Not sure increasing CT wage cap and rider minimum without adding money works as it feels like they will just then have no money to spend on fun things like PTHC wildcards.
PTHC wildcards are in no way helpful, if you don't have a level 4 rider that needs a couple XP. In the fight for promotion or in helping your team longterm, these wildcards do more harm than good. I don't see many teams using them, except if they have no real intention in promoting. They get you no points and they collide with potential other races where you can score points. Money can be spend in better ways than paying to compete in a race where the average opponent teams are FAR better than yours.
For years there has been a narative from CT managers that they have no viable way of maxing level 4 riders. Solution gets presented and then people still find stuff to complain about, it's the exact same thing in PCT for PT wild cards(I didn't buy a GT wild card for 4 years in PT until I needed it to max out my riders and massively push my level 3's XP on top of that. Level 3 riders which have been a bit of a pain in CT in the past is also massively helped by PTHC, if I have read the XP matrix correctly, no points scored also means no impact on renewals requests, while you get to potentially test out a long term leader in a race if you're in the promotion race for future seasons. Also just gives you something to look forward to at a potential dead week or two in your season.
Not sure increasing CT wage cap and rider minimum without adding money works as it feels like they will just then have no money to spend on fun things like PTHC wildcards.
PTHC wildcards are in no way helpful, if you don't have a level 4 rider that needs a couple XP. In the fight for promotion or in helping your team longterm, these wildcards do more harm than good. I don't see many teams using them, except if they have no real intention in promoting. They get you no points and they collide with potential other races where you can score points. Money can be spend in better ways than paying to compete in a race where the average opponent teams are FAR better than yours.
For years there has been a narative from CT managers that they have no viable way of maxing level 4 riders. Solution gets presented and then people still find stuff to complain about, it's the exact same thing in PCT for PT wild cards(I didn't buy a GT wild card for 4 years in PT until I needed it to max out my riders and massively push my level 3's XP on top of that. Level 3 riders which have been a bit of a pain in CT in the past is also massively helped by PTHC, if I have read the XP matrix correctly, no points scored also means no impact on renewals requests, while you get to potentially test out a long term leader in a race if you're in the promotion race for future seasons. Also just gives you something to look forward to at a potential dead week or two in your season.
Where is 1 or 2 PTHC races via wildcard a way to develop a level 4 rider as a CT team? 1.1 XP per raceday.
The only way to get that 4.100 push is via loaning them out to a PT team.
Stupid Ideas I always have enough, so here anither one
Regarding make CT more fun/appealing:
Scrap the CT Free Rider Draft at the end. Replace it with a Draft for 1 50k Rider at the START!
Not without restrictions, lets say something like this:
- Riders (Free Agents) 27 or younger
- exclude the Top 10 (or so) Talents from the current year but include all others
And then make a 1 Round draft before the Transfers start, with the worst team got the #1 pick and so on. So each Team can get a solid rider or if they wanna use it a good talent.
Another benefit i see is that people actually would care a bit more in renewals and not letting go riders with the intention: "I will get him anyway again for 50k -60k and save money"
I mean sure it can hurt for some teams who didnt renew a rider but then they just need to be more careful when doing renewals.
In the end this only "takes" away 15-20 riders before transfer starts and most high end riders are usually above 27 anyway but gives a good incentive to CT Teams and keeps them (especially new ones) more motivated since they have at least one good piece they dont need to worry about anymore.
I kinda like the idea - but I think more restrictions is needed. Newly added talents shouldn't be possible to get a headstart on. For reasons jt already mentioned. I would be devastated to see the best greek talents be picked up for 50K each season. Either because they are actually good or simply because the CT managers would know that I would be interested in paying too much to get them.
But riders left over from the last FA and non-renewed riders below a certain threshold would be alright to me. Even if they would happen to be Greek
Thats all just idea's and suggestions I can think of, after all thats what this thread is for.
So regarding the discussion before:
Rider Levelling & more fun CT
The current system for the levelling is made so purely of balancing reasons. Its so structured that its impossible for a PT Team to get 1 > 3 for a talent. And the reason therefor is to prevent PT teams to just grab every great Talent by overpowering PCT but especially CT teams with money since they cant level tem themselves and if they want to they need to spend a shit ton of money to loan out.
With the changes made even now this isnt really an option anymore since the fee is now limited to 600k. So CT gehts 600k and has to level a rider (use racedays for them) which wont be very useful in almost all cases and the money they got isnt worth a lot also. And in worst case they even still page a huge portion of the wage.
The XP System and how it works is well thought of and works but realitically and logically it doesnt make much sense. If we look at IRL the higher the competition the more it would be worth for a talent.
Anyway thats not what it was made for and again, i really think its well thought of.
And finally now here the suggestion Its a huge one and i dont think many will like but i suggest anyway:
- get rid of the clustered XP gains, just connect it to racedays and make it so that a rider can be leveled 1 > 3, 3>4 and 4>Max in any division if well used.
Now you say: "Oh no but then just PT Teams will get all the good talents anyway and CT/PCT doesnt get any out of it."
Thats true but therefor comes #2 :
- New added riders/Talents with 1.00 now get a max. Salary of 500k . If that is reached the rider "chooses" which of the 500k offer he accepts.
We live in 2026 so its pretty easy to find a RNG tool thats decides this then.
- Another addition to this though, every team gets 1 "Ticket" BUT:
+ you get 5 if your primary team nation matches the riders nation
+ you get 3 for when the secondary matches
So in the end it feels a bit like really the rider decided where he wanna goes.
--------
So enough rambling of me and I know already people wont like it but i still wanted to say it
And finally now here the suggestion Its a huge one and i dont think many will like but i suggest anyway:
- get rid of the clustered XP gains, just connect it to racedays and make it so that a rider can be leveled 1 > 3, 3>4 and 4>Max in any division if well used.
Now you say: "Oh no but then just PT Teams will get all the good talents anyway and CT/PCT doesnt get any out of it."
Thats true but therefor comes #2 :
- New added riders/Talents with 1.00 now get a max. Salary of 500k . If that is reached the rider "chooses" which of the 500k offer he accepts.
We live in 2026 so its pretty easy to find a RNG tool thats decides this then.
- Another addition to this though, every team gets 1 "Ticket" BUT:
+ you get 5 if your primary team nation matches the riders nation
+ you get 3 for when the secondary matches
So in the end it feels a bit like really the rider decided where he wanna goes.
P
In general a good thought. But 500k max wage is way out of the league for a CT team. You would then need to take 14 minimum contract riders in order to reach the 15 rider roster minimum. So you wouldn't even have a single guy to scorer. Only domestiques etc.
Where is the fun in that? Basically this just randomizes which PT (or maybe also some PCT) team the talent goes to. Doesn't help CT one bit.
I like the "more ticket for right nation" kind of thing though.
Wanted to see what people's thoughts are on the below rule, particularly with respect to non 1>3 loans:
9. A team can never receive a fee for a loan above 600,000. If the fee calculated according to the rules below exceeds 600,000 the team receives only 600,000, the fee paid by the loaning out team remains as calculated below. When posting such a transaction the Money In and Money Out will not be equal.
When I read the transfers rules, it seemed obvious to me that this rule was added to prevent a few teams from receiving exorbitant fees for 1>3 loans and gaining an effectively unfair advantage over their peers. Hence the line about loaning in and loaning out teams paying and receiving different amounts—that would obviously only be agreed to in a 1>3 situation.
However, the rule by its terms applies to all loans, including for maxed riders. So, it is currently operating not just to prevent 1>3 disparities, but to effectively prevent any non 1>3 loan that could otherwise be valued at over 600k fee. We saw this come into play with the Aular deal between Nemo and Ulrich. I also encountered this issue during the transfer season, and in my case it cut off what would have been some really interesting and mutually beneficial ideas that were possible in previous years, but are now forbidden by the rule. Of course, there might be ways around the 600k limit, for example doing a separate deal with additional fees and riders, but that just means further deals have to be linked together in ways that allow for less competition.
I realize that might be the intent of the rule, to prevent large loans of all kinds. If it is, I think I disagree since in those cases both sides are negotiating value on equal footing with other players, like any other deal (besides 1>3 loans), but I defer to the admins. I mostly wanted to raise in case this wasn't the intent, so going forward we could clarify the rule to say this only applies to 1>3 loans.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy
Quick Fire Headlines!
1) The Low Stat Exemption goes away.
2) Stats will be split into 3 Tiers, with Tier 1 being 100% cost, then Tier 2 & 3 being discounted.
3) These discounts would only apply to riders under a certain OVL
4) Under this OVL, training cost will always be that of the new stat!
5) Above this OVL, training is as usual, cost of stat or OVL whichever is higher.
6) There is a minimum training cost of 100k introduced, you'll see why
7) Discounts cap at 76
Please don't get hung up on the specific OVL's or Costs. These are always adjustable, i'm more interested in the underlying ideas and we can tweak the numbers later on.
What are the 3 Tiers?
Tier 1 - FL, MO, MM, HL, TT, ST, CB, SP, PR
Tier 2 - RS, RC, ACC
Tier 3 - FTR, DH
Tier 1 is most of the stats. But it has to be, otherwise it just gets too easy to abuse the discounts. These are the "impact" stats and should always be expensive to level up.
Tier 2 stats definitely can make an impact but less significantly. ACC is the one i'm least sure on, it could easily be Tier 1.
Tier 3 stats do basically nothing.
What are the Discounts?
Tier 3 discounts 100,000 - Which would make <65 training free, hence the new Minimum Training Cost of 100,000. For Tier 3 this makes <69 100k. Feels crazy, but remember this only applies to riders under a certain OVL.
Tier 2 discounts 50,000, still with the Minimum 100k cost. For Tier 2 this makes <67 100k.
Why flat rate discount? Because a %-rate discount gives bigger benefit to high stats, which is the opposite of what I want to achieve. Plus Flat Rate is really easy for everyone to understand and the MG Admin to check in Transfer Sheets.
What's the OVL line for Discounts?
In my mind, the C2 boundary makes some sense, so 74.49. And we need to not make it easy to turn already good riders into better riders.
A Stat Cap?
Above 76 you just revert to normal cost. Simple way to again stop exploitation of the system and keep the discounting to more RP areas and not cause stat inflation in the CT leader zone.
74 or 75 i also though about and could easily argue for. I might prefer them... idk... this is the hardest part for me
Simply, Why?
At the moment in CT you just can't train up regional riders into viable CT level scorers, and I wanted to try and open up a way for CT to get to do more meaningful training.
I toyed with "CT Only" training rules, but too risky for new managers to get taken advantage of. Plus I want teams with a Regional focus that get up to PCT to be able to keep going.
Hence the OVL limits coming in, where we shouldn't end up with cheap training on PCT and PT level regular scorers. So they can work on riders but in a way that doesn't, i think, break the game.
Hopefully we can make CT training more viable. Spread out training to more varied stats and riders. Spread out training across the divisions. And if it works, lead to the removal of the disliked (but necessary) Transfer Tax.
Anyway, please discuss. I did try and run some maths on the numbers, but i'm not a data analyst like some of you are. If the numbers are off, please suggest new ones and don't just dismiss the core concepts.
Ideally we'd pair this with a bit more change to Stat Gains to keep encouraging choice and rider variation, but that's way beyond what I can work out, and this was designed to function with Stat Gains as is.
Wanted to see what people's thoughts are on the below rule, particularly with respect to non 1>3 loans:
9. A team can never receive a fee for a loan above 600,000. If the fee calculated according to the rules below exceeds 600,000 the team receives only 600,000, the fee paid by the loaning out team remains as calculated below. When posting such a transaction the Money In and Money Out will not be equal.
When I read the transfers rules, it seemed obvious to me that this rule was added to prevent a few teams from receiving exorbitant fees for 1>3 loans and gaining an effectively unfair advantage over their peers. Hence the line about loaning in and loaning out teams paying and receiving different amounts—that would obviously only be agreed to in a 1>3 situation.
However, the rule by its terms applies to all loans, including for maxed riders. So, it is currently operating not just to prevent 1>3 disparities, but to effectively prevent any non 1>3 loan that could otherwise be valued at over 600k fee. We saw this come into play with the Aular deal between Nemo and Ulrich. I also encountered this issue during the transfer season, and in my case it cut off what would have been some really interesting and mutually beneficial ideas that were possible in previous years, but are now forbidden by the rule. Of course, there might be ways around the 600k limit, for example doing a separate deal with additional fees and riders, but that just means further deals have to be linked together in ways that allow for less competition.
I realize that might be the intent of the rule, to prevent large loans of all kinds. If it is, I think I disagree since in those cases both sides are negotiating value on equal footing with other players, like any other deal (besides 1>3 loans), but I defer to the admins. I mostly wanted to raise in case this wasn't the intent, so going forward we could clarify the rule to say this only applies to 1>3 loans.
100% disagree. Keep the incoming cap. Enough cheating as it is
I could have gotten more income from the Stavrakakis loan, in fact I could have gotten atleast the fee needed to make the +1COB - but the rules prevented that. And while it would definately help me in the future if we removed the 600K cap, I kinda like it. It enforces the loaning out manager to not just have a bunch of riders they don't need, but can always loan out to secure money. And in case of even better riders I could see crazy sums - Eg. 1,5mio or so, where there is also a training included. But it really should be up to the loaning out manager to find money from multiple channels if they want to train a rider loaned out.
So I like it as it is.
If we want to channel more level 1 riders down in the divisions, it could be an idea to set a cap to the amount of level 1-3 pr. team pr. season though. F.e. 1 to PT, 2 to PCT and indefinete to CT. Not sure I like the idea but it would probably let the PT managers go hard for the top talents, but not so much for the subtop talents, which would make them more likely to head for lower divisions - alternatively take another year to develop.
I could have gotten more income from the Stavrakakis loan, in fact I could have gotten atleast the fee needed to make the +1COB - but the rules prevented that. And while it would definately help me in the future if we removed the 600K cap, I kinda like it. It enforces the loaning out manager to not just have a bunch of riders they don't need, but can always loan out to secure money. And in case of even better riders I could see crazy sums - Eg. 1,5mio or so, where there is also a training included. But it really should be up to the loaning out manager to find money from multiple channels if they want to train a rider loaned out.
So I like it as it as is.
Completely understand that take, although I think in that case loaning out a good maxed rider is still not an infinite money glitch because it will require the loaning out team to waste signficant wage cap and loan cap for the year, which limits their ability to replace that scoring or sign talents, etc. And as a complete limit, no rider over 400k wage can be loaned out in that way anyway just based on the 200k loan cap for each side.
And I wasn't just thinking if the training infused loans we've seen, just regular loans involving maxed riders.
A couple of suggestions from someone who has only played one season and might have stupid ideas. These are not really thought through.
1) In regards to making the CT more fun, competitive or whatever it is...
Could you look at the MLS, which also has a wage cap, but where you can sign players who are exempt?
I am not saying that CT teams should just be able to sign a rider to a 6 mil. wage because he doesn't count against the cap, but make it so only 50% of his wages count against the cap. Obviously, you can only sign one such rider.
2) Have a one rider CT draft after the first 72/96 hours. Forces other teams to go for talents they really want earlier on, but should still leave enough talents that are interesting to CT teams. Make this rider have a wage of 50k.
3) Bump riders, who are drafted in the CT draft's XP, so it is more worthwhile to draft talents instead of one and done guys. Every rider who is drafted gains .50 XP.
4) More C2 races. It seems that there are fewer this year, and basically it means, that you have to ride pretty much every C2 race, if you don't want to get bullied by the big boys in higher level races. I know it means more work, but I think it would lead to more specialized CT squads.
5) Pump more money into the system. Give CT teams a monetary bonus the following year based on what percentage of their race days are ridden by lvl 1 and 2 guys.
6) Make lvl 1 riders with a potential of 4 and below have a minimum wage of 20k for CT teams. If he gets to 50k, he is fair game for everyone.
A couple of suggestions from someone who has only played one season and might have stupid ideas. These are not really thought through.
1) In regards to making the CT more fun, competitive or whatever it is...
Could you look at the MLS, which also has a wage cap, but where you can sign players who are exempt?
I am not saying that CT teams should just be able to sign a rider to a 6 mil. wage because he doesn't count against the cap, but make it so only 50% of his wages count against the cap. Obviously, you can only sign one such rider.
2) Have a one rider CT draft after the first 72/96 hours. Forces other teams to go for talents they really want earlier on, but should still leave enough talents that are interesting to CT teams. Make this rider have a wage of 50k.
3) Bump riders, who are drafted in the CT draft's XP, so it is more worthwhile to draft talents instead of one and done guys. Every rider who is drafted gains .50 XP.
4) More C2 races. It seems that there are fewer this year, and basically it means, that you have to ride pretty much every C2 race, if you don't want to get bullied by the big boys in higher level races. I know it means more work, but I think it would lead to more specialized CT squads.
5) Pump more money into the system. Give CT teams a monetary bonus the following year based on what percentage of their race days are ridden by lvl 1 and 2 guys.
6) Make lvl 1 riders with a potential of 4 and below have a minimum wage of 20k for CT teams. If he gets to 50k, he is fair game for everyone.
I don't really understand this constant narrative of other divisions vs PT/PCT. You're not supposed to compete with higher division teams but with the ones in your own divisions, as reflected in the separate rankings. And if you do well, we have a promotion and relegation system that allows for plenty of fluctuations between divisions. It is perfectly logical that teams that are higher up have more means to sign riders.
In my opinion the loan fees for 1->3 loans are rather too high in some cases. It never made sense to me that the fee gets higher by the wage even if nothing changes for the intaking team. I think the fee should be dependent on the cap hit (salary + loan) of the intaking team, which would be 400k at max. Maybe make the fee double of the cap hits, so it would be 800k at most.
I think the focus should not be too much on inter division balance but rather making sure that teams within one division have similar prerequisites, including those that battled through a lower division to promote. Currently I think that is not really the case. It is way to easy to keep a strong team together and profit of it. The reason is that it usually is much harder to build a team from free agents. We should see if we can find a way that there are more attractive free agents. Firstly, I'd say it should generally not be allowed to renew riders for more than the salary cap. This would hit relegating teams the hardest, but I think it's also fair that they cannot keep their team from a higher division together. However, I'd even say that the max sum teams can renew riders for should be somewhere below the salary cap (e.g. 2.5m for PT), forcing strong teams to make some choices and potentially at least letting some of their riders go to FA. That'll result in more FA options and will give teams more of an even playing field and would also limit transfer gains of top teams that would be invested into the status quo.
One idea I had, is different min wages per division (maybe 40k for PCT and 30k for CT). That would allow lower division teams a little bit more to compete for their favorite riders against PT teams. Dane Bramage had a similar idea.
I agree with that (P)CT teams should have more freedom in their calendar choices. It should not be required to have an all-round team as in PT.
I agree with some of the proposed changes to training. All division teams should have access to same game mechanics, so it makes sense to make especially training more accessible. I'm very much for the different stat tiers. Tier 1 should just be the 5 main stats though. I'm not a fan to choose an arbitrary OVL value from which different training rules apply. However, I do think that stats that are less than the OVL should become more easily trainable (for all OVLs probably). Maybe instead of having to pay according to the OVL only, maybe the cost could be the average of the OVL and the stat to be trained. I doubt it would lead to too much stat inflation and would give a path to fix flawed riders (like Mauro Schmid for Fabianski for example)
Quick Fire Headlines!
1) The Low Stat Exemption goes away.
2) Stats will be split into 3 Tiers, with Tier 1 being 100% cost, then Tier 2 & 3 being discounted.
3) These discounts would only apply to riders under a certain OVL
4) Under this OVL, training cost will always be that of the new stat!
5) Above this OVL, training is as usual, cost of stat or OVL whichever is higher.
6) There is a minimum training cost of 100k introduced, you'll see why
7) Discounts cap at 76
Please don't get hung up on the specific OVL's or Costs. These are always adjustable, i'm more interested in the underlying ideas and we can tweak the numbers later on.
What are the 3 Tiers?
Tier 1 - FL, MO, MM, HL, TT, ST, CB, SP, PR
Tier 2 - RS, RC, ACC
Tier 3 - FTR, DH
Tier 1 is most of the stats. But it has to be, otherwise it just gets too easy to abuse the discounts. These are the "impact" stats and should always be expensive to level up.
Tier 2 stats definitely can make an impact but less significantly. ACC is the one i'm least sure on, it could easily be Tier 1.
Tier 3 stats do basically nothing.
What are the Discounts?
Tier 3 discounts 100,000 - Which would make <65 training free, hence the new Minimum Training Cost of 100,000. For Tier 3 this makes <69 100k. Feels crazy, but remember this only applies to riders under a certain OVL.
Tier 2 discounts 50,000, still with the Minimum 100k cost. For Tier 2 this makes <67 100k.
Why flat rate discount? Because a %-rate discount gives bigger benefit to high stats, which is the opposite of what I want to achieve. Plus Flat Rate is really easy for everyone to understand and the MG Admin to check in Transfer Sheets.
What's the OVL line for Discounts?
In my mind, the C2 boundary makes some sense, so 74.49. And we need to not make it easy to turn already good riders into better riders.
A Stat Cap?
Above 76 you just revert to normal cost. Simple way to again stop exploitation of the system and keep the discounting to more RP areas and not cause stat inflation in the CT leader zone.
74 or 75 i also though about and could easily argue for. I might prefer them... idk... this is the hardest part for me
Simply, Why?
At the moment in CT you just can't train up regional riders into viable CT level scorers, and I wanted to try and open up a way for CT to get to do more meaningful training.
I toyed with "CT Only" training rules, but too risky for new managers to get taken advantage of. Plus I want teams with a Regional focus that get up to PCT to be able to keep going.
Hence the OVL limits coming in, where we shouldn't end up with cheap training on PCT and PT level regular scorers. So they can work on riders but in a way that doesn't, i think, break the game.
Hopefully we can make CT training more viable. Spread out training to more varied stats and riders. Spread out training across the divisions. And if it works, lead to the removal of the disliked (but necessary) Transfer Tax.
Anyway, please discuss. I did try and run some maths on the numbers, but i'm not a data analyst like some of you are. If the numbers are off, please suggest new ones and don't just dismiss the core concepts.
Ideally we'd pair this with a bit more change to Stat Gains to keep encouraging choice and rider variation, but that's way beyond what I can work out, and this was designed to function with Stat Gains as is.
Cool.
Think this is really good, I am half coming down on the side of Bikex and Fab that we are just going to have to take the hit and have ST, RES and REC all charged the same regardless of the known impact of ST as the next game cycle may not reflect the same as now
Probably don't need FL in tier 1 either
It probably needs stress testing as I'm 99% sure I can make a completely ridiculous Ben Turner under these current rules but it feels like a good way to take away money from the market and onto RP riders
Just to throw an alternative training cost idea out there that I haven't fully thought through...
What if the full training cost was only for Pot 7 riders and each Pot level down got X% cheaper training costs, keeping the 2 trainings per rider limit.
The riders who max with the best stats tend to be the highest Pot riders anyway so it would add a gameplay mechanic of do I sign this talent who is Pot 7 so maxes out slightly higher than a Pot 5 guy who maxes lower but would be cheaper to train in the future. Plus you'd see Pot 2/3/4 riders having cheaper training meaning regional domestiques would be worth training but would still decline quicker due to their lower Pot.
It might need a little bit of an adjustment in how we add new riders to keep it balanced or maybe a slow raise of 1% each year until we get it adjusted/ tuned correctly alongside new addition management but thought it worth throwing out tehre to see if others think it could be made to work
A couple of suggestions from someone who has only played one season and might have stupid ideas. These are not really thought through.
1) In regards to making the CT more fun, competitive or whatever it is...
Could you look at the MLS, which also has a wage cap, but where you can sign players who are exempt?
I am not saying that CT teams should just be able to sign a rider to a 6 mil. wage because he doesn't count against the cap, but make it so only 50% of his wages count against the cap. Obviously, you can only sign one such rider.
2) Have a one rider CT draft after the first 72/96 hours. Forces other teams to go for talents they really want earlier on, but should still leave enough talents that are interesting to CT teams. Make this rider have a wage of 50k.
3) Bump riders, who are drafted in the CT draft's XP, so it is more worthwhile to draft talents instead of one and done guys. Every rider who is drafted gains .50 XP.
4) More C2 races. It seems that there are fewer this year, and basically it means, that you have to ride pretty much every C2 race, if you don't want to get bullied by the big boys in higher level races. I know it means more work, but I think it would lead to more specialized CT squads.
5) Pump more money into the system. Give CT teams a monetary bonus the following year based on what percentage of their race days are ridden by lvl 1 and 2 guys.
6) Make lvl 1 riders with a potential of 4 and below have a minimum wage of 20k for CT teams. If he gets to 50k, he is fair game for everyone.
Some cool ideas here
1 and 2 I don't think have a place in a free market that MG Is meant to be.
3 love it agree completely or have one round for maxed rider, one round for unmaxed and the unmaxed rider gets a level jump no matter what
4 is just there is no reporters we've only just got under 1 year for a full season
5 not a fan enough money in the game already
6 like this as well don't see and issue as CT teams IRL would offer and be able to offer lower wage to this type of rider
Just to throw an alternative training cost idea out there that I haven't fully thought through...
What if the full training cost was only for Pot 7 riders and each Pot level down got X% cheaper training costs, keeping the 2 trainings per rider limit.
The riders who max with the best stats tend to be the highest Pot riders anyway so it would add a gameplay mechanic of do I sign this talent who is Pot 7 so maxes out slightly higher than a Pot 5 guy who maxes lower but would be cheaper to train in the future. Plus you'd see Pot 2/3/4 riders having cheaper training meaning regional domestiques would be worth training but would still decline quicker due to their lower Pot.
It might need a little bit of an adjustment in how we add new riders to keep it balanced or maybe a slow raise of 1% each year until we get it adjusted/ tuned correctly alongside new addition management but thought it worth throwing out tehre to see if others think it could be made to work
This wouldnt work just makes Pithie and Nys incredible and Belletta who I've just signed has 82 ST pot 4 would just be cheap training
1) it is already super expensive for PT teams to develop lvl1 talents
2) the step from pct to ct seems super punishing to me. The step from pt to pct however does not seem anywhere close to that when so many managers intentionally plan their transfers around going down. I think no sports league / game should encourage losing so if relegating isnt punishing enough, is there sth we can do to make it less attractive to relegate back to pct?
I think no sports league / game should encourage losing so if relegating isnt punishing enough, is there sth we can do to make it less attractive to relegate back to pct?
What if instead of increasing CT wage cap we decreased PCT cap to 2.2-2.3M? It would hurt more to relegate from PT, and promoting CT teams would be a little bit closer to PCT teams in terms of wage already... But then the step up from PCT to PT would become even harder than it already is imho.
I think the difference to IRL sports is that some "general rules" that are true in RL don't necessarily hold in MG. For example, great talents IRL almost always leave their team when they relegate. In MG, if you know the renewals mechanics well enough, you can easily estimate which riders you can keep in case of relegation. Contracts aren't voided after relegation like they sometimes are in professional sports (contract clauses) - that would really, really hurt.
And also money available isn't really linked to the division. In some way yes, because you have higher cap space in PT (which you could also just use e.g. as training money). But the money on top of the cap doesn't really depend on the division (well, I don't know, but I didn't see a clear correlation yet), whereas in professional sports it's clear that there's a big budget difference between leagues - probably far bigger than what we have in MG...
And to be honest, whereas I love to ride all the big races, race subscription and planning is way more interesting in PCT, where you can find your niches and can make cool moves. In PT, the only variance you have is in PT bands, which isn't even 1/4 of all RDs. But as long as we don't have more reporters, I don't think we can do much about that... It's a great question you brought up though, well worth discussing!
