cycling4freaks.com

One can not have more than 20 riders in a team at this moment, right?
If we change some things to be more realistic, we shouldn't forget the other important things.
8 riders for "monuments" done.
So next 2 or more races for big teams. Change or eliminate the blockage of funds(Geldsperre). Up to 28-30 riders in a team and the maximum of blockage of funds should be 50% or less. Why are we riding with these "baby"teams with 20 or less riders? Not realistic! Blockage of funds the same. We need a better solution for that. The ridiculous premium system also has to be changed. Same premium for a rider with the yellow jersey(for example) in a Cat 1 tour like in a Cat 5 tour. Ridiculous! In real cycling most of the money for the teams is earned with good results at the Tour de France. In RSF it is earned at little Cat 1 fantasy races. Money is not all but this system is just poor.
But of course jersey designing is more important.. all show and no substance!

The flat skills of sprinters and climbers are ridiculous too. And this problem should be solved first, but don't say this too loud, the chief doesn't like guys talking about these things...

With 28-30 riders ?? So , the "geek" (word in English?) who are able to do many races per day will be the best ... I know many managers who harder can ride just a single race per day . 2 or 3 ?? ok , we'll be as every game in Internet , the one who is the most on the computer will win ... And I can't accept it !

Noone said that 30Riders also mean 3 Races per day...
Well...in fact i hope most of the Mayotext was sarcastic - otherwise it is ridicolous in my eyes...though he got a few good points...

Quick wrote:Noone said that 30Riders also mean 3 Races per day...
Well...in fact i hope most of the Mayotext was sarcastic - otherwise it is ridicolous in my eyes...though he got a few good points...

So why 30 riders ? ^^ 15 is enough ...

The flat skills of sprinters and climbers are ridiculous too. And this problem should be solved first, but don't say this too loud, the chief doesn't like guys talking about these things...

Aha. Why???

And if i integrate something cool, realisitic stuff (loose energy without making tempo in small groups) the most people are crying and some say that they want stop playing. Very cool and great motivation!

And i can´t only make things for the "old" users here. For new something like the jersey-designing is important and the most will like the physik.

We cann talk about the flat skills of climbers and sprinter another thread. But the "all is shit"-post of mayo isn´t very good to start any productive discussion.

So because a few loudmouths complain about something at first (in case you haven't noticed, the protests have calmed down... a lot) you don't want to make more complicated maybe not universally liked things anymore? You like what you did with the "puller groups"? I guess yes. Many others do as well, many of the complainers stopped complaining, not because "it makes no sense anyway), but simply because they realize that well, the changes after all aren't THAT big.

Understand not very much of your post i must admit..."puller" groups? What is that?

Ziehergruppen

If I would write an "all is shit"-post I wouldn't be playing this game anymore after doing this.
I just want to know if you want to develop this game so that it is more realistic or not. On which improvements you want to work and which not because it's frustrating to think about something for a long time when it hasn't even a chance to be implemented. Just say yes or no to the proposals so that one knows if it's worth the effort. I don't know what you think about the "Punkte und Prämiensystem stark überarbeiten" proposal, too.

"So why 30 riders?" why not? There are teams with 26 or more riders in real cycling.
Nobody is forcing you to do 2 races a day. I don't know if I would do it but nevertheless I don't think "I don't want or don't have enough time to do 2 races a day, so nobody else should!" That is a bit egoistic in my opinion. To win the Div 1.. Ok, if that is your goal we could still try to find a solution so that it would be balanced.

The anti "puller group" thing is very good in my opinion so you can't say that I'm criticising everything