|
|
Post by ElGringo on Feb 3, 2012 22:53:54 GMT 1
It would be nice that when we select the country we can see all the teams that exists in that country.
|
|
|
|
Post by icsulescu on Feb 7, 2012 21:10:40 GMT 1
It would be nice if there would be a page with a list that contains all the staff members in the game (Administrators, Forum moderators, Translators). Maybe staff members could also recieve Premium in order to encourage them to do their job, but this is IP decision.
And I don't think it's ok if any user can update the translation. Only staff members (Translators) should have the access to the translation tool.
Also, it would be great if Translators could translate the announcements from the first page of the website.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by lee1950 on Feb 7, 2012 21:54:16 GMT 1
CA: at this time is a random bonus between 0 and current CA for the best skill (as I remember  ), why not make it a random bonus between CA/2 and CA BS: the same, random between current skill of the YT divided by 2 and current skill Example. a YS: 10 - 10 - 10 I can be sure that B/S is at least 5 and a bonus to the best skill was at least .5. I see, makes sense... I'll think about it CA/2 as minimum would be nice, and won't unbalance. BS/2 as minimum Steering and Balance seems a bit unbalancing. Everyone hates to see Balance=0 or Steering=2, but that is a part of the game. A better option, imo, was previously suggested, which was to accelerate the training speed of Bal & Strg at low levels. Instead of BS/2 as minimum... How about a chance for a random increase to the starting Bal/Strg? Something like: If D20 >Initial Balance (IBal), then increase IBal by .2*(D20-IBal) Examples: Initial Balance (IBal) = 8 D20=12 Then: Adjusted Balance = 8 + .2(12-8) = 8.8 Initial Balance (IBal) = 0 D20=12 Then: Adjusted Balance = 0 + .2(12-0) = 2.4 Initial Balance (IBal) = 15 D20=12 Then: Adjusted Balance = 15 It would have a small positive effect, but there would still be a few unlucky riders with 0 or 1. A 10-10-10 YS would generate Bal/Strg between: (lo) .2 (IBal=0.0 + D20=1) (hi) 12 (IBal=10 + D20=20) |
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on Feb 8, 2012 13:55:53 GMT 1
Would it be too much of an effort to display the Team Name in the Division --> Best cyclists section?
At the moment it is:
[Nr]<small margin>[Name]<huge margin>[Points]
I guess you could put the team name into this huge margin without any problem so that it would be
[Nr]<small margin>[Name]<margin>[Team]<margin>[Points]
|
|
thrstein
Cycling Tourist Group
Shotgun Blues
Posts: 12
|
Post by thrstein on Feb 19, 2012 21:14:32 GMT 1
Would be nice to have one canonical URL for peloton, right now peloton-game.com, www.peloton-game.com, peloton-game.net etc. are all different and you need to relog if you follow a link to one of the other URLs. If all redirected to one (.net or .com, with or without www, I don't care), it would be easier. Think that helps with google pagerank too. |
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 19, 2012 22:25:09 GMT 1
Which URLs are you referring to? Those in the game are normally all relative (only with the page names).
|
|
thrstein
Cycling Tourist Group
Shotgun Blues
Posts: 12
|
Post by thrstein on Feb 20, 2012 1:01:33 GMT 1
I'm referring to URLs posted in the forum (the ones on the site work perfectly). I'm pretty sure having a canonical URL (with redirects from the alternatives) is the way most sites go.
Failing that, being logged in to one instance of the site should log you into all.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on Feb 20, 2012 8:45:29 GMT 1
That's exactly what I was speaking of here. |
|
|
|
Post by sila on Feb 20, 2012 20:03:50 GMT 1
can add an options that lower the skill of the trainer and youthscout?
maybe it wouldn't be use now but it will be useful in the future when your trainer will have a big salary if it will have multiskills and you will not use all of them...
something like: decrease by 1 skill/week at no cost
|
|
|
|
Post by sila on Feb 26, 2012 21:05:04 GMT 1
CA: at this time is a random bonus between 0 and current CA for the best skill (as I remember ), why not make it a random bonus between CA/2 and CA BS: the same, random between current skill of the YT divided by 2 and current skill Example. a YS: 10 - 10 - 10 I can be sure that B/S is at least 5 and a bonus to the best skill was at least .5. still thinking about? it would be very nice if it will be implemented and it will reduce the random. At least at ST/BA |
|
|
|
Post by sila on Feb 26, 2012 21:30:44 GMT 1
i know it was a suggestion that was made and discuss a little about lower the wage at trainer with fitness.
you can't have a trainer just with fitness and to make sense of using these training it have to be at least 15 or even 20.... (but with the actual wage it is almost impossible)
with the new RE the skill of HILL, DH, SP and TT was improve.
not hear anything about fitness???
maybe make the fitness influence in wage of training very low...
i would appreciate if will be an answer regarding these.
|
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 27, 2012 14:39:37 GMT 1
CA: at this time is a random bonus between 0 and current CA for the best skill (as I remember ), why not make it a random bonus between CA/2 and CA BS: the same, random between current skill of the YT divided by 2 and current skill Example. a YS: 10 - 10 - 10 I can be sure that B/S is at least 5 and a bonus to the best skill was at least .5. still thinking about? it would be very nice if it will be implemented and it will reduce the random. At least at ST/BA After the last changes to the youthscout and the resulting complaints, I'm not sure if I should change another thing this season  We're still thinking about it, anyway. But the lower limit shouldn't be too high either. It's not because you have a 20-20-20 scout that the secondary stats should always be at least 10. It's a good idea, but I would like a better solution |
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Feb 27, 2012 14:44:36 GMT 1
Suggestion:
Make it so that after buying a rider, an owner must wait through at least one "weekly update" (maybe more then 1) before putting that rider up for sale again.
Okay... perhaps I'm just bitter because a rider I put up for sale was bought and then immediately put him back up for sale and sold for WAY more then I got for him (95K to me, 250K to the guy who bought from me). But I've never heard of something even remotely similar in real cycling. Stock market simulations, yeah, and even in some other sports leagues where trading is more formalized. But in cycling you almost never see a transfer get transfered again in the same season. Fired... sometimes, but not transfered. I understand we may need more flexibility then that to build and maintain teams... but do we need the ability to essentially "buy a bargain and sell him immediately for a big profit" when this is a cycling simulation game?
|
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 28, 2012 13:30:59 GMT 1
Suggestion: Make it so that after buying a rider, an owner must wait through at least one "weekly update" (maybe more then 1) before putting that rider up for sale again. Okay... perhaps I'm just bitter because a rider I put up for sale was bought and then immediately put him back up for sale and sold for WAY more then I got for him (95K to me, 250K to the guy who bought from me). But I've never heard of something even remotely similar in real cycling. Stock market simulations, yeah, and even in some other sports leagues where trading is more formalized. But in cycling you almost never see a transfer get transfered again in the same season. Fired... sometimes, but not transfered. I understand we may need more flexibility then that to build and maintain teams... but do we need the ability to essentially "buy a bargain and sell him immediately for a big profit" when this is a cycling simulation game? There were some ideas in the past about adding a (procentual) fee that decreases in time. Maybe it could be sufficient to do it like you proposed: after buying a cyclist you need to wait 1 week before you can sell him again. It's definitely the easiest to understand The question is only: will this be enough? |
|
|
|
Post by kurtinsc on Feb 28, 2012 15:09:05 GMT 1
Suggestion: Make it so that after buying a rider, an owner must wait through at least one "weekly update" (maybe more then 1) before putting that rider up for sale again. Okay... perhaps I'm just bitter because a rider I put up for sale was bought and then immediately put him back up for sale and sold for WAY more then I got for him (95K to me, 250K to the guy who bought from me). But I've never heard of something even remotely similar in real cycling. Stock market simulations, yeah, and even in some other sports leagues where trading is more formalized. But in cycling you almost never see a transfer get transfered again in the same season. Fired... sometimes, but not transfered. I understand we may need more flexibility then that to build and maintain teams... but do we need the ability to essentially "buy a bargain and sell him immediately for a big profit" when this is a cycling simulation game? There were some ideas in the past about adding a (procentual) fee that decreases in time. Maybe it could be sufficient to do it like you proposed: after buying a cyclist you need to wait 1 week before you can sell him again. It's definitely the easiest to understand The question is only: will this be enough? I don't know. To be honest I probably wouldn't care if I didn't click on the rider after he sold and see that he was up for sale again. Forcing a small delay might not change what happens... but it would make me feel better in that at least the argument could be made that the person who bought him may have invested some amount of training to improve him as a cyclist between the purchase and re-sale. I'm okay with more weeks. Heck, I'm okay with it having to last until the end of the season, but that might be overkill (especially for new teams). But it's probably the most realistic... mid-season transfers are pretty rare in cycling. Having MORE THEN ONE mid-season transfer isn't something I ever remember seeing. Of course teams could fire a cyclist at any time. |
|
Melres United
), why not make it a random bonus between CA/2 and CA
