cycling4freaks.com

I read this...i don´t see the problem, because you are not able to buy any rider if you have not enough money. You have no possibility to more than a few month.

Buhmann wrote:I read this...i don´t see the problem, because you are not able to buy any rider if you have not enough money. You have no possibility to more than a few month.

So all can make a ultra 8/9 riders teams at 700k. And then, when our riders are too old to ride, create a new team ? Good timefor sell all my shitty riders and buy 2 more climber and 5 more classics for the Giro.

Buhmann wrote:I read this...i don´t see the problem, because you are not able to buy any rider if you have not enough money. You have no possibility to more than a few month.

great decision for balancing...great thought about not able to buy a rider, just the argument is crap...cause if you build such a team you give a shit about not being able to buy a rider...after the season you sell all riders and build a new team...

Quick wrote:Leso reading this thread?

Buhmann wrote:I read this...i don´t see the problem, because you are not able to buy any rider if you have not enough money. You have no possibility to more than a few month.

Nobody was asking about you

But ok. Let's see it this way:

1. It's a bug, yes? Originally there was this -100k rule. Disappeared with the new design (I think), and at first it was declared to be a bug if I remember correctly. Now... see my signature.
2. If it's a bug why not correct it?
3. Ok, doesn't matter if it's a bug or not. Why was this rule at first introduced. What was its role?
4. Is the answer to 3 still valid? If yes, correct it, if not, leave it like it is. But explain why?
5. Hansa actually explained the problem, if it is one quite nicely (even if he was arguing against the -100k limit.

Buhmann wrote:I read this...i don´t see the problem, because you are not able to buy any rider if you have not enough money. You have no possibility to more than a few month.

But what prevents teams to just ride until their riders are too old and then make a new account and do the same again?

Also, we all know your time is limited and I wasn't quite sure if you still read these threads here in the bug+fairnessforum(all other subforums are not highly important anyway) what is no problem per se because we know your lack of time and maybe of motivation too but if you're still reading them anyway it would be nice to maybe answers these threads at least once a week and give us updates about your plans.

Glaub Buh wollte damit früher die Neulinge schützen, was ich als sehr gute Idee empfinde. Denn wenn ich mal auf den div6 Markt gucke, gibts da einen 84er mit 77 Zeit. Bomben Rundfahrer und hält auch noch paar Monaten bei dem Alter. Jedoch wenn ein Team den Fahrer kauft, ist es schon finanziell ruiniert, wenn es keine anderen Fahrer hat, die Geld für so ein Team reinfahren können, auf anderen Etappen.

Also bitte wieder die Regel einführen! Zum Schutz für Neulinge und zum Schutz für Erfahrene, die sich über so einen Gegner ärgern, der drumrum gar kein Team hat.

Even easier:

- If you're not able to pay the salary (after substracting the covered salary) you can't race. As simple as that.

Das ist nicht gut, denn wenn ich jetzt einen Jugie kaufe und 0 Geld noch auf dem Konto habe, dürfte ich kein rennen mit mehr Gehalt als abgedeckt fahren?
Obwohl ich das locker mit einem zu erwartenden Sieg holen könnte.

Andere Idee das Ganze linear vom Teamwert abhängig machen. Heißt:

Mein Teamwert ist 42mio, ich darf 420k Schulden machen, mit mehr muss ich verkaufen.


Edith sagt, es ist das Gesamtkapital nicht der Teamwert.

danke das war genau das was ich meinte

Da es gerade so schön passt erlaube ich mich mal zu zitieren:

Ronson wrote: Des weiteren sollte es in den Regeln erwähnt werden, oder steht es da? Ich höre z.B. das erste Mal davon Sollte eine Änderung in diese Richtung kommen, so würde ich begrüßen wenn dies rechtzeitig (eventuell eine Saison/ Monat vorher) kommuniziert wird.

Danke dafür!

up!!