[English] - Suggestions

[EpoGlucK]

I am 100% agree for the variability of talent. It Will make the game more balanced between old and new managers.

The new WC are a massive improvement, I would also add stages to NTeams, mount-hill and sprint-hills are rarely seen in the calendar.

About the age dropping skills, I do not have an opinion yet, so everything sounds good.

The most important os to see that the game is Alive  .Thx for the effort Oska

[wacco]

Hi Oska,

I really like the updates of the training camp icons and the 2 new WC races! This will make starting a flat-cobbles or sprint-hills generation a lot more intereseting and will bring a bit more balance in the game.

I'm doubtful about the variable talent for 2 reasons:
- It will create a big imbalance in favour of 24+ aged riders who have trained for lots of season with talent 5 and this effect will be there for quite a few seasons.
- I'm a numbers guy and I like this game because it pays off to plan ahead for quite a long time. This will disappear with the variable talent and it will be more of a casino game, which I don't really like.

Thanks for thinking about the future of the game and implementing changes though, even when I don't like all of them!

Edit: Like other managers point out below, the variable talent and variable age at which riders start to drop are changes big enough to need time to come into effect. I would suggest introducing both of them with the 19 yr olds that come into play next season when it is decided these changes are final.

A possibilty could be to wait until that current 19 yo riders are 31. After that, "close" this version of cff and start a new cff with all the suggested modifications.

This would be the more fair way for everybody. The drawback is that this would be in 500 days or so.

How would waiting be more fair?

In ten seasons people will keep playing and there will always be someone who starts a new generation.

[RealMurciaCycling]

First of all, thanks Oska for changes and the attention you pay to the game.

About these two future changes, I only have one thing to say. I completely agree with this. I think that variable talent will make the game more similar to real cycling (among its possibilities) with riders making better in later ages and with potential future stars staying half way. About variable decreasing age, my opinion is the same than before, with riders decreasing at sooner ages, and riders winning at later ages (for example, 40-ager Valverde still winning).

I can't be against that changes that will make the game alive season by season.

And I repeat, thanks Oska for the changes an paying attention to that game we enjoy a lot!

[wacco]

One more question about implementation.

Most managers are falling about the change in the youth and promote the aging process. But how would you implement this?

Just say starting from next season your rider might decrease in skill starting from the age of 31. I understand between the age of 24 and 31 there is no decrease at all. Only a small increase by training. BUT at the moment riders start decreasing from the moment they turn 25 (just a little but it is there). So a rider of the age of 29 at this moment will stop decreasing from the age of 30 and might decrease again from the age of 31. While a rider who will turn 25 had no decrease at all. So riders turning of age just before the implementation will have a TRIPLE advantage. They had less decrease of skill compared to older riders AND they had no possible change in talent compared to younger riders AND they were drafted in a time the spiderweb was active so lots of high talent riders.

I do not care about this because I will not be competitive for the next 6-7 seasons and I have a generation of 20 year olds at the moment (spiderweb was removed just after). But it might have a big influence to the top of division 1a during the first 5-6 seasons.

So maybe it might be good to do these chances in fases.  For example. Implement them both with the exception of the aging process might happen around 27/28 for the first couple of seasons. From the moment the first riders from the new system turn 26/27 adjust the aging factor to 30/31. Some riders might be lucky and had no aging decrease but not all of them

[Davilo07]

Hi wacco I think he referred to the acceleration of the process of aging. At this moment that acceleration happens when they hit 31yo. And the idea was that process could start earlier (as in reality  happened to nairo?) Or later like for instance Valverde or Horner.

In the sake of realism I like that proposal very much, but I would suggest another step forward: adding a plateau in the aging process. So at the age of 27 (most likely) the rider would reset their skills to the beginning of the season for a period of 3 seasons (randomised as well)

So John doe hits 27yo, he starts the season with his skills at 35 37 56 34... He trains normally but the following season he would come back to the skills as they were when he was 27.  And this "reset" would repeat for a likely period of 3-4 years with a probability of being longer or shorter.

[lunatiko]

Hi wacco I think he referred to the acceleration of the process of aging. At this moment that acceleration happens when they hit 31yo. And the idea was that process could start earlier (as in reality  happened to nairo?) Or later like for instance Valverde or Horner.

In the sake of realism I like that proposal very much, but I would suggest another step forward: adding a plateau in the aging process. So at the age of 27 (most likely) the rider would reset their skills to the beginning of the season for a period of 3 seasons (randomised as well)

So John doe hits 27yo, he starts the season with his skills at 35 37 56 34... He trains normally but the following season he would come back to the skills as they were when he was 27.  And this "reset" would repeat for a likely period of 3-4 years with a probability of being longer or shorter.

uff this is too extreme and unbalancing in case you are not very lucky... It can be very discouraging.


In my humble opinion both changes initially proposed by Oska are very beneficial.

I have played the game for a long time and I have been on the different sides with regards to cff player profiles. I started having no clue about how to play or why I was dropping on sprint stages... Then excels created by some players were able to predict the overall performance. From here I became quite obsessed with numbers and created my own processes to calculate talent, to find out the best possible training and to get the max performance, including winning several races and 1a.
Now I'm back to the game after a big pause but I won't really dedicate as much effort.

when I think in all those profiles,  I see myself enjoying the changes in all of them. For the newbie player it reduces the difference when compared to lifelong excel-like players. For the players obsessed with numbers and willing to devote time to the game, it is yet another way to make a difference by having every time under control the talent. For the es that know the game but rather play on gut feeling, it feels more like real cycling. The important point I'm trying to make is that we should think about the change not only on how it affects to our generations, or our way of playing, but on how it affects to everyone. I still think this is a quite unfair game for newcomers. In general I will support any change that makes the game more difficult to predict and plan for, not because of pure randomicity by itself, but because of unknown stuff to the players.

But above all expressed before, it's great to see this moving forward. Long live cff!

[horace_vr]

Talking about realism: no chance of adding days to player ages...? Not just years...?

[Vos]

2 new Road World Championship races have been added , Leeds-Harrogate a hills-sprint race and Ritchmond a fully cobbles plain race. Hamilton won't be more in WC calendar due two same races are in WC locations as Salzburg and Lisboa.

For those who wonder how the new WC roadrace in Richmond ( Virginia, USA ) looks like, 
already it is visible as CFF CUP quarterfinale ; SPORTLIFE versus ZATARRA



The name of the city is spelled wrong ( it should be Richmond without the "t" ).
Oska mentioned that this is a fully cobbles plain race, but looking at the picture I have a little doubt if this is correct / 2 options :
1# my wild guess looking at the picture = maybe hills count too, for example 5% , and maybe downhill for example 2%.
2# my other wild guess is of course that Oska is correct and that the percentages of just a flat cobble race count ( with high % stamina ).

Very nice to see this new type WC race, well done Oska. 
A bit less nice =  this is a bad draw for my team in the CFF Cup. My prediction = an Australian team will win this quarter finale.

[ophiuko]

Here is the other WC added.

[Vos]

Thanks Ophiuko, good to see this race too already, and also a very nice race. 

edit ; here the country is wrong, it should be England ( or Great Britain ) instead of Australia.

[Zatarra]

Now only a cobblehills WC is missing  .

[oscacom]

No hills with category in profiles 4ª, 3ª... , no hills influence. In this case excel makes it but altitude difference in the circuit was low . NO HILLS INFLUENCE PLAIN COBBLES.

[vlominck]

Now only a cobblehills WC is missing  .

Ya lo hay...la ronda de Cff-cup que te ha tocado en cuartos de final...zetarra vs sportlife esta incorporada como nueva para el mundial

[Vos]

No hills with category in profiles 4ª, 3ª... , no hills influence. In this case excel makes it but altitude difference in the circuit was low . NO HILLS INFLUENCE PLAIN COBBLES.

Ok, gracias Osca. 
I adjusted my previous post about the flatcobble WC race, including that Richmond is spelled right now.

[lunatiko]

Now only a cobblehills WC is missing  .

Ya lo hay...la ronda de Cff-cup que te ha tocado en cuartos de final...zetarra vs sportlife esta incorporada como nueva para el mundial

but it's plain cobbles as explained by Oska. I agree with Zatarra, all terrains should have the chance to earn a WC title, now only cobblehills are lacking that chance (Btw, this year's real life WC will be in Flandes, sharing some sections of Ronde Van Vlaanderen).

And to be honest, the fact that cobblehills can already win a lot of points don't really apply in my opinion, hillers can get more points and they do have their chance in the WC! I of course agree on a "biased" selection approach, so that hills or cobblehills have less options than sprint or pure mountain (to balance the calendar)

Just my 2 cents of course, is up to Oska to think about the influence