cycling4freaks.com

Now, you can not buy riders because of some reasons.
For example:
1. because the rider is only available for Div1-4 / 5-6
2. because you already have 2 strong climbers (2 strong sprinters, whatever)
3. because you have enough riders, which were bought cheaply.

My question now: Which of these rules do we really need? Reason because i ask: I want to create the transfermarket-page in the new layout soon. And if we don´t need any of this rules i need not integrate this.
Really necessary is the first rule. But the others i don´t know. What do you mean? Especially the 3. rule is very very old.

I think the rules 2 / 3 are still pretty useful.

They are all very good. Maybe we could change the second rule, so it depends on the team size. 9 riders=2 strong Climbers. 13 Riders =3 strong, 17 riders= 4 strong or somethin like that... but i think its not important at all, because you can buy 9 climbers, if you use the JTM... maybe there it should be changed?

i dont like the restrictions
they are not necessary and they are not useful

Rule 2 is not very usefull in my eyes, too. Let the teams the freedom to choose their riders in their own. There will be no team with 9 sprinters or mountain riders because it has no worth for races, so it will not happen

I'm pretty sure it will happen...

well if, then should be thought abput if it would be a real problem. And don't think so.

I'm with Luna.

It will even happen on a quick-buy-quick-sell-basis. Lonestanding team time trias already lost the public interest because of that. They could as well vanish from the calendar. It's only stuff for the lower Divs. Noone else sees a real competition between grown teams in that. I'm not very interested in riding for example the Dauphiné with a tolerated multi like KRAMPUSTAG or MAPLE SIRUP lining up with 9 climbers and forcing the whole field to attack from km 0. Or imagine the Vuelta with teams that consist of 9 sprinters from 90 to 96. No one would be interested in working for a bunch sprint. That would create races far from what we would expect from a GT.

There are small teams with 3 sprinters now, cutting that rule would only make it worse

Héhééé where is the problem ?
I have 4 sprinters and so ?

I feel I will make me friend again, but well. Today when we have 2 sprinters we can't buy a third 91+ sprint guy. Why not down this limit at 82 or 83, something like that, now ?

I dont know if this is the right topic...
We had an youth market update tonight. Riders available in div 6-7: 700
Riders available in div 1-5: 276
Only 6 riders with 73 or better flat or only one with 73 mountain.
That cant be normal. Im looking for new riders cince days...

There are no youth market updates for D1-5... or it's a "constant" update. Every x minutes there is a new rider coming on, an old one leaving.

Really?
Man, im really up 2 date

Just saw the "Letzte Auffüllung am " and searched for new ones.

Mea culpa!


But the other part: Why only 1/3 of the rider for div6-7 are available in div1-5?

Because, when that was implemented, there were a lot of more teams in Div. 6-7 than in Div. 1-5.

I am not allowed to buy more than six riders younger than 23. Ok, no problem.
But i cant a buy 20 year old rider. thats shitty! I cant use him before he gets 21, so my riders which are 23 now, are 24 when i can use my now 20 year old rider.
can we change that?
Not 6 riders under 23, it should call 6 usable riders under 23

RS Ostfriesland wrote:I am not allowed to buy more than six riders younger than 23. Ok, no problem.
But i cant a buy 20 year old rider. thats shitty! I cant use him before he gets 21, so my riders which are 23 now, are 24 when i can use my now 20 year old rider.
can we change that?
Not 6 riders under 23, it should call 6 usable riders under 23

sounds good

Allagen wrote:

RS Ostfriesland wrote:I am not allowed to buy more than six riders younger than 23. Ok, no problem.
But i cant a buy 20 year old rider. thats shitty! I cant use him before he gets 21, so my riders which are 23 now, are 24 when i can use my now 20 year old rider.
can we change that?
Not 6 riders under 23, it should call 6 usable riders under 23

sounds good

What sounds good, that you call it different but mean the same?

Anyway, what's not to understand in the sentence: "not allowed to buy more than six riders younger than 23". 20 yo are younger than 23, aren't they?

But thats the problem FL.
I can use them only, when they are 21 but buy them with 20 years of age.

My two 23 year old riders will get 24. So i have only 4 riders under 23.
We should count only from 21 to 23.

The restriction is not about the USE, it's about the AGE of the riders

But of course I get the problem. The question is, WHAT exactly Buhman and leso wanted with this rule. Did they really want only to have a team have 6 riders 23yo and younger, incl. the 20yo youth riders or did they want the teams not to have 6 USABLE riders 23yxo and younger in the team... The answer to that question should provide a good basis for a solution.

Jip, thats the question.
One idea for that rule: is you have many young riders, they become olde togehter and you have to buy many new riders in few month.
Thats maybe good for new teams or team managers without a plan.

RS Ostfriesland wrote:Jip, thats the question.
One idea for that rule: is you have many young riders, they become olde togehter and you have to buy many new riders in few month.
Thats maybe good for new teams or team managers without a plan.

But that's exactly one point what should be avoided through this rule... that teams build a whole new team (or a big part of it) full of youth riders.

This should be stated and explained in the in game guidelines....

My keyboard an my brain working not very well together today...

I know that the rule is exactly for that point. thats why i mentioned it.

I happen to know something about this game destroying rule.

The plan wasn't 20-23, but 21-23. Or 20-22 of course. At one point in time Buh seemed to have corrected the early problems, it was possible to buy a 20 year old rider if you had 6 guys 21-23... since the 23 year old would be 24 a month later when the 20 guy would be 21... but obviously the game is having an acid flashback, so we get old bugs again? Or maybe it never was corrected.