|
Suggestions 2025 season
|
| Nemolito |
Posted on 12-03-2025 15:38
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3837
Joined: 20-04-2020
PCM$: 425.00
|
Think it doesn't hurt to have a suggestion thread open.
One thing I think we can really use is using a web application for transfer weeks. Even if the forum works properly/better again by the time transfers are here, I believe it's in the benefit of the game to have something that's not more trusthworthy/less unreliable, but also easy to use. Ezeefreak sent me two example pictures of what could happen/be realized, but of course he'd need to know on time if we make it an actual thing.
As seen on the example pictures, this could work with just creating one login per team, makes it easier to look up riders and therefore less prone to making mistakes (which is also another relief of the shoulders of the people who need to keep looking out to see who they need to correct and make a total mess of some threads etc.). Perhaps Ezee is able to make it so that you can't make more than 20 bids on 8 different riders per day as well, but I assume that might be a bit too hard to make (or another option would be for the admins to see a bid posting history per user, similar to how we could see post history on the forum in the good old days).
There is no 'discussion' component or anything on there, just the act of transfers (FA's and Deals), so this is not taking mg away from the forum, it's just making life easier. If you can log in on pcmdaily.com, I'm sure you could also log in on another site for three weeks. Saying no to this means you can't complain when the forum is down during transfers and no time should get added for you to make overbids then 
Example pictures:
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 12-03-2025 15:41
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15024
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 11500.00
|
I would prefer all resources to go to making the current forum more stable, rather than looking for external solutions.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| Nemolito |
Posted on 12-03-2025 15:43
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3837
Joined: 20-04-2020
PCM$: 425.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
I would prefer all resources to go to making the current forum more stable, rather than looking for external solutions.
Yes, that's been going on for ages now (not blaming anyone in particular). Ezee doing this is really not something that collides with that though.
|
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 12-03-2025 15:49
|
World Champion
Posts: 13560
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 400.00
|
If we were to do this, I don't think it should combine the functionalities of db searching and forum posting. It should only be used for the actual bidding. Having easy acces to the riders stats and seeing who had a bid on already or what is the highest bid so easily would take the fun out of db searching for hidden gems.
Or keep the stats but only allow for filtering by name, not stats or bids. And also don't allow sorting of any kind.
Edited by alexkr00 on 12-03-2025 15:54
|
| |
|
|
| Ezeefreak |
Posted on 12-03-2025 15:54
|
Domestique
Posts: 700
Joined: 06-07-2009
PCM$: 300.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
I would prefer all resources to go to making the current forum more stable, rather than looking for external solutions.
I am not really an external source 
Actually i did this just because i wanted to try something out what was also a good learning for my job. So this was/is a small private project.
Ignore that it looks plain, it hjas no styling at all yet. Important for me was all the background stuff. Like automatically keeping track of budgets, free riders and auctions/FA bidding. Of course after the time is over for bids the deal is sealed automatically. And assigning it in the end to the team.
You basically load the pre transfer database into it, then transfers happen there (the operative stuff like announce finalizing deals and signings) and when all is over the staff gets the edited database with all transfers done. In addition i just included all the budget stuff. Besides this nothing happens there like Nemo said. Just thought it might be a help (not a replacement) for the staff to not do a lot of that manually. Also of course convenient for managers.
Also it is to note it needs more work obviously because at some point i stopped. I just dont wanna do work that isnt used anyway.
Anyway, just a few details on what Nemo said 
alexkr00 wrote:
If we were to do this, I don't think it should combine the functionalities of db searching and forum posting. It should only be used for the actual bidding. Having easy acces to the riders stats and seeing who had a bid on already or what is the highest bid so easily would take the fun out of db searching for hidden gems.
I kinda agree, i just did it like this because I could and i wanted to fiddle around a bit with it. Removing everything stat wise is obviously not a problem and increases performance also
|
| |
|
|
| Fabianski |
Posted on 12-03-2025 16:17
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5234
Joined: 29-09-2018
PCM$: 185.00
|
I'm really torn on this subject. On one hand, as a software developer, I've been imagining all potential tools that could facilitate MG. Including having a web-app where reporters can simply upload their results and the rankings are updated automatically.
But in the end, I don't think we should take stuff away from the forum, just like Ollfardh says. One challenge of transfers is to keep track of your bids, and on all the other riders - it currently isn't even allowed to share mid-transfer DBs, so having a website where you always have the current state would be 100% against this idea. But it would definitely make people's lives easier, which should particularly benefit those not being able to spend hours and hours during transfers.
Personally, I spend some time every day to keep track of the current bids and transfers, thereby also calculating which team has how much budget left - details that an app obviously calculates within fractions of a second and makes it available to everyone. For me, it would mean saving quite some time, but also taking quite a big challenge away from the managers (at least those who are interested in these details).
So yeah, it's a cool idea for sure, but if we can manage to bring the forum up to speed again (and sustainably!), this would be my priority. But if we need to make MG more "sexy", well, go for it, I guess I could handle it either way
Two more points: The current tooling for transfers works pretty well. But only one person knows how to do it, and also knows what it does (iirc it's more than "just" moving riders around). If there's a new tool, it would need more or less the same feature set - and it'd be good if more than one person knew how it actually works.
And it needs to be flexible enough to allow "overrules" like bid reset/removal or amount adjustments by admins, which is pretty easy on the forum but can be a hassle with an application, as it means you'll need different roles with different permissions. Obviously doable, but it means work, and in IT it mostly means more work that you'd expect
Thanks anyway to Ezee for the work that's already done - as said before, I like the idea, but to me it wouldn't feel very "MG-like" to leave the forum for transfers 
|
| |
|
|
| Roman |
Posted on 12-03-2025 17:42
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4279
Joined: 29-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I am all for any solution that will improve current situation. It is just unacceptable to post something which takes minutes to show up on the website. But sometimes just an error shows up.
As Skype is about to end, I am all for any solution which will improve the situation. Something like Discord may be a decent solution, similarly this tool presented by Nemolito can also help. If forum cannot keep up, we should not only think like MG has to suffer as well.
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 12-03-2025 18:16
|
World Champion
Posts: 12631
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
I Think this is a brilliant idea.
It could be discussed how much the managers should be able to see, eg the other teams budget situation etc., maybe even not seeing their teams at all, as we probably want to give active managers an advantage when creating their own DB that tracks this kind of stuff.
But for the admins to see which teams are doing what, and how their budgets is looking I Can only applaud.
Also the automatical thing at the end is great. The less manual Labor needed for admins to do the better imo.
In all honesty I have about given up on this site ever running perfekt, so moving races etc. to another platform, but keeping all diskussion, HQ etc. Here would be absolutely fine by me. The race results could be posted here at the same time, but for an alternative Way of checking another place to copy it into wouldn’t hurt imo.
We already use external chat functions during transfers, because it’s easier and more flexible. I welcome a similar proces for transfers, which is not at all interesting to follow for non-members
Imo.
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 12-03-2025 18:17
|
World Champion
Posts: 12631
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
I Think this is a brilliant idea.
It could be discussed how much the managers should be able to see, eg the other teams budget situation etc., maybe even not seeing their teams at all, as we probably want to give active managers an advantage when creating their own DB that tracks this kind of stuff.
But for the admins to see which teams are doing what, and how their budgets is looking I Can only applaud.
Also the automatical thing at the end is great. The less manual Labor needed for admins to do the better imo.
In all honesty I have about given up on this site ever running perfekt, so moving races etc. to another platform, but keeping all diskussion, HQ etc. Here would be absolutely fine by me. The race results could be posted here at the same time, but for an alternative Way of checking another place to copy it into wouldn’t hurt imo.
We already use external chat functions during transfers, because it’s easier and more flexible. I welcome a similar proces for transfers, which is not at all interesting to follow for non-members
Imo.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 05-12-2025 19:36
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| knockout |
Posted on 12-03-2025 19:27
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8235
Joined: 21-12-2010
PCM$: 500.00
|
How much of that is a feature and how much of that is a necessarity to keep managers responsible for their action and for avoiding to go over the cap etc?
A Big Thank You To All MG Reporters! |
| |
|
|
| quadsas |
Posted on 12-03-2025 19:46
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2727
Joined: 18-01-2013
PCM$: 300.00
|
The main thing that should be automated and visible to everyone externally are the FA Bids. it takes for ever to look a rider up first few days. If all the bids can be tracked somewhere then that would be great. Other than that I dont really care, I think being able to fuck up is a feature of a game, taking away human element from sheets is detrimental (unless the help it would provide for people dealing with DBs n such is greater)
|
| |
|
|
| Fabianski |
Posted on 12-03-2025 20:57
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5234
Joined: 29-09-2018
PCM$: 185.00
|
knockout wrote:
How much of that is a feature and how much of that is a necessarity to keep managers responsible for their action and for avoiding to go over the cap etc?
I don't care whether it's one or the other, I like it anyway
For the admins, an external tool for bids would obviously be pretty helpful, as they wouldn't need to check for invalid bids, bid limits etc. anymore if the tool implements all of this (which definitely is doable). On the other hand, managers would even less need to read the rules if there's a tool stopping them from doing what they must not do anyway
quadsas' point of being able to fuck up definitely is valid - but you have to weigh this one versus the admins' workload.
|
| |
|
|
| Bjartne |
Posted on 12-03-2025 22:50
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3059
Joined: 15-07-2007
PCM$: 300.00
|
I am really impressed by the pictures and would love to do transfers on this external site. Personally I find it very helpful to easily search up whether there have been bids on the free agents, without it taking several minutes.
I applaud the initiative and if it's also helpful for the admins I would strongly vote in favor for this!  |
| |
|
|
| Laurens147 |
Posted on 13-03-2025 12:26
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1524
Joined: 26-04-2020
PCM$: 900.00
|
SotD wrote:
It could be discussed how much the managers should be able to see, eg the other teams budget situation etc., maybe even not seeing their teams at all, as we probably want to give active managers an advantage when creating their own DB that tracks this kind of stuff.
But for the admins to see which teams are doing what, and how their budgets is looking I Can only applaud.
Also the automatical thing at the end is great. The less manual Labor needed for admins to do the better imo.
I fully agree to this one.
Thanks Ezee for putting the work in!
MG - Lotto - Caloi
[MG] New Manager of the Year - PCM.daily Awards 2022
|
| |
|
|
| redordead |
Posted on 13-03-2025 12:46
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5511
Joined: 18-10-2017
PCM$: 200.00
|
With the current state of the forum I don't think there is any other choice, but to have transfer season somewhere externally. Maybe it could also make it easier for those who don't have computer access at the time as the forum is not mobile friendly.
Of course it should be without any features that aren't already available on the forum.
"I am a cyclist, I may not be the best, but that is what I strive to be. I may never get there, but I will never quit trying." - Tadej Pogačar
|
| |
|
|
| ivaneurope |
Posted on 13-03-2025 13:29
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3124
Joined: 09-05-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
I honestly applaud the effort put in this tool, but it will be up to roturn to decide if it will be implemented. But I'm also willing to help if needed
|
| |
|
|
| DubbelDekker |
Posted on 17-03-2025 17:29
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2797
Joined: 20-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Nice work Eeze! For me having a tool like this would make the game better.
It seems like we have many software/web developers in the game. I'm also one.
Let me know if I can help.
|
| |
|
|
| Ezeefreak |
Posted on 07-05-2025 11:35
|
Domestique
Posts: 700
Joined: 06-07-2009
PCM$: 300.00
|
It's me again, suggestion time! And its actually a suggestion for the 2026 Season or more the 2025 End of the season.
Stagains/Levelling Overhaul
Yes it's time again to suggest that I think nearly all are not so happy with the current system. It just benefits a lot more certain rider types and this makes the DB in the end pretty boring because you only see the same rider type over an over again. I have posted before how uneven (and unfair) the pts distribution sometimes is.
With going to PCM24 and the addition of Medium Mountain thats another point why we should do that. Now it will be the average of Mountain and Hills but this again prevents to create more fun and special rider types.
So here is my suggestion how to do in the future:
- NO specific Training Paths anymore
- "free spending"from Attributes Points to the Attributes
- Number of Points depending on Rider Potential and Level
Total Attribute Points
| Pot | 1>2 | 2>3 | 3>4 | 4>MAX | Total | AVG | MEDIAN | | 1 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 29 | 24 | 25 | | 2 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 34 | 29 | 30 | | 3 | 11 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 40 | 30 | 30 | | 4 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 47 | 41 | 41 | | 5 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 13 | 55 | 47 | 48 | | 6 | 16 | 16 | 15 | 15 | 62 | 53 | 54 | | 7 | 18 | 18 | 17 | 17 | 70 | 60 | 61 |
- AVG and MEDIAN are what we got with the current system. Tweaked the numbers a bit and added a few for Medium Mountain which can be trained individually then also
- Limits for Distribution each Attribute and Level
Individual Stats Maximum (e.g Mountain or TT)
| Pot | 1>2 | 2>3 | 3>4 | 4>MAX | Total | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 8 | | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 10 | | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 10 | | 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 11 | | 7 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
- means a Pot 7 Rider, max 3 Pts on Attribute each level > So max Total gain is 12 Pts for one Attribute > less Potential Less Training on one Attribute possible
- max Limit on Total Value for primary Attribute (Flat, Mountain, Medium Mountain, Hill, TT, Cobbles, Sprint, Prologue) > 81, riders cant be levelled on a primary Attribute higher than 81, rest needs to be with Training.
- Keep decreases, just minor tweaks (less decline at Fighter, Stamina and resistance)
Advantages?
- More control over Rider development
- FAIR system for each rider type
- bigger variety of rider types
- less predictable and more fun
How to implement?
- Web Apllication can be created by me where every manager can and need to do it for their rider till end of the season (automatically applies all rules and stuff)
> Less work for Staff also
--------------
So thats what I came up with. All the numbers here are obviously changeable but i think thats a good base. What do you think?
I know its early but we also know it takes a while to make a decision here and if we want to do this I would also need time to do all the coding stuff.
And here 2 examples:
1. (possible) Ayuso (pot 7)
| LVL | FL | MO | MM | HI | TT | STA | RES | REC | CO | SP | ACC | FI | DH | PRL | TOTAL | | 1.00 | 67 | 71 | 70 | 68 | 69 | 72 | 69 | 69 | 62 | 62 | 69 | 66 | 68 | 67 | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 18 | | 2.00 | 68 | 74 | 72 | 71 | 71 | 73 | 71 | 71 | 62 | 62 | 69 | 66 | 68 | 69 | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 18 | | 3.00 | 69 | 76 | 75 | 74 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 62 | 62 | 70 | 66 | 68 | 71 | | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 17 | | 4.00 | 70 | 79 | 78 | 77 | 75 | 74 | 74 | 74 | 62 | 62 | 70 | 66 | 68 | 73 | | | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 17 | | 4.100 | 70 | 81 | 81 | 80 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 62 | 62 | 71 | 66 | 68 | 74 | | | 3 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 | |
3. (possible) Nys (pot 3)
| LVL | FL | MO | MM | HI | TT | STA | RES | REC | CO | SP | ACC | FI | DH | PRL | TOTAL | | 1.00 | 70 | 69 | 71 | 73 | 67 | 71 | 74 | 68 | 62 | 69 | 72 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | | 2.00 | 72 | 70 | 71 | 76 | 67 | 72 | 75 | 68 | 64 | 70 | 72 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | | 3.00 | 73 | 70 | 72 | 78 | 67 | 73 | 76 | 68 | 66 | 72 | 72 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | | 4.00 | 74 | 70 | 73 | 80 | 67 | 74 | 77 | 68 | 68 | 73 | 73 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | | 4.100 | 75 | 70 | 74 | 81 | 67 | 75 | 78 | 68 | 70 | 74 | 74 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 5 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 8 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Just 2 examples but with the suggest System you could even try to make a Sprinter out of Ayuso and a Climber out of Nys. All possible!
|
| |
|
|
| jt1109 |
Posted on 07-05-2025 12:10
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3484
Joined: 23-07-2008
PCM$: 600.00
|
Ezeefreak wrote:
It's me again, suggestion time! And its actually a suggestion for the 2026 Season or more the 2025 End of the season.
Stagains/Levelling Overhaul
Yes it's time again to suggest that I think nearly all are not so happy with the current system. It just benefits a lot more certain rider types and this makes the DB in the end pretty boring because you only see the same rider type over an over again. I have posted before how uneven (and unfair) the pts distribution sometimes is.
With going to PCM24 and the addition of Medium Mountain thats another point why we should do that. Now it will be the average of Mountain and Hills but this again prevents to create more fun and special rider types.
So here is my suggestion how to do in the future:
- NO specific Training Paths anymore
- "free spending"from Attributes Points to the Attributes
- Number of Points depending on Rider Potential and Level
Total Attribute Points
| Pot | 1>2 | 2>3 | 3>4 | 4>MAX | Total | AVG | MEDIAN | | 1 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 29 | 24 | 25 | | 2 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 34 | 29 | 30 | | 3 | 11 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 40 | 30 | 30 | | 4 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 47 | 41 | 41 | | 5 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 13 | 55 | 47 | 48 | | 6 | 16 | 16 | 15 | 15 | 62 | 53 | 54 | | 7 | 18 | 18 | 17 | 17 | 70 | 60 | 61 |
- AVG and MEDIAN are what we got with the current system. Tweaked the numbers a bit and added a few for Medium Mountain which can be trained individually then also
- Limits for Distribution each Attribute and Level
Individual Stats Maximum (e.g Mountain or TT)
| Pot | 1>2 | 2>3 | 3>4 | 4>MAX | Total | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 8 | | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 10 | | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 10 | | 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 11 | | 7 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
- means a Pot 7 Rider, max 3 Pts on Attribute each level > So max Total gain is 12 Pts for one Attribute > less Potential Less Training on one Attribute possible
- max Limit on Total Value for primary Attribute (Flat, Mountain, Medium Mountain, Hill, TT, Cobbles, Sprint, Prologue) > 81, riders cant be levelled on a primary Attribute higher than 81, rest needs to be with Training.
- Keep decreases, just minor tweaks (less decline at Fighter, Stamina and resistance)
Advantages?
- More control over Rider development
- FAIR system for each rider type
- bigger variety of rider types
- less predictable and more fun
How to implement?
- Web Apllication can be created by me where every manager can and need to do it for their rider till end of the season (automatically applies all rules and stuff)
> Less work for Staff also
--------------
So thats what I came up with. All the numbers here are obviously changeable but i think thats a good base. What do you think?
I know its early but we also know it takes a while to make a decision here and if we want to do this I would also need time to do all the coding stuff.
And here 2 examples:
1. (possible) Ayuso (pot 7)
| LVL | FL | MO | MM | HI | TT | STA | RES | REC | CO | SP | ACC | FI | DH | PRL | TOTAL | | 1.00 | 67 | 71 | 70 | 68 | 69 | 72 | 69 | 69 | 62 | 62 | 69 | 66 | 68 | 67 | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 18 | | 2.00 | 68 | 74 | 72 | 71 | 71 | 73 | 71 | 71 | 62 | 62 | 69 | 66 | 68 | 69 | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 18 | | 3.00 | 69 | 76 | 75 | 74 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 62 | 62 | 70 | 66 | 68 | 71 | | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 17 | | 4.00 | 70 | 79 | 78 | 77 | 75 | 74 | 74 | 74 | 62 | 62 | 70 | 66 | 68 | 73 | | | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 17 | | 4.100 | 70 | 81 | 81 | 80 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 62 | 62 | 71 | 66 | 68 | 74 | | | 3 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 | |
3. (possible) Nys (pot 3)
| LVL | FL | MO | MM | HI | TT | STA | RES | REC | CO | SP | ACC | FI | DH | PRL | TOTAL | | 1.00 | 70 | 69 | 71 | 73 | 67 | 71 | 74 | 68 | 62 | 69 | 72 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | | 2.00 | 72 | 70 | 71 | 76 | 67 | 72 | 75 | 68 | 64 | 70 | 72 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | | 3.00 | 73 | 70 | 72 | 78 | 67 | 73 | 76 | 68 | 66 | 72 | 72 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | | 4.00 | 74 | 70 | 73 | 80 | 67 | 74 | 77 | 68 | 68 | 73 | 73 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | | 4.100 | 75 | 70 | 74 | 81 | 67 | 75 | 78 | 68 | 70 | 74 | 74 | 68 | 75 | 70 | | | 5 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 8 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Just 2 examples but with the suggest System you could even try to make a Sprinter out of Ayuso and a Climber out of Nys. All possible!
Geniunely think this is genius some limits are going to be needed I would say though as otherwise most riders will be trained to with there max in a primary stat.
Maybe linking the potential to max cap so
pot 7 - 81 cap
pot 6 - 80 cap
pot 4/5 - 79 cap
pot 3/4 - 78 cap
pot 1/2 - 77 cap
that way you could still give for example Nys a low potential so his hill maxed at 78 but because of his starting stats and the freedom to apply attributes he would end up as a much more well rounded rider then a Pot 7 guy who has lower starting attributes |
| |
|
|
| Fabianski |
Posted on 07-05-2025 12:43
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5234
Joined: 29-09-2018
PCM$: 185.00
|
I'm all in for a stat gain system allowing for more balanced riders, instead of pushing one main stat. But the current proposition would rather encourage the latter. The limits per attribute (ranging from 8-12) are higher than what you can currently do. Iirc, I can train a main stat by max 10 points for a Pot. 7 rider currently. So a climber who currently maxes out at 79 could end up at 81 with the new system. So I guess the restrictions jt proposed would need to be implemented, too.
I'm not really sure I'd like the system with complete freedom, i.e. no stat gain paths. It looks much more time consuming, and as said before, I'm not sure it would really encourage more varied rider types with the current proposition.
I did like however the system we had in ICL, which sadly is gone. You could have primary and secondary training, plus separate backup stats training. For example, I'd have loved to train e.g. Schmid's Sta/Rec instead of Ftr, but the best path for main stats didn't allow this. Decoupling main and secondary stats would already be a good progress imho.
And I'm not a fan at all of having this done in an external application. MG is already heavily dependent on certain users in some admin activities, I don't think it'd be a good idea to add more dependencies. I'm sure you'd do a great job, so that's not against you by any means, I'm just not really in favour of it. Same for the new transfers app...
|
| |
|
