Author Topic: [English] - Suggestions  (Read 6742 times)

Aurora Australis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Australian born, Australian crazed
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #105 on: June 07, 2021, 11:14:30 AM »
Before I put my detailed take on the discussion, here's a simple question.  Do you want the best manager to be successful, or do you want the manager who got lucky to be successful?
The proposed 1st change & 2nd change puts game success more firmly into the "luck" category.

Quote: “Valverde” “Horner” “Nairo”

Aged 22-23 Valverde won Espana stages, finished 3rd overall in a team where he was the only top cyclist, and finished 2nd in the WC RR.  His best was aged 25-30, cycling actually missed his best years because he was suspended because he was a drug cheat.  He’s still around because he’s managed his decline, and because RL top cyclists are a rare commodity.  The next oldest top cyclist is around 5 years younger, and is also a convicted drug cheat.  In fact, if you look at the cyclists who’ve made it at the top pass 35, almost all of them have records for being drug cheats.
Of course we have Horner as an exception, an unknown who jumped up at age 41 to win Espana.  He won simply because the best weren’t there, and the few who were there were exhausted after a hard season, attempting Tour-Espana duo, whilst he was fresh.

Here’s a simple fact.  This idea of some cyclists having natural long youth is false.  The maximum physical peak for everybody is 25-29 years of age.  This is a biological defined set programmed limit, only extendable by drug use.  There’s no biological maximum physical peak in the 30s.  Those who've managed careers into the mid-30s have done so from managing their decline, choosing when to race, and/or drug use.

And for a current Valverde-like CFF example:
Richard Levin.  Where are his old competitors?  Where is Benny, who was a better born cyclist & supposedly high talent?  Where are TeaMetal cyclists?  Gone.  Where is Freddy Butcher who was ranked 2.84av higher than Levin aged 20?  You’re saying Freddy Butcher who.  He never made it to the top, largely or completely because of weaker training.  Heck, Levin wasn’t even my best original cyclist.  My initial hopes were on several cyclists with better born stats than Levin & Trump.  But they were too weak to make it.  Yet it was Levin who got multiple WC & NT wins, who still has many track records, and who is still performing at age 35.  5th place in the only Div1 flat TT he’s raced so far (11th in a hills TT).  2nd last season aged 34.  And track records aged 33.  It’s only as this season has gone on that he’s really declined.  Why?  Because he was Valverde quality, and his decline was managed better than his competitors.  Richard Levin is the game’s Valverde, here right now, not because of some fake age luck, but because of better management.

Being able to select youth cyclists both with initial stats & their development potential is management.  Being able to manage your cyclists as they age so they can perform late into their careers is management.  To remove this, and make it a hidden per season & hidden aging luck attributes is removing the management part in favour of a lottery of those who have these precise excels on every single stage yet don’t want to manage their cyclists (which makes their complaints a laugh).

What these proposals represent, is the wish for some to abuse their cyclists, and for it not to matter due to luck; whilst managing your cyclists gets punished.  This is supposed to be a management game, and choosing smart, both with youth cyclists & managing older cyclists is a key part of what management is about.  To say that management doesn’t matter, to make it that players can abuse their cyclists & they’ll get better outcomes because of sheer luck is taking away from the management part, making it more a lottery, and removing the incentive to properly manage cyclists from 19 years because you’d be screwed from simple hidden luck in favour of those who don’t want to manage & treat their cyclists well.

If this change is done because of the fake narrative that older managers have better knowledge on training (which btw doesn’t require “excel-like knowledge), then surely all race stage attributes should be randomised, because this is where the “excel-like players” have the true unfair advantage.

pipinata

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #106 on: June 07, 2021, 11:36:35 AM »
Before I put my detailed take on the discussion, here's a simple question.  Do you want the best manager to be successful, or do you want the manager who got lucky to be successful?
The proposed 1st change & 2nd change puts game success more firmly into the "luck" category.

Quote: “Valverde” “Horner” “Nairo”

Aged 22-23 Valverde won Espana stages, finished 3rd overall in a team where he was the only top cyclist, and finished 2nd in the WC RR.  His best was aged 25-30, cycling actually missed his best years because he was suspended because he was a drug cheat.  He’s still around because he’s managed his decline, and because RL top cyclists are a rare commodity.  The next oldest top cyclist is around 5 years younger, and is also a convicted drug cheat.  In fact, if you look at the cyclists who’ve made it at the top pass 35, almost all of them have records for being drug cheats.
Of course we have Horner as an exception, an unknown who jumped up at age 41 to win Espana.  He won simply because the best weren’t there, and the few who were there were exhausted after a hard season, attempting Tour-Espana duo, whilst he was fresh.

Here’s a simple fact.  This idea of some cyclists having natural long youth is false.  The maximum physical peak for everybody is 25-29 years of age.  This is a biological defined set programmed limit, only extendable by drug use.  There’s no biological maximum physical peak in the 30s.  Those who've managed careers into the mid-30s have done so from managing their decline, choosing when to race, and/or drug use.

And for a current Valverde-like CFF example:
Richard Levin.  Where are his old competitors?  Where is Benny, who was a better born cyclist & supposedly high talent?  Where are TeaMetal cyclists?  Gone.  Where is Freddy Butcher who was ranked 2.84av higher than Levin aged 20?  You’re saying Freddy Butcher who.  He never made it to the top, largely or completely because of weaker training.  Heck, Levin wasn’t even my best original cyclist.  My initial hopes were on several cyclists with better born stats than Levin & Trump.  But they were too weak to make it.  Yet it was Levin who got multiple WC & NT wins, who still has many track records, and who is still performing at age 35.  5th place in the only Div1 flat TT he’s raced so far (11th in a hills TT).  2nd last season aged 34.  And track records aged 33.  It’s only as this season has gone on that he’s really declined.  Why?  Because he was Valverde quality, and his decline was managed better than his competitors.  Richard Levin is the game’s Valverde, here right now, not because of some fake age luck, but because of better management.

Being able to select youth cyclists both with initial stats & their development potential is management.  Being able to manage your cyclists as they age so they can perform late into their careers is management.  To remove this, and make it a hidden per season & hidden aging luck attributes is removing the management part in favour of a lottery of those who have these precise excels on every single stage yet don’t want to manage their cyclists (which makes their complaints a laugh).

What these proposals represent, is the wish for some to abuse their cyclists, and for it not to matter due to luck; whilst managing your cyclists gets punished.  This is supposed to be a management game, and choosing smart, both with youth cyclists & managing older cyclists is a key part of what management is about.  To say that management doesn’t matter, to make it that players can abuse their cyclists & they’ll get better outcomes because of sheer luck is taking away from the management part, making it more a lottery, and removing the incentive to properly manage cyclists from 19 years because you’d be screwed from simple hidden luck in favour of those who don’t want to manage & treat their cyclists well.

If this change is done because of the fake narrative that older managers have better knowledge on training (which btw doesn’t require “excel-like knowledge), then surely all race stage attributes should be randomised, because this is where the “excel-like players” have the true unfair advantage.

Hi Aurora,

What do you mean by the bold?


Aurora Australis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Australian born, Australian crazed
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #107 on: June 07, 2021, 11:54:32 AM »
What do you mean by the bold?
What I mean is that there are people, including in the "chat" group, who've calculated every stage, prime tactics for stages, AVs for every stage, and a bunch of other excel stuff on stages.  They were also the ones who'd been using the spider-web for calculations before it got removed.

And they're suggesting to those who take 5-6 seasons (close to a year) to build up a group of cyclists that "no, it's too much formula for us."

Davilo07

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Lemarche manager #mesqueunteam
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #108 on: June 07, 2021, 12:19:00 PM »
Hi aurora,

Putting names was just to give an example of what I meant. But still, I don't know if it was because of drugs or because everybody is different there have been certain riders in cycling who had their peak at a younger age or later. But in any case, this is not real cycling.

I don't think variable talent is going to make it easier for manager who don't plan or as you said, manage their training, all the opposite, you'll need to be more on the top of the training checking every year the talent of your riders to reschedule trainings in order to make the most of it. I see that more exciting than knowing how my rider is going to be with 24-27 or 30 yo.

Regarding the age process, It seems sensible what you just said but it cannot be everything about planning, a little component of luck and chance  is always necessary in life. And I would be happy to see a rider that has been average during all his career and then keeps his stats for longer or shorter.... Making it just and older age decreaseg,  I would agree with you and I wouldn't like it as much.

And on the other hand, I think osca wasn't saying that it would be a lottery. Most of the riders would follow the known pattern of decay starting at 31. And the same with talent. 


Davilo07

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Lemarche manager #mesqueunteam
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #109 on: June 07, 2021, 12:23:46 PM »
What do you mean by the bold?
What I mean is that there are people, including in the "chat" group, who've calculated every stage, prime tactics for stages, AVs for every stage, and a bunch of other excel stuff on stages.  They were also the ones who'd been using the spider-web for calculations before it got removed.

[/img]

In my case I am not suggesting that. I am suggesting that knowing exactly how your rider is going to be at 24-28 or 32 is not as exciting as It would with a little of uncertainty.

Btw, if you know anyone who got the exact formula for every stage in CFF do you mind to introduce them to me. Thanks

Well not all of them, only the cobbles ones

ophiuko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1093
  • OphiukoCT - 1a
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #110 on: June 07, 2021, 12:37:22 PM »
I think you are confusing managers, Aurora. I don't think those who calculate everything with excels (and here I'd like to remind that these calculations are just estimates, no one knows the real percentages), are asking for the variability because "it's too much formula for them". At least not me, if it's me who you are thinking about. And I can't think any another manager in the chat who thinks they way you said.

I like to have every aspect of the game planned and under control. But it's true that right now there is not much chance for "the luck", apart from the promotions. All the rest can be calculated. The talent variability will add a bit of luck. A talent 5 will probably still be good, because most likely will stay between talents 4 and 5 -maybe 3- for the first 5 years of training. So, the calculations will be still important, but to add a small amount of luck with the talent changes.
I think the calculations will still have a massive advantage in rider training. If they were 100% calculations - 0% luck in training matters, with the variable talent would be like 80%-20%

With respect to the aging. I don't know if it's doping or high experience which makes some real riders mantain their performance longer, but it is a fact that it happens in real life. Maybe it would be more real not to postpone the dropping age, but to keep the late-aging riders in a low dropping for longer, like if they were 31 until 35yo.

Apart from this, changes always are exciting, and it's also exciting to adapt to them. I'm already thinking about an excel to calculate if my rider has started to drop his skills, so I would know when is the perfect moment to sell him and still gain some money  ;D
« Last Edit: June 07, 2021, 12:44:54 PM by ophiuko »

horace_vr

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 256
  • TeaMetal
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #111 on: June 07, 2021, 10:18:26 PM »
Why not remove talent entirely ? I mean - what is the purpose of it ? I only see an additional (hidden) layer of randomness in the game. You have random when you pull the 19 yo riders, and then you have another random with talent. Sure, it takes some time to find it, but in the end it's just another "80% chances that your star 19 yo is not the best ever"

Where is the game heading ? Do we aim for realism, or randomness ? Do we aim for lucky winners, or tactical winners ?

I still believe the best addition would be to add age days to riders :)

Davilo07

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Lemarche manager #mesqueunteam
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #112 on: June 08, 2021, 12:17:41 AM »
Tactical winners obviously. Variable talent makes you to be checking the talent of your riders season after season to adjust the training to the best possible way. Not once on the first week of training and then plan the training ahead for the rest of the riders life.

What I don't get is why would you like to remove talent altogether. Wouldn't that make the game more simple and maybe boring?

ophiuko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1093
  • OphiukoCT - 1a
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #113 on: June 08, 2021, 12:51:08 AM »
I still believe the best addition would be to add age days to riders :)

I agree. This would be an excellent improvement.

horace_vr

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 256
  • TeaMetal
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #114 on: June 08, 2021, 06:37:29 AM »
Tactical winners obviously. Variable talent makes you to be checking the talent of your riders season after season to adjust the training to the best possible way. Not once on the first week of training and then plan the training ahead for the rest of the riders life.

What I don't get is why would you like to remove talent altogether. Wouldn't that make the game more simple and maybe boring?
By adding variable talent, you are adding more random, without reducing random somewhere else. So overall, the game will become more random; and that will add frustration when Lady Luck will mess with your riders. Sure, it can go both ways, but there will be more frustrating evolutions that there are now. And guess which ones will be made more pubic, and which managers will be the vocal ones ;)

Therefore, I am advocating for less variability in the game. You can still make a lot of strategic and tactical choices even without talent.



Rico

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 320
  • CaptainOrange (1a)
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #115 on: June 08, 2021, 07:29:52 AM »
Tactical winners obviously. Variable talent makes you to be checking the talent of your riders season after season to adjust the training to the best possible way. Not once on the first week of training and then plan the training ahead for the rest of the riders life.

What I don't get is why would you like to remove talent altogether. Wouldn't that make the game more simple and maybe boring?

So what is the reason for variable talent now? Some say it is to make the game less predictable, but how many riders are really trained so that they end up like they are "predicted". This is already hard enough for most managers with fixed talents, so why add another layer of difficulty?

Franky

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 881
  • Manicomicos_Cycling_Team
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #116 on: June 08, 2021, 08:31:30 AM »
I still believe the best addition would be to add age days to riders :)

I agree. This would be an excellent improvement.

Almost sure, this cannot be added without restarting the game... :-\

EpoGlucK

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 550
  • Peachy🐹melocotons -3h-
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #117 on: June 08, 2021, 08:57:41 AM »
Tactical winners obviously. Variable talent makes you to be checking the talent of your riders season after season to adjust the training to the best possible way. Not once on the first week of training and then plan the training ahead for the rest of the riders life.

What I don't get is why would you like to remove talent altogether. Wouldn't that make the game more simple and maybe boring?

So what is the reason for variable talent now? Some say it is to make the game less predictable, but how many riders are really trained so that they end up like they are "predicted". This is already hard enough for most managers with fixed talents, so why add another layer of difficulty?

In my opinion, the biggest advantage is to reduce the gap between experienced mánagers and new ones. The usual pull of Young riders, where we sell the low talented to non experienced managers will be less dramátic for them.

Davilo07

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Lemarche manager #mesqueunteam
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #118 on: June 08, 2021, 10:05:32 AM »
Tactical winners obviously. Variable talent makes you to be checking the talent of your riders season after season to adjust the training to the best possible way. Not once on the first week of training and then plan the training ahead for the rest of the riders life.

What I don't get is why would you like to remove talent altogether. Wouldn't that make the game more simple and maybe boring?

So what is the reason for variable talent now? Some say it is to make the game less predictable, but how many riders are really trained so that they end up like they are "predicted". This is already hard enough for most managers with fixed talents, so why add another layer of difficulty?

This days if you want to take your time to plan your training, you just need 4-5 days to check the talent of your riders and after that most of us I guess already have spreadsheets to make a very accurate  calculation of how our riders will be. For us who like to plan and schedule trainings is adding another layer of interest and difficulty to the game.

For those who don't bother to check riders talent, they are not going to notice any difference. It s going to be the same matter of chance.

This is not "now" I think this has been always the thought behind the variable talent.

pipinata

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
Re: [English] - Suggestions
« Reply #119 on: June 08, 2021, 10:46:22 AM »
Tactical winners obviously. Variable talent makes you to be checking the talent of your riders season after season to adjust the training to the best possible way. Not once on the first week of training and then plan the training ahead for the rest of the riders life.

What I don't get is why would you like to remove talent altogether. Wouldn't that make the game more simple and maybe boring?

So what is the reason for variable talent now? Some say it is to make the game less predictable, but how many riders are really trained so that they end up like they are "predicted". This is already hard enough for most managers with fixed talents, so why add another layer of difficulty?

In my opinion, the biggest advantage is to reduce the gap between experienced mánagers and new ones. The usual pull of Young riders, where we sell the low talented to non experienced managers will be less dramátic for them.

In my opinion is quite the opposite.

Anyone that wants to learn how to compute the talent can learn in 30 minutes. Is VERY basic maths. So, computing the talent is not the problem if you are really interested (I speak for myself, I did some tools the very first weeks I found the game interesting).

However, building a squad that shares the trainning through different years is something that is really difficult for beginners. It is not easy to know what a rider needs to train in every category and, furthermore, it is impossible to know what level do they need to achieve to win in first division.

Therefore, the difficulty now is not gonna be to know the talent of your rider, it is gonna be to be able to modify EVERY SEASON the global training of the team so that you can maximize the global benefit.

This is gonna be very difficult for the beginners, and for sure, and edge for the manager that pay more atention.

However, I see a big problem here. To handle a full squad during 5 seasons with variable talent will be very time demanding and difficult. My guess is that a big part of the managers will focus, even more, in a small amount of riders and sell (again, even more than nowadays) most of the others.

In my opinion, something that would really benefit the gane would be to include something like LOYALTY.

I would need to thing about the numbers, but something straithforward that comes to my mind is to add 0,2 to each ability for every season that a rider is in your team. However, without days in age the implementation seems impossible.