www.cyclingforfun.org
GENERAL => Suggestions => Topic started by: horace_vr on October 27, 2018, 08:51:30 PM
-
1. In Tactics page: keep the green/red effort counter forever, not only for new players
2. In Tactics page: Keep the stars (importance of each skill) forever, not just for new players.
3. Have (at least) one flat Time Trial in Tour de France. Longer or shorter, but it should always have at least one flat TT.
4. World Challenges: 10 to 15 races, only those which are constant in every year (like San Remo, Amstel, Fleche, Roubaix, Lombardia, maybe some stages from Tours)
Just my opinions, of course ;)
-
1. In Tactics page: keep the green/red effort counter forever, not only for new players
2. In Tactics page: Keep the stars (importance of each skill) forever, not just for new players.
3. Have (at least) one flat Time Trial in Tour de France. Longer or shorter, but it should always have at least one flat TT.
4. World Challenges: 10 to 15 races, only those which are constant in every year (like San Remo, Amstel, Fleche, Roubaix, Lombardia, maybe some stages from Tours)
Just my opinions, of course ;)
1- At moment only in 3rd or 4th, make all you make mistakes likes me a lot
2-It is for all players
3- Random, Could be 3 or none as other tours
4-Umm, difficult system, I need your tactics to try in 3rd season the new system, maybe 1st round with stages small tours, 2nd roudn stages big tours, and 3r round A classics. Until we have 3 seasons I can't program this new system, I did a primary version .
-
5. http://www.managercycling.com/cff/2323.php Instead of U23 classification, create a U21 classification.
-
National Teams
Osca, are you planning on having 9 cyclists on a team still or will you be reducing that number (maybe to 5 or 7)?
-
National Teams
Osca, are you planning on having 9 cyclists on a team still or will you be reducing that number (maybe to 5 or 7)?
At moment the same, only absolute NT.
To try during BETA
-This night most of achievements ( process at 00.05)
Until stage 50 , test training, scout, races, classements, points , tour updates.
-Stage 50-51 calendar for next season.
-Before end of season : training camp in next season and elections.
END OF SEASON: too many processes
-Next season: Cff cup and NT races
-In 2 seasons: New World Challenge ( I need your tactics in 1st, 2nd, 3rd division and choose races because with variable calendar is complex for me).
-
Beta supporter will expire in 1 day. Suggestion: keep it active :P
-
National Teams
Osca, are you planning on having 9 cyclists on a team still or will you be reducing that number (maybe to 5 or 7)?
At moment the same, only absolute NT.
Have you thought about an U25 NT? I think two will be manageable for most countries.
-
At moment only absolute.
If I add one more in future U21 or U23, now with less time to improve cyclists will be in NT before.
Not happy due difficult to find NT for all countries.
U25 not sense now.
-
Beta supporter will expire in 1 day. Suggestion: keep it active :P
Done !
-
Would be nice to have an overview of the number of the first, second and third places in GC. Like there is for the stages (number of gold, silver and bronze medals), see attachment.
-
Would be nice to have an overview of the number of the first, second and third places in GC. Like there is for the stages (number of gold, silver and bronze medals), see attachment.
great idea! GC riders win less stages/one-day races, but their GC wins should be reflected somehow
-
I don't like these icons due they are all victories and it is not the same in 1st, 2nd 3rd or 4th division .
I prefer always see history in every cyclist, in thee page at end of season only you can see top position in 1a.
-
Hello Everyone ;)
Thanks for new, better game and they are my suggestions :
1. Change main colors of start window because they are in CFF too
2. Extend the way for Flat/Climb Time Trialist to have a icons (I saw cyclist with silver at age 22 in CFF)
3. If you can - lock some stages in big Tours f.e. 10stage in Paris in TdF or some climbing stages because big tour without typical stage for climbers is not for "tours" cyclist. Or do a random without lock f.e. in stage 8 of TdF will be to Risoul to Tourmalet or to Pla a'Det(climb stages) to avoid tours for cobblers/sprinters (they have classics with a lot points to rankings).
4. Itzuria small tour is a tour of Basque Country? If yes you can change the name of race to better.
5. Form - that schould be changed because less races, the same max 20 riders in team.
6. In Team Rankings panel you can do how many points teams are loosing to the leader or/and column with the cyclist with the most points in the team.
7. And some new... if you want you can do a half of star (example - **' (2,5 star)) in results cyclist panel it will be more interesting to see more changes in evolution of riders.
And one question... whence some players know and write in Comments the cyclist talent points?
There is my statistics about this season stages (if it will be useful) :
9 Puncher stages
4 Puncher-Sprinter
13 Flat Sprinter
9 Cobbler-Puncher
5 Flat/Sprint Cobbler
8 Flat/Flat-Puncher Time Trials
2 Mountain TT
13 Mountain stages
18 Mountain-Puncher
10!(too many i think) Mountain-Sprinter
Thanks again for new game
Greetings :D
-
I have been thinking about the calendar and the amount of Tours in a season. For me the ratio of tours/one day races is good in CFF2.
If i look at the stage we have 3 grand tours and 9 small tours now (actually 2 small tours more than in CFF2) for a total of 75/91 tour stages per season. Between the Tour of Romandie and the end of the Vuelta are 2 one day races now.
It doesnt feel balanced. I think there could be two options for this:
1 Replace some small tours for one day races
2 reduce the amount of stages per tour (My preference) to 4 days for a small tour and 9 for a grand tour. Because almost 1/3 races is a grand tour in the new calendar. That also feels like too much.
Option 2 would lead to 60/91 races for tours and 31 one day races. much more similar to CFF2 which feel very well balanced with 65/118 races tours.
It is also possible to add a few races because we end the season halfway during the week.
Ps. I support the idea of Team Elrosportu to have some fixed stages per Tour to keep the character. Right now most tours dont feel unique or, again, balanced. For example the Volta a catalunya. You only need climbing, flat, sprint and TT now. Or the Tour with 4 flat sprints, 2 climbing sprint and 1 cobble sprint and 2 cobble hill stages. Only one hillclimb and no TT. Doesnt feel like a TdF to me.
Ps2. I would also keep Lombardia as the last race of the season. As it is in real life.
-
Patience, 1 day races in tours are races too and people must choose if they play for tour or for race, sometimes is useful play for 1 day races in tours.
Other 1 day races don't have this problem everybody have same goal.
Calendar is random and never it will be balanced for everyone but this 1st year some specialities are not included, as I said 20-25% of stages will be new or redesigned next year.
-
In the challenge page, put some statistics:
http://www.managercycling.com/cff/caraacara.php
Times I challenged other teams - All time
Times other teams accepted - All time
Challenges won - All time
My Best riders in challenges - All time
The the same - for Current Season
No statistics about lost challenges, please :D
-
I am curious: why isn't Lombardia last race in the Calendar ? :)
-
I make WC as last races , more interesting, more points .This is a game.
-
Make the forum compatible with Tapatalk
https://www.tapatalk.com/activateTapatalk
-
when someone gets elected as NT/U21/U23 manager, send in-game message to inform.
In CFF2, I was not a candidate, but I am U21 manager, and did not notice it until now... Lost 2 races
-
Now, with the new calendar, seasons finish on Thursdays.
I believe it would be an interesting fact, to make the days between that Thursday and the following Sunday (the three days in which we are right now) useful regarding transfer market, as it was a little preseason to make some transfers in order to improve or change your team.
-
Omloop Het Nieuwsblad, the colour of the last two sections are a very dark red (probably not helped by the many vertical black lines and the narrowness of the coloured band), and could be mistaken for a possible brown (mountain section) rather than cobbles (red), particularly if somebody doesn't have the benefit of supporter status. Noticing this, I then noticed that the colours of mountain & cobbles sections on different races were not standard, and very from light/dark, and varied shading.
As such, I'd recommend a standardisation of colours, light brown for mountain, light/mid red for cobbles, etc, so it's visually clear what each section in every race is.
-
I would love to know where Osca gets all of these race pics from. Do you make them up yourself or do you have every official race program from the beginning of time?
-
95% I have to search profiles, I put in my excel altitude and after I make a profile. After I pass to photoshop to put colours ,sections, mountains...
5% I make my own routes to give Cff the stages the game needs ( some time trials or cobbles races)
-
Show number of challenges won by the team:
http://www.managercycling.com/cff/caraacara.php
-
There had been a question months ago whether the training bonus for u24 was too great, and seeing my 23 year old climbers close to 100 in climb, downhill, stamina, and 80+ (by end of season) in hills, I suspect the question has merit.
As such, if a tweak is warranted, I would like to make the suggestion of 3+ old speed for 19-21 year olds, then 2+ old speed for 22-23 year olds.
-
There had been a question months ago whether the training bonus for u24 was too great, and seeing my 23 year old climbers close to 100 in climb, downhill, stamina, and 80+ (by end of season) in hills, I suspect the question has merit.
As such, if a tweak is warranted, I would like to make the suggestion of 3+ old speed for 19-21 year olds, then 2+ old speed for 22-23 year olds.
Why ? :D
I mean, why do you think would a multi-skilled rider be a bad thing ? Feel free to train them in flat, or in TT, or sprint form now on
Remember that starting with 24 yo there will be a slight decrease, by almost 1 skill point per season. So you would still need to train them in the high skills.
Yes, having 3 skills in 95+ is more than CFF2, but why is that bad...?
It will be a more tactical game; the skills are going to be more level, so managers' race tactics will be more important. On the other hand - the multi skills. Personally, I think it will be more fun like this :) (IMHO, of course)
-
Training speed is good for me, you must know actually due some bugs you have more than 10-20 extra training sessions full speed than future game.
-
http://www.managercycling.com/cff/team.php?userid=69
In Trophies section, when mouse over T-shirt, text is:
"Best Manager of his country"
suggestion:
"Best manager of his country, Season X"
Same for Best U23, Best Rider, etc.
-
http://www.managercycling.com/cff/team.php?userid=69
In Trophies section, when mouse over T-shirt, text is:
"Best Manager of his country"
suggestion:
"Best manager of his country, Season X"
Same for Best U23, Best Rider, etc.
Updated.
-
In achievements, there's a bunch of u23 race achievements. I think they should be disabled when the main game starts until the 1st gen cyclists are 26-27, because it defeats the value of the achievement if it's awarded when every cyclist is u23.
-
Suggestion: send "Supporter Ending" message 5 days before, not only the day of expiring.
-
One nice suggestion would be to have the 'order' in the tactical phase of the riders assigned, the same to the table below which shows their skills. :-)
-
In the Main Team Page:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/plantilla.php
Have an icon for riders who are currently in Training Camp
Maybe use the same icon as in achievements:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/iconoscff/concentra1.png
-
Can you Bring back the draft
-
Can you Bring back the draft
With 19 years old cyclist and trying new people don't find too many things to learn in the game, at moment it is not an option.
-
In the Main Team Page:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/plantilla.php
Have an icon for riders who are currently in Training Camp
Maybe use the same icon as in achievements:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/iconoscff/concentra1.png
Different specialities to be on training camp . I prefer the other icons.
-
Can you Bring back the draft
Probably no - CFF3 is supposed to be "light"-er on the server requirements, and Osca has explained that drafts were consuming too many resources. So as much as we enjoyed drafts, it is most likely gone for good... On top of that, all rider pulls are 19 years old, so drafts become a little redundant...
-
In the Main Team Page:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/plantilla.php
Have an icon for riders who are currently in Training Camp
Maybe use the same icon as in achievements:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/iconoscff/concentra1.png
Different specialities to be on training camp . I prefer the other icons.
In only suggested the easiest option; but if you can implement the specialities' icon, that would be really awesome!
-
How about a personal information page ingame?
It would be nice to write where your from, a little about your team (or the manager) or whatever you feel.
This option is already there for riders, but not for the team/manager. :).
-
Could we have a CFF Cup 2, for teams ranked 129-256 in CFF Rankings...? 8)
I mean for teams who did not make it into the "normal" CFF Cup.
Maybe call it "CFF Trophy" ;D
-
I'm surprised noone appears to have noticed this, but the game has like 64 4th division groups active when there isn't even a full Div3, yet alone many teams. As such I'd recommend:
Get rid of Division 4, which also means no relegation from Div3. If possible, expand the number of teams that can be in each Div3 group, most Div3 teams aren't active anyway, or if not possible, then have more Div3 groups.
Alternative in neither of the above is possible, then have Div4 teams fill a single Div4 group at a time, so at least they might get a chance to race against somebody.
-
I'm surprised noone appears to have noticed this, but the game has like 64 4th division groups active when there isn't even a full Div3, yet alone many teams. As such I'd recommend:
Get rid of Division 4, which also means no relegation from Div3. If possible, expand the number of teams that can be in each Div3 group, most Div3 teams aren't active anyway, or if not possible, then have more Div3 groups.
Alternative in neither of the above is possible, then have Div4 teams fill a single Div4 group at a time, so at least they might get a chance to race against somebody.
The new system is very complex, maybe the most difficult change for me in the game.
Teams in 3rd division relegate and go to 4th division.
After they relegate, system checks if they are not active ( 2 months). If they are inactive they were deleted and less teams in 4th division.
One option they are not very active ( not active, maybe less than 2 months without play), other option they can get money and train to be stronger in 3rd division.
Now new teams go to complete 3rd division and if it is full, they go to 4th division.
Not easy change it, I tried and study some options but I left this as it is now and it will continue, I don't see too much problem. Until 3rd division no problem.
-
This is a suggestion for the tactics and might be difficult to adjust. In my opinion the section bonus (for example hill, mountain,..) should be more important than the GV, especially with the helpers bonusses. For example a FFFMM stage. Bernal will be more likely to win the stage than Tony Martin because the stage ends in the mountains. Therefore his GV is way higher. So in the game Bernal would be the best helper for your leader and he will give his bonus. In reality Tony Martin is a way better helper in the first three sections because he is a stronger rider on the flat parts. So it would be nice a decent flat rider gives a huge bonus on the flat parts even though he isn't a good climber and you can for example send a rider like Bernal in the breakaway to help the leader in the last sections. In this case the game will become even more tactical.
I know this is probably very hard to adjust and not everybody likes it. But I just wanted to share my vision on how the game might feel even more like a real race.
Edit: In real life it also doesn't matter in a FFFFF race that your helper doesn't have a good sprint. Declerc and Keisse are for example way better helpers than Cavendish.
-
In the team page - show riders who are currenlty in Training camp (and therefore not eligible for sign up)
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/plantilla.php
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/inscripciones.php
maybe also here:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/preinscribir.php?eleccion=xx
-
Why are both training sessions in the night (Central European time 01:00 and 07:00)? It would be good to change this, for example 22:00 and 07:00 Central European Time. Then European managers (= the majority of the users) will have the opportunity to change their training between the 2 sessions. For example change training when a cyclist increases to 90 climbing at 22:00. He can start training a new skill at 07:00. Now everyone is asleep between then training sessions, so you get less page views. And more pageviews between the training sessions is always good for advertising income :)
-
I think it is only a tradition of many years.
You don't have to be online at that hour, you can change training after every race in upcoming races screen. You put the training you want after every race. You can put rest level , rest or change training.
-
It has some disadvantages too, for example when you buy a new rider. I can't change the training before 7 AM because I sleep the transfer time and still sleep at the second training time. Same thing when I am not sure if the rider will pop in the first training (talent level unknown), I might waste a training because I want to switch training after an increase to for example 80 climbing.
-
Within the CFF "silly season" (between Thursday and Sunday), could we organise a Small or Grand Tour for NT Teams? This will also give tourriders the opportunity to get selected :)
-
There should be a FAQ on Total Value from races. A lot has been answered in the "Questions" forum, but I think it would be useful to have it on the FAQ section. Or is it already there and I missed it...?
-
There should be a FAQ on Total Value from races. A lot has been answered in the "Questions" forum, but I think it would be useful to have it on the FAQ section. Or is it already there and I missed it...?
Total value?? Like the screen at
Races > Sign Up > Price Money & Points ?
-
There should be a FAQ on Total Value from races. A lot has been answered in the "Questions" forum, but I think it would be useful to have it on the FAQ section. Or is it already there and I missed it...?
Total value?? Like the screen at
Races > Sign Up > Price Money & Points ?
No, man :)
(BTW - where do you see Total Value in "Races > Sign Up > Price Money & Points"?)
I was referring to how GV is calculated, then the bonuses, then about helpers and which skill is relevant for helpers and so on. There are lot of questions about that in the "Questions" forum, but nothing in a single place
-
There should be a FAQ on Total Value from races. A lot has been answered in the "Questions" forum, but I think it would be useful to have it on the FAQ section. Or is it already there and I missed it...?
Total value?? Like the screen at
Races > Sign Up > Price Money & Points ?
No, man :)
(BTW - where do you see Total Value in "Races > Sign Up > Price Money & Points"?)
I was referring to how GV is calculated, then the bonuses, then about helpers and which skill is relevant for helpers and so on. There are lot of questions about that in the "Questions" forum, but nothing in a single place
I actually have a half written FAQ on race tactics which has this. Will finish it one day, not today as I'm about to get ready for work.
-
There should be a FAQ on Total Value from races. A lot has been answered in the "Questions" forum, but I think it would be useful to have it on the FAQ section. Or is it already there and I missed it...?
Total value?? Like the screen at
Races > Sign Up > Price Money & Points ?
No, man :)
(BTW - where do you see Total Value in "Races > Sign Up > Price Money & Points"?)
I was referring to how GV is calculated, then the bonuses, then about helpers and which skill is relevant for helpers and so on. There are lot of questions about that in the "Questions" forum, but nothing in a single place
I actually have a half written FAQ on race tactics which has this. Will finish it one day, not today as I'm about to get ready for work.
Oh, that's great! Let me know if I can help, but if you are already at such an advanced stage, I guess I can only review it since I haven't put anything on paper yet; (well, not paper... hard drive :P)
-
Show if rider is for sale in the Dream Team page:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/dreamteam.php
-
Could we also have the race-icons, indicating the favorites (not paying attention, or looking better than the rivals), domestiques (going too fast, significantly helping of trying to break the group) also for the national teams' races?
-
Can the rider order on the status page (https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/status.php) be ordered by points gained instead of salary?
-
I just found out that the rider below has to bronze icons, while only 1 is shown on his profile. Can all icons become visible on a team page? When I look at the team page now it looks like this team is specialized in sprint and also has one cobble rider. But in fact this rider is both a cobble rider and a sprinter. I normally don't look at team pages for individual riders, so I think it's good to show all icons on the team page.
https://cyclingforfun.org/cff/vision.php?ciclistaid=14910
-
Now with the Worl challenge I´m not sure how good is it for te team, I have many active carts at the same time (salary, fire,...)
I would like to know how much do I earn from it in finances or somewhere, or how much do I save from it :-*
-
I have messages in my inbox from March last year, probably a hundred of them are NT selection messages. So my suggestion is for a saved messages section, and anything not in that saved section gets deleted after 2-3 months (maybe with the season reset), that way all of these messages aren't clogging up the server.
-
Make World Challenges available to race multiple times, even if won that race already. (Of course, if you win the same race twice, it will not count as a new win.)
This will make world challenges fun even in late season - as you can perhaps study different tactics in the same race.
-
Make World Challenges available to race multiple times, even if won that race already. (Of course, if you win the same race twice, it will not count as a new win.)
This will make world challenges fun even in late season - as you can perhaps study different tactics in the same race.
I agree, this would be good.
Also: Bring back the World cup. Maybe for the 5 monuments or some other combination of major races.
And another one: Add one cobblehill stage to the World Championship (Richmond WC?)
-
The world cup would be nice!
P.S: Also the thing that horace is saying!!
-
New Acheivement > Trophies:
To win a Div 1 race with a cyclist aged 34 years or older. Maybe make it Cadel Evans (TdF winner at age 34).
-
The free rider market is really not a new user friendly search option. And not an easy one for experienced players.
There is no option to put in a maximum stat and there is only an option to see 50 riders at the same time.
As a new player you do not know what stats are good to put in and for climbers for example there are hundreds with 100 skill why is one good or bad? As an experienced player these bad riders force you to put other minimum stats and this way you might miss one rider better but with just one below the minimum you have placed.
The icons next to the riders are very helpful but not very useful if you do not know how to look or if there are just 50 riders visible.
I have two suggestions.
1. Put a maximum option just like in the normal market.
2. Delete the maximum 50 riders option to a higher number if infinite is to heavy for the server.
3. Just do them both.
-
Add a special "Star" or some distinctive sign for supporter teams, everywhere the team name is displayed
-
Add a special "Star" or some distinctive sign for supporter teams, everywhere the team name is displayed
Supporter teams have the option of a team jersey image, which identifies supporter teams, well those who use it.
-
Add a special "Star" or some distinctive sign for supporter teams, everywhere the team name is displayed
Supporter teams have the option of a team jersey image, which identifies supporter teams, well those who use it.
Correct, but I was referring to an automated badge of some sort, visible for all; you know, just to make the supporter feature more visible and with an immediate gratification ;)
-
Oska, are you reading this thread?
-
Oska, are you reading this thread?
Have you received any answer?
-
Oska, are you reading this thread?
Have you received any answer?
Nope :(
-
Oska, are you reading this thread?
Have you received any answer?
Nope :(
He did mention that he is very busy in real life (work + familiy), and his involvement in the game will be low (so I would assume limited to emergencies/critical things). So I think it is best to assume he is not reading this ;)
-
Today I added some suggestions I have in my notepad and I uploaded to the server.
Most are minor updates, some internals to quit messages, supporters notifications, processes with less loading time ...
Now in team page you can see cyclists in training camp , free market now give 100 results, status order is changed.
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.
And I started in chat a discussion due I give some internal changes to change 2 important things in the game.
As always, these changes have players that agree and others than disagree and it's not easy for me, I will study these changes more time, reading all you.
1st change- talent will change at end of every season +1 or -1 .
2nd change Age where cyclists start to loss skills will be random 30 to 34 (or 31-34 or 29-35...) not fixed . Some cyclists can mantain his level some years .
-
1st change- talent will change at end of every season +1 or -1 .
Are you confirming that this has been implemented? (or is it still just proposed)
-
Not yet, that part is still being discussed, but personally, I'd like to see something like this.
1st change- talent will change at end of every season +1 or -1 .
Are you confirming that this has been implemented? (or is it still just proposed)
-
If it's still up for discussion, I'd like to argue the case for no change.
-
Only proposed
-
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.
-
For me its the same: switching talent per season will not be a good change for me. If talent has too much influence i would sooner suggest to remove a few levels and have the maximum bonus on +15% or something. This way its harder to calculate, has less influence but is still fixed.
I am very much in favour of changing the Age where riders start to get worse.
As always: thanks :)
-
Today I added some suggestions I have in my notepad and I uploaded to the server.
Most are minor updates, some internals to quit messages, supporters notifications, processes with less loading time ...
Now in team page you can see cyclists in training camp , free market now give 100 results, status order is changed.
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.
And I started in chat a discussion due I give some internal changes to change 2 important things in the game.
As always, these changes have players that agree and others than disagree and it's not easy for me, I will study these changes more time, reading all you.
1st change- talent will change at end of every season +1 or -1 .
2nd change Age where cyclists start to loss skills will be random 30 to 34 (or 31-34 or 29-35...) not fixed . Some cyclists can mantain his level some years .
Nice changes you made, Oska, including more variation in the WC road race. :)
About the 2 changes ( I made them bold ) which are in discussion ;
I wonder what the arguments are that these are good changes for CFF ?
I have a vague idea why, but since this is discussed already and being discussed here, it is nice to know what the arguments are.
In my opinion ( for now ) ;
about the 1st change = What does this mean exactly ?
As I read it know, a 19yo has the first season talent rating 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 ;
and at their 20yo birthday they will have talent rating 1 or talent rating -1 for the rest of their career ?
So this could be +3% trainingspeed or -3% trainingspeed ( if talent rating 1 is 3% but I forgot what percentage talent rating 1 gets ).
Besides that I don't know exactly what this 1st change implies ;
I see one problem that is already mentioned by Rico ( and Sjiz ).
For example I have 3 very young training projects ( 1x 20yo and 2x 21yo, including a free cyclist that I cannot sell ),
and they look to me as promising talents right now, but when this change already happens after this season ;
they're much less promising because they cannot profit of the talent rating bonus, and all generations above them had that advantage.
I have just 3 young talents, but for teams that train a full team of very young talents for some months already ;
no doubt they have invested in their talents based on a high talent rating, but that base is gone with this change,
plus the fact that their talents then will have a big disadvantage compared to all generations above them.
So, I can imagine this change will be very dissapointing to teams full of young talents.
Maybe a good idea if this change will happen ;
that it will not happen after this season already, but after 3 seasons to avoid this big dissapointment.
About this 1st change ; I wonder what the arguments are ?
Perhaps also good to mention = I'm not complaining ; I like changes that are beneficial to the CFF game. 8)
Even no problem if this creates a bad situation to my 3 young training projects, and also it would mean to me a waste of a free cyclist.
My situation is nothing compared to teams full of very young talents ; I assume they will not like this change at all, if it is applied soon.
about the 2nd change = No problem for me to adapt to this situation. I like variaty in the game, so probably I will like this change.
Also about the 2nd change ; I wonder what the arguments are ?
-
Hi, I'm very happy that some changes are going to happen finally. Great to hear about the new stages. I'm just going to give my opinion about the big changes proposed:
1st change - variable talent: I think it's better in terms of similarity to real cycling. With respect to the dynamics of the game, I think it will favour those that don't calculate talent than the ones who do. Also, manager will pay more for a 19yo because there will be less risk of having a low talent forever (even if it's low, it can increase later).
It's important to clarify whether the variability will be +1/0/-1 each season, or just +1/-1. This is very important, because with the +1/0/-1 system, a rider can still be talent 5 during the whole under24 training, meanwhile with +1/-1 the maximum will be 5-4-5-4-5. In this way, it will also be important to know what are the chances of a talent 5 to change. Will it be 50% no change - 50% decrease to talent 4? Or 66.7% no change - 33.3% decrease to talent 4?
I like this change, but to me is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to annouce (in game) details about this changes in advance (at least 2-3 seasons), so everyone knows in advance and are able to plan accordingly.
2nd change - decreasing start age: again, it's a great idea to make the game more similar to reality. But in the game now is quite clear that some type of riders, specially grand tourers and those terrains which include many different skills, usually cannot start winning until 27-28 yo due to the big differences in training from 24yo to 30yo. If the decreasing starts at 29 or 30yo, this will give a very short winning life of those riders. For that reason, I would not go lower than 31yo for the decreasing start age, so all the riders can have at least 3-4 years of winning chances. In my opinion, 31-35 would be the best option.
Now that some changes can be made, it would also like to stress out a couple of needed changes of great importance to me:
-There is no competition at all in 3rd div and many managers are using it as a way to make huge amounts of money meanwhile training new generations (some of them even until 26yo of their riders). I think this is not good for the game, relegation should be a punishment, not a reward. It could be solved by reducing the number of groups in 3rd division, so it is harder to promote again and prizes will be lower due to the bigger competition. I know this change it's not easy, probably not possible, so another option would be reducing considerably the prizes in 3rd div.
-I think we all know that the game interface is quite obsolete now and that an improvement in these terms (interface renewal of the website - real mobile app) would increase a lot the number of users in the game. I know this is practically impossible to achieve, but I wanted to mention just to be considered. Another thing that could increase substantially the number of users would be the activity in social media. Right now it's almost 0, and I know there are people in the chat willing to take over the social media accounts to try to bring new users. Maybe you could give a chance on this, Oska.
I wonder what the arguments are of the persons who discussed this in a (Spanish ?) chat group.
Vos, about the variable talent, some managers have been discussing and claiming it to be a great change, because they don't like that a rider can be predicted to 24yo with maximum accuracy. I agree with the change not because I don't like the predictions (actually it was me who made the prediction tool), but because it makes the game more similar to real cycling.
About the decreasing start age, I didn't see anyone talking about it in the chat. So it must be something that Oska just made up himself, but it is a great idea.
-
Nice to see changes for the World Championship, I really like that, makes the game more balanced.
1st change: talent will change at the end of every season +1 or -1
Hmm, it reflects real life more, when a very talented rider in the end is not the talent he promised to be and the other way round. So it might be a good change, makes development less predictable.
Some questions:
Will it always be -1 or 1 or is 0 also a possibility? Having the 0 option would make more sense in my opinion.
Is there a min and max limit to talent? Will it always be 0 to 5, or are for instance -3 and 8 also possibilities? If 0-5 then the last generation trained without talent changes and talent 5 will have a big advantage for a while, so I don't like that. If talent < 0 or talent > 5 is possible then there is the danger that there are a few superstars in the game, dominating the races, which I also don't like. So a balanced implementation looks a problem to me.
2nd change: start losing skills at a random age.
That reflects real life more, so it might be a good change, it makes the game less predictable. In combination with the first change there is the chance that huge talent (>5 if possible) in combination with late eldering age can create a very old competitive rider. That would make way for the Chris Horner milestone, winning a grand tour at the age of 41... I like this second change better than the first one.
-
Good to read these reactions. 8)
I guess my point of view on the debatable first change is a bit different to how Ophiuko and Combuijs explain it.
It is still not exactly clear to me.
But I like almost every change that makes this game more variable / more unpredictable ( and more like real cycling ).
I just think of this now ; such changes are beneficial to me / managers who play like me.
I play on gut-feeling because I'm too lazy to calculate in this game, just sometimes I do that, mostly even for other managers.
My own opinion ; to calculate a lot takes a bit the fun out of the game to me/ a bit a waste of time, I rather waste time to the CFF League.^^
But I can imagine many others like this calculating aspect of the game. So far CFF is a great game for both types of managers,
because even such a "dumb/not calculating" manager like me, was 1A champion once. :D
Also I think of this right now ;
The first debatable change can cause that is less interesting to start a youth team for the next 6 seasons or so.
But maybe this thought is wrong, because it seems my point of view on the first debatable change is not correct.
Almost always Ophiuko and Combuijs have better points of view when it comes to CFF stuff like this, so, interesting to read.
-
For me, just seeing Oska doing changes, it is always a good thing! The game is alive!!
About the proposals...honestly, I don't care too much, we will adapt to those changes hehe, and if the changes are not good in a long term, we will change them again!
-
Like Franky said.
We are humans and we do not like change. Change means we need to learn something new. Give a change some seasons a chance, if not liked change it back. Ok maybe some unfair competition but even more satisfying if your rider ends up as a good rider.
No one mentioned it but I hope if there are changes they are well explained and just implemented with a total reset of the game.
-
Only was 2 suggestions I readed in this forum.
NO GAME RESET , WE ONLY RESET BECAUSE TO ADD THIS CALENDAR AND TRAINING WAS IMPOSSIBLE WITH OLD GAME.
Before changes I need read options and your reactions. If I'm not sure it's for better I won't change anything.
The option about talent was at end of season = +1 or -1 ( 50% equal, 25% +1, 25% -1), if you have 5 ( 75% equal , 25% -1). 0 talent (75% = , 25%+1).
About age to decrease I think we can mantain 31 as minimum and we can add until 34. Example 50% 31, 30% 32, 15% 33, 5% 34).
In calendar I will try add some stages, not too many because when you add a stage you decrease options to other terrains, for this I only will add if I think a new stage is useful to get a better fight in the game.
Some tours have their own identity ( cobbles in Binkbank, no mountain in Down Under, mountain and hills in Basque Country...)but we can introduce some stages in any tour to improve the game.
In Time Trial I think maybe random factor is high and difference is low, maybe I give more value to Global Value , effort and maybe any bonus. I have to study this engine a lot again.
-
I am all in for both changes. That amount of variability and surprise would make the game something "more alive". At this moment, once you know the talent of the rider, you can calculate how is going to be with 24-28 or 32 years old with barely any error. and that in my opinion is a bit boring. Then you just need to stick to a training schedule and voila, your rider is fully cooked at perfection with the perfect age.
With these two changes, you'll have that change and variability, you'll need to check year after year the talent of the rider to readjust trainings... It adds a complete new layer of possibilities to the game in my opinion.
And then the variable decrease age, the same. It would make that riders would start to compete sooner just in case mine would be not usable by the age of 31yo. Or it could happen all the opposite and could keep compiting up to the age of 35 or older.
These 2 changes are more than welcome by me. And it is what many people have been asking: more variability in the game and new challenges.
And just to let you know I have just started a new generation this year so I am by far one of the person's who is not going gain any advantage of this new situation.
I don't think we need a full reset for implementing these changes, but I wouldn't be against it if osca considers it necessary.
-
Today I added some suggestions I have in my notepad and I uploaded to the server.
Most are minor updates, some internals to quit messages, supporters notifications, processes with less loading time ...
Now in team page you can see cyclists in training camp , free market now give 100 results, status order is changed.
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.
And I started in chat a discussion due I give some internal changes to change 2 important things in the game.
As always, these changes have players that agree and others than disagree and it's not easy for me, I will study these changes more time, reading all you.
1st change- talent will change at end of every season +1 or -1 .
2nd change Age where cyclists start to loss skills will be random 30 to 34 (or 31-34 or 29-35...) not fixed . Some cyclists can mantain his level some years .
Hi Osca,
Ophikuo has some good data about the age of the riders that win the races. In mean, this riders are 28 years old, +-1.
To star to age the riders too soon (29 y.o) seem way premature. If you finally decide to implement this idea of random aging, I would suggest to keep it for older riders, from 31 years old+. Otherwise, you could be training a rider for quite a long time and only fully benefit from him for 1-2 seasons.
It is nice to hear that you are active and willing to implement some changes :)
-
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.
-
Only was 2 suggestions I readed in this forum.
NO GAME RESET , WE ONLY RESET BECAUSE TO ADD THIS CALENDAR AND TRAINING WAS IMPOSSIBLE WITH OLD GAME.
Before changes I need read options and your reactions. If I'm not sure it's for better I won't change anything.
The option about talent was at end of season = +1 or -1 ( 50% equal, 25% +1, 25% -1), if you have 5 ( 75% equal , 25% -1). 0 talent (75% = , 25%+1).
About age to decrease I think we can mantain 31 as minimum and we can add until 34. Example 50% 31, 30% 32, 15% 33, 5% 34).
In calendar I will try add some stages, not too many because when you add a stage you decrease options to other terrains, for this I only will add if I think a new stage is useful to get a better fight in the game.
Some tours have their own identity ( cobbles in Binkbank, no mountain in Down Under, mountain and hills in Basque Country...)but we can introduce some stages in any tour to improve the game.
In Time Trial I think maybe random factor is high and difference is low, maybe I give more value to Global Value , effort and maybe any bonus. I have to study this engine a lot again.
.
From lemarche #mesqueunteam we want to publicly support both new ideas and changes. The "random ageing" I like the original idea that could happen from 29yo. But better this than nothing.
And I support the idea of the sooner the better, waiting one year and a half for a probability of a change in the talent of a rider seems toooooo long for me.
-
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 ;D.Thx for the effort Oska
-
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.
-
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!
-
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
-
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.
-
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!
-
Talking about realism: no chance of adding days to player ages...? Not just years...? :D
-
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 ; (https://www.worldcyclingstats.com/img/flags/small/au.png) SPORTLIFE versus (https://www.worldcyclingstats.com/img/flags/small/au.png) ZATARRA
(https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/etapas/ritch.jpg)
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. 8)
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. :D
-
Here is the other WC added.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/564826389765816343/850127924882440193/leedswc.jpg)
-
Thanks Ophiuko, good to see this race too already, and also a very nice race. 8)
edit ; here the country is wrong, it should be England ( or Great Britain ) instead of Australia.
-
Now only a cobblehills WC is missing ;).
-
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.
-
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
-
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. 8)
I adjusted my previous post about the flatcobble WC race, including that Richmond is spelled right now.
-
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 :P
-
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.
-
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?
-
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."
-
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.
-
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.
(http://[img]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.")[/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
-
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
-
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 :)
-
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?
-
I still believe the best addition would be to add age days to riders :)
I agree. This would be an excellent improvement.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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... :-\
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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... :-\
I think that's a technical detail on which only osca can know the answer. In my mind, it would be easy to just implement it in Day 1 of a season: for every existing rider, set days to "1" (or a random number between say "1" and "15"), and for the new youth pulls - start from "1".
I think the purpose of the topic is to discuss ideas, and let osca decide what is feasible from the technical point of view (if the ideas are ok, of course)
-
The cyclist IDs are in order according to when they were promoted. I think it wouldn't be difficult to know the exact date (or season-stage) of every cyclist promotion.
-
Of course that technically can be done, I meant if doing it now, with thousands of riders already in the game, that didn't have this benefit could be a problem. Probably for old riders not a big deal, but for those that would be from 20 to 25 and didn't started the first days of the season, is a notorious disadvantage, 10, 20 or 30 days less of training...
-
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.
Fun thought about the loyalty.
About the variable training. Will it have that much influence on the training schedule? When a rider is 19 you determine the talent. If it is low, we will still fire them or sell them. If it is high there might be a chance the talent will decline but it will still be a good rider and your schedule will stay the same in general. The biggest value of the variable talent is a wider amount of top riders. At this moment there is a 30% training difference between talent 0 and 5, which is huge and those riders always ended up in the teams with the big money. Hopefully now less with the spiderweb gone. Without the spider you can buy a very good rider but with talent 0. With a variable talent schedule he might get better.
So the variable talent will change you opinion on firing riders or which one to buy. More riders will have te benefit of the doubt. But influence on your training schedule I can not imagine it will be that important. In my opinion
-
Of course that technically can be done, I meant if doing it now, with thousands of riders already in the game, that didn't have this benefit could be a problem. Probably for old riders not a big deal, but for those that would be from 20 to 25 and didn't started the first days of the season, is a notorious disadvantage, 10, 20 or 30 days less of training...
That's why I suggested to set the day for those as a random number between 1 and 15; or 1 and 10; the disadvantage would be reduced that way
-
Variable talent, if any time comes into reality, I would try to change my schedule to make the most of it. But it is not only that, as it been said with tools and spreadsheets you can do a very accurate forecast of how the riders are going to be. variable talent brings a little bit of uncertainty, what would be good, in my opinion, to the game.
-
Here's a simple question on the variable age decline proposal. The current decline rate is because it’s seen as against the game’s interests to have competitive cyclists into their 40s. The game even lists a 35 & 37 yo getting 1st Div points as significant achievements, with no further achievements beyond this. As such, it’s always been the game’s design to have cyclists retire in their early 30s so players have to keep evolving with new cyclists. Is this no longer the desired life cycle rate?
If it’s desired to have cyclists lasting to later &/or having a more steady peak period, then there’s a fairer way to do it. Simply alter the decay rate. Changing the decline ages 27-30 to 0.0075 puts a little pressure to curb an improvement, or stop it for zero talent, then 31 at 0.01, 32 at 0.0125, 33 at 0.015, 34 at 0.0175, 35 at 0.2 means that those on low talent or mismanaged will drop quickly, yet those who properly manage their cyclist can keep going. And this would be an absolutely fairer way than some blind luck screw somebody over through no mismanagement in favour of somebody who’s abused their cyclists but is lucky on a blind stat. And this is particularly cruel for anybody who’d trained their talent/s from age 19 to be done over for somebody who just buys at older ages and doesn’t bother managing their cyclists wellbeing.
____
And with the variable season to season talent. A manager training cyclists from age 19 has to sit through at least 5 seasons, and as many as 6 or 7 before their cyclists are able to be competitive. This is around a year in RL time. Can anybody tell me how it’s reasonable that somebody can do everything right, get the right cyclists, take the time to train properly, only to have the cyclists collapse to worthless through mere season to season random? A cyclist with talent 5 or 4 can be, and quite possibly be put into 2-0 talent worthless status within 2-3 seasons, yet alone 5-7 seasons, with the manager who does everything right possibly finding on average (or even more) 2/3rds of their cyclists junked this way, in addition to those naturally junked on initial low talent. What boundaries are in place to prevent this?
Maybe go through 5-7 seasons to end up with nothing through no fault of their own. Why would somebody train cyclists from 19 years in such a situation?
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
Absolutely. And if these people claim to want it easier on new managers, then how about their per stage excel data & formula calculations, which is a vastly more complex area where the true difference between new & experienced managers lie.
-
And with the variable season to season talent. A manager training cyclists from age 19 has to sit through at least 5 seasons, and as many as 6 or 7 before their cyclists are able to be competitive. This is around a year in RL time. Can anybody tell me how it’s reasonable that somebody can do everything right, get the right cyclists, take the time to train properly, only to have the cyclists collapse to worthless through mere season to season random? A cyclist with talent 5 or 4 can be, and quite possibly be put into 2-0 talent worthless status within 2-3 seasons, yet alone 5-7 seasons, with the manager who does everything right possibly finding on average (or even more) 2/3rds of their cyclists junked this way, in addition to those naturally junked on initial low talent. What boundaries are in place to prevent this?
Maybe go through 5-7 seasons to end up with nothing through no fault of their own. Why would somebody train cyclists from 19 years in such a situation?
I agree with AA on this: CFF does not have millions of riders, so any extreme statistics cancel each other out long term. If you do get into a bad luck scenario, when your 19 yo talent 5 pull (which is already quite rare :)) goes to talent 2 or 1 by the time he is 23, then you've lost 4-5 seasons of training. And that will cause frustration for the manager. Too much bad luck. And it's not like you can replace that in the market, because the market is quite dead. We have 100-200 riders on the market (except around end of season, when there are 400-500); but for the most part of the seaosn, there are no options on the market out there.
Yes, there might be examples of low talent pulls who will go to talent 5, but seeing that at other managers, will only increase frustration if you are the un-lucky one.
.
Too much luck-based variability with variable talent - in my opinion. Too much shift from long-term planning to just luck in the strategic game. With simply not alternatives being offered, other that restart the team.
-
Suggestion to help new teams:
Let's be honest, the team new players start with is throwaway material, and doubly so if they don't begin at the start of the season. So my selection is to replace three of the 19-year-olds with 7-star 25-year-olds. Seven stars won't trouble any proper teams, they won't affect the NTs, even if they end up at 8 stars before 30 years of age. But importantly, it gives new players something to actually race with. I know you're saying "free transfer list," but most make poor selections there simply because anything's better than 19-year-old nothing.
I'd propose these 7-star cyclists be a random three from the major disciplines of:
Pure Climber
Climb-Hiller
Sprinter
Sprint-Hiller
Hiller
Cobbler
Hill-Cobbler
Flat TTer
-
And with the variable season to season talent. A manager training cyclists from age 19 has to sit through at least 5 seasons, and as many as 6 or 7 before their cyclists are able to be competitive. This is around a year in RL time. Can anybody tell me how it’s reasonable that somebody can do everything right, get the right cyclists, take the time to train properly, only to have the cyclists collapse to worthless through mere season to season random? A cyclist with talent 5 or 4 can be, and quite possibly be put into 2-0 talent worthless status within 2-3 seasons, yet alone 5-7 seasons, with the manager who does everything right possibly finding on average (or even more) 2/3rds of their cyclists junked this way, in addition to those naturally junked on initial low talent. What boundaries are in place to prevent this?
Maybe go through 5-7 seasons to end up with nothing through no fault of their own. Why would somebody train cyclists from 19 years in such a situation?
According to the percentages given by Oska, the probability of a given talent 5 at 19yo to be at talent 2 after three seasons is 1.5625%.
The probability of a given talent 4 at 19yo to be at talent 2 after three seasons is 3.125%
Still if a talent 5 drops to talent 2 in 3 seasons, if you are a expert manager that makes no faults, I guess you would have calculated the talent every season, and could still sell him for good money (early training at high talents makes riders very good-looking) before it becomes worse. And then buy good riders with that money.
Moreover, the same way a talent 5 will drop to talent 4, a talent 4 of yours will increase to talent 5, with the same probability.
I think you should stop considering only your team at evaluating these changes, Aurora. Because you are practically the only manager that does not sell/buy riders, you just keep going with your high-talent TTers, always train for them, and rarely sell them. Which I don't criticize, everyone enjoys this game the way they want, but you have to admit that it's only you the one who does that. Most of manager make a generation, and then sell most of them to buy riders in all the other terrains. CFF has less and less users everyday. Changes are needed for sure.
Again, I would like to stress out the changes which I think are needed the most right now:
-There is no competition at all in 3rd div and many managers are using it as a way to make huge amounts of money meanwhile training new generations (some of them even until 26yo of their riders). I think this is not good for the game, relegation should be a punishment, not a reward. It could be solved by reducing the number of groups in 3rd division, so it is harder to promote again and prizes will be lower due to the bigger competition. I know this change it's not easy, probably not possible, so another option would be reducing considerably the prizes in 3rd div.
-I think we all know that the game interface is quite obsolete now and that an improvement in these terms (interface renewal of the website - real mobile app) would increase a lot the number of users in the game. I know this is practically impossible to achieve, but I wanted to mention just to be considered. Another thing that could increase substantially the number of users would be the activity in social media. Right now it's almost 0, and I know there are people in the chat willing to take over the social media accounts to try to bring new users. Maybe you could give a chance on this, Oska.
Let's be honest, the team new players start with is throwaway material, and doubly so if they don't begin at the start of the season. So my selection is to replace three of the 19-year-olds with 7-star 25-year-olds. Seven stars won't trouble any proper teams, they won't affect the NTs, even if they end up at 8 stars before 30 years of age. But importantly, it gives new players something to actually race with. I know you're saying "free transfer list," but most make poor selections there simply because anything's better than 19-year-old nothing.
I agree this would be also great to attract newcomers. Maybe these experienced riders could come from riders that have been for a while on the free riders market and no one picked them up, before they are deleted from the game. I would say that these new teams could even start just with 10 riders from the free riders market, if they want 19yo riders, they just have to promote them. I think these have been proposed earlier, and I don't think it would be hard to make it work.
-
But is the variable talent anything more than an annoyance then?
Like pipinata said before, the difficulty of this game is not to find one talented cyclist, but to train a whole team at the same time. That is difficult enough already for most teams, why create another layer of difficulty, just for the sake of making the game more random?
-
I have read the whole post again, I think the only one saying variable talent would be good for new managers is peachey. And he says that because a newbie buying a low talented rider would still have the opportunity of that talent to improve.
And for more experimented managers, I think it would add another layer of difficulty to the training. A new challenge.
I don't see it as an annoyance. But for me is different I guess I don't like to have everything under control, and for a game, I like to have that little uncertainty that is going to give me that 25% chance of decreasing or growing my talent every year.
-
Oh, seems that Oska made a few changes more? At least, I cannot see now the efforts helper when putting tactics :o
-
Are you sure your Supoorter did not expire? I noticed that the message that it ended was taken away, so it now comes as a bit of a surprise.
-
On my tactics page nothing changed ; the total EP used is visable.
Rico his question is a very good one and most likely the case, because I see your team does not have a shirt anymore (also a supporter feature).
-
Are you sure your Supoorter did not expire? I noticed that the message that it ended was taken away, so it now comes as a bit of a surprise.
Yeah, was that! ;D ;D
-
Send an in-game message when voting starts in NT Elections - personally, I forget many times to vote. This suggestion will perhaps drive engagement
(Currently, a message is sent only when managers can become candidates)
-
GC victories/podiums should count on the overall team/cyclist victories/podiums, not only stage victories/podiums.
-
Add the "For sale" icon in the classification pages:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/indi2.php
(btw: is osca still reading the forum...? :))
-
...And maybe add the "For Sake" icon on the Supporter ranking pages:
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/medallitass.php?valor=paves
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/dreamteam.php
https://www.cyclingforfun.org/cff/dreamteam23.php
Thank you
-
Could the Supporter expiration notification be sent 5 or 10 days in advance or so... ? Currently it is being sent as "Hey, your supporter expired; bang!".
I don't really see the benefit of the current situation, without advance notice...
cc: CFF Admin (not sure who that is :D)