 33 y/o leader for the vuelta at the start of the season might see him turn too weak to compete by the time it starts.
Anyways, I guess what I'm wondering is if the value you select at game start is different from the coeff_f_carac_evolution in DNY_manager, and why this value is always 0? Is it a bug on my end, or is it supposed to be like that? So far in my current game I haven't changed it and I've seen a few riders increase/decrease in one attribute, but I'm only in April so way too early to tell.
also note that the 1.0 growing stat is also the decline stat, at 0.5 riders decline slower |
| |
|
|
| eple |
Posted on 22-05-2013 17:13
|
Stagiare
Posts: 173
Joined: 17-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
I would recommend going up a difficulty level if you are doing that well with Pozzo....
I agree, I could use a more challenging level but when I tried I found the gap from normal to hard a bit too big. Maybe it was situational though.. I tried hard difficulty with Euskatel and I had no chance dropping riders and getting away with Nieve in TDU, but did so with Ulissi on normal and he is weaker than Nieve. I also did a test with Nibali in Giro and struggled with my dot-effort tactic.
Was a bit tighter in Paris-Roubaix 
eple attached the following image:
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 22-05-2013 17:28
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
But without the challenge the results just arn't satisfying  Its why my stage win with Gatto (hey look its a story plug!) was the best feeling win i've ever had (probably) because it was on a level where it really should not have happened.
|
| |
|
|
| Selwink |
Posted on 22-05-2013 17:48
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8856
Joined: 17-05-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
But without the challenge the results just arn't satisfying Its why my stage win with Gatto (hey look its a story plug!) was the best feeling win i've ever had (probably) because it was on a level where it really should not have happened.
About that, when will you race the next stage?
I currently am not able to play PCM, because my battery is broken. Buying a new battery soon and then also buy a desktop so I can run PCM2013 on the max
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
