
Salvo SliX 2 medal 4961 4 days ago
(This message, with full respect for the entire iGP staff – supermod, mods, etc. –
is addressed first and foremost to the CEO and founder of this game, and I sincerely hope he will reply personally.)
Hi Jack,
I’m not writing to complain, but to share what many of us players have been experiencing. I do this with respect,
because we all know how much passion and effort you have put into iGP Manager, and how you’ve allowed
thousands of people to enjoy themselves, connect, and build a unique community.
When I first joined the game, leagues were full, forums were alive, tournaments and cups were created every day.
There was 2D and later 3D, changes in tyre wear and other updates: people might have agreed or not, but they
kept playing, helping each other, and creating together. There was energy, enthusiasm, and friendship in the air.
Today, however, many feel that this spirit has faded. Not because of the game itself – which is still great – but
because of how the issue of farms and multiple accounts has been managed. The intention was right, but the
method left scars: sudden bans, unclear criteria, active players treated as suspects without a chance to explain
themselves.
Some concrete examples:
- A manager who dismisses staff and spends days searching the market for replacements may look inactive or like
a “farm”, when in reality they’re just trying to strengthen their team.
- Someone joining halfway through a season to build race history is not trying to cheat, but simply preparing for the
next season with staff and drivers. In the meantime, they might run on wet tyres just to avoid interfering with others
who are fighting for victory. That’s still a way of participating, not farming – we can’t put players on trial for their
intentions.
- A player who is less active because of work or personal life shouldn’t have to live in fear that every action will be
seen as suspicious.
- There is also a shortage of players: hosts themselves often add “fillers” to keep their championships alive,
but these are in turn flagged as farms or multi-accounts.
The alternative would be adding bots, but then they would have to be promoted all the way to Elite,
where, without proper management, they would only disrupt and distort race results.
On top of this, there is a language barrier: rules and explanations are often unclear, forums are scattered across
different languages, and it’s unrealistic to expect players to read and translate hundreds of posts just to
understand whether their actions are allowed.
The point is simple: iGP Manager is a game, not a job. Players shouldn’t have to live with constant fear that their
choices might be misinterpreted. We are not bots to be monitored, but people who have chosen to dedicate time
(and sometimes money) to a game they love.
That’s why we’re asking for more respect and trust. Moderators already know what the community wants: there’s
no need to reinvent the wheel, just listen to them. Players want to be treated with dignity, heard, and involved.
iGP Manager is still a unique game with huge potential, but if we want it to grow again, a shift in approach is
needed:
- Clear written rules, integrated directly into the game, so there’s no room for fear or misinterpretation.
- Progressive penalties: a warning, a suspension, a correction – before moving to a permanent ban.
- More listening and collaboration: players are not enemies, but resources keeping the game alive day after day.
No one here is a “devil”: we are people who chose iGP Manager to have fun, to relax, and to feel part of
something. We don’t want to be opponents, but allies in keeping this project alive.
I’m writing this because I still believe in it. I believe iGP Manager has a soul that goes beyond being just a game,
and that with a few changes it could once again become that place where people enjoyed themselves and felt like
part of a global family.
With respect and care,
Salvo S.

Lorenzo Laschi medal 5147 4 days ago
I agree with all things you say

Maurizio Amodio medal 5072 4 days ago
Sadly true

Marco Pellegrini medal 5245 4 days ago
I’ve been playing for 10 years. I agree with everything you wrote, Salvo.

Salvo SliX 2 medal 4961 4 days ago
P.S:
Before my translated English is misread, I'm not saying that farms shouldn't be monitored and punished. Rather, I'm suggesting a graduated system of punishment. This will allow people to understand what's right and wrong and have time to correct their mistakes. After all, not everything is done in bad faith. If that's already the case, the game will lose its value and become a "game until I make a mistake." Furthermore, my examples are merely indicative and should not be considered the reason for my letter. I apologize for my lack of clarity on this matter.

Kevin Bissell medal 5003 Super Mod 4 days ago
I've also been playing for 10 years. Personally speaking, I would love to return to the "fixed cost subscription" model we had up until the mobile friendly update appeared in August 2016.
It would be good for the iGP revenue and (IMHO) also be good for the players, a real win, win situation. It would, at a stroke, make farming worthless and multi-accounts would only be competitive for people who are prepared to pay a subscription for each account they own.
The way in which it worked before August 2016 was that anyone could have as many accounts as they wanted, but you had to subscribe to have access to the race viewer. With no subscription you could only manage a race using the lap chart which was an enormous disadvantage if you were playing against a subscriber.
If subscriptions were to be reintroduced you could perhaps make it that certain HQs (Technology, Design, Youth Academy) were only available to subscribers. In this way, people could still play for free but if they wanted to compete against Subscribers they would also need to subscribe.
Yes, you would end up with leagues full of non-subscribers who would be on a level playing field, but my guess is that a good proportion of the player base would subscribe to get the "full management experience".

Slo Bro medal 5714 4 days ago
Ok, at the risk of getting all the 💩in igp world to be swung at me, here goes.
Forgive me for being blunt in my analysis: you ask for clear written rules because you got caught farming (again).
Clear and defined rules is heaven for those who seek an unfair advantage because you enable farming. Do this or that and you can’t get caught for farming. By describing what farming is, you describe for those who like accumulating tokens, what is not considered farming.
This is why I believe there will not be a set of clear rules, either that or a very very stringent one (which none of us would like).
With all due respect for all posts above, there are no devils in igp, and all in good faith I believe that, I truly do, but I also know human nature is to get creative with a set of rules and try to bend them.
By doing so, rule-benders get a competitive advantage but forget they give a competitive disadvantage to a fair player who doesn’t bend the rules. So if you want to have fun and relax playing igp, think about these players too, by bending rules you take away their fun.
About filler accounts: that’s something completely different imo. They are needed, certainly with player numbers on the down but they shouldn’t have sponsors, and should never ever buy or sell drivers or staff. Their purpose is to fill a league, nothing else.

Maurizio Amodio medal 5072 4 days ago
Slo
Ok, at the risk of getting all the 💩in igp world to be swung at me, here goes.
Forgive me for being blunt in my analysis: you ask for clear written rules because you got caught farming (again).
Clear and defined rules is heaven for those who seek an unfair advantage because you enable farming. Do this or that and you can’t get caught for farming. By describing what farming is, you describe for those who like accumulating tokens, what is not considered farming.
This is why I believe there will not be a set of clear rules, either that or a very very stringent one (which none of us would like).
With all due respect for all posts above, there are no devils in igp, and all in good faith I believe that, I truly do, but I also know human nature is to get creative with a set of rules and try to bend them.
By doing so, rule-benders get a competitive advantage but forget they give a competitive disadvantage to a fair player who doesn’t bend the rules. So if you want to have fun and relax playing igp, think about these players too, by bending rules you take away their fun.
About filler accounts: that’s something completely different imo. They are needed, certainly with player numbers on the down but they shouldn’t have sponsors, and should never ever buy or sell drivers or staff. Their purpose is to fill a league, nothing else.
I’m sorry, Slo, but I totally disagree with what you’re saying.
Your reasoning starts from the wrong assumption: that all players intentionally broke the rules. Many times I’ve had to explain to new players that what they were doing was “against the rules”: they were acting in good faith.
Laws must be clear and precise in order to be respected, without leaving free interpretation to the judge. The general rule of “Be good” is far too subjective and dangerous.

Slo Bro medal 5714 4 days ago
Maurizio
Slo
Ok, at the risk of getting all the 💩in igp world to be swung at me, here goes.
Forgive me for being blunt in my analysis: you ask for clear written rules because you got caught farming (again).
Clear and defined rules is heaven for those who seek an unfair advantage because you enable farming. Do this or that and you can’t get caught for farming. By describing what farming is, you describe for those who like accumulating tokens, what is not considered farming.
This is why I believe there will not be a set of clear rules, either that or a very very stringent one (which none of us would like).
With all due respect for all posts above, there are no devils in igp, and all in good faith I believe that, I truly do, but I also know human nature is to get creative with a set of rules and try to bend them.
By doing so, rule-benders get a competitive advantage but forget they give a competitive disadvantage to a fair player who doesn’t bend the rules. So if you want to have fun and relax playing igp, think about these players too, by bending rules you take away their fun.
About filler accounts: that’s something completely different imo. They are needed, certainly with player numbers on the down but they shouldn’t have sponsors, and should never ever buy or sell drivers or staff. Their purpose is to fill a league, nothing else.
I’m sorry, Slo, but I totally disagree with what you’re saying.
Your reasoning starts from the wrong assumption: that all players intentionally broke the rules. Many times I’ve had to explain to new players that what they were doing was “against the rules”: they were acting in good faith.
Laws must be clear and precise in order to be respected, without leaving free interpretation to the judge. The general rule of “Be good” is far too subjective and dangerous.
I understand what you mean and I do believe the majority of players act in good faith, this community and its forum is full of good and honest players like you and me
But in a technology driven world where farming scripts are very easy to write (certainly with ai) assuming good faith from every player is too dangerous in my opinion. I’ve seen it in another game where script ran players demolished the game for everyone, that was not a pretty sight.
And so I prefer the general rule of be good cause in the end it protects us. That’s at least how I see it

Skid Solo medal 5010 4 days ago (Last edited by
Skid Solo 4 days ago)
Maurizio
Slo
Ok, at the risk of getting all the 💩in igp world to be swung at me, here goes.
Forgive me for being blunt in my analysis: you ask for clear written rules because you got caught farming (again).
Clear and defined rules is heaven for those who seek an unfair advantage because you enable farming. Do this or that and you can’t get caught for farming. By describing what farming is, you describe for those who like accumulating tokens, what is not considered farming.
This is why I believe there will not be a set of clear rules, either that or a very very stringent one (which none of us would like).
With all due respect for all posts above, there are no devils in igp, and all in good faith I believe that, I truly do, but I also know human nature is to get creative with a set of rules and try to bend them.
By doing so, rule-benders get a competitive advantage but forget they give a competitive disadvantage to a fair player who doesn’t bend the rules. So if you want to have fun and relax playing igp, think about these players too, by bending rules you take away their fun.
About filler accounts: that’s something completely different imo. They are needed, certainly with player numbers on the down but they shouldn’t have sponsors, and should never ever buy or sell drivers or staff. Their purpose is to fill a league, nothing else.
I’m sorry, Slo, but I totally disagree with what you’re saying.
Your reasoning starts from the wrong assumption: that all players intentionally broke the rules. Many times I’ve had to explain to new players that what they were doing was “against the rules”: they were acting in good faith.
Laws must be clear and precise in order to be respected, without leaving free interpretation to the judge. The general rule of “Be good” is far too subjective and dangerous.
sorry but I am in agreement with Slo. if you clearly define what constitutes farming you are providing a means to the less scrupulous to farm right up to the limit.
its no different to real life where many things that break rules are not clearly defined for exactly the reasons Slo describes. Take the industry I worked in Asset Management. Most investment funds have rules stating that anyone who excessively trades within their funds may be subject to penalty or compulsory redemption of their investments. It is never defined because if it was there would be some who would trade right up to the limit.
Yes this is a game, and sometimes iGP takes things a bit too far, but in terms of farming I find it refreshing that at least one game take seriously, a subject which, lets be honest is really cheating (not that I can comment on this instance as I don’t know anything about the league involved.)

Salvo SliX 2 medal 4961 4 days ago
...Awaiting an official response from the CEO JACK B.
I’d like to reply to the two posts above from the managers in order to clarify a few points.
If you say this, then you are confirming that in your country there are no written rules or laws, and therefore no way to distinguish between what is lawful and what is not? In the example of “financial funds,” you yourself said that controls are triggered when there are anomalies in purchases, so you actually know there is a clear and defined rule, even if you don’t know exactly where the limit is. But if you happen to cross that limit, it doesn’t mean that all your accounts are shut down.
BUT....Okay, maybe we are going too far into extreme cases, and this doesn’t really help to explain anything. After all, we’re talking about a game, guys! :)
In life, as in games, written rules have always existed: they fill pages of forums and must be constantly updated to avoid ambiguity. Of course, supervision is also needed to prevent abuse and to fill regulatory gaps.
The issue, however, exists even without rules: in fact, it gets worse, because people act “blindly.”
For example: if I were a manager and wanted clarification on an unclear rule, someone might tell me to search the forum. But the content is often neither clear nor easy to find (especially if I don’t know the exact terms in the right language). If I search for “filler,” for instance, I find nothing. At that point, I rely on common sense, convinced I’m not doing anything wrong. So why should I be banned, if I’m acting in good faith?
I admit that I misinterpreted the rule and I take responsibility for it. However, I ask you: what is the difference between “Filler” and “Bot”?
If you tell me that it shouldn’t have a strategy, a staff, or a driver… then it’s the same as a BOT, and I don’t need it, because it only interferes with the races, gives away DRS arbitrarily, or blocks the path of those who are competing.
That said, I believe there is a lot of confusion in understanding my message, and we are heading in the wrong direction.
I don’t want to talk about fillers or bots, and I don’t want to justify my own misinterpretation (judge me however you like, but that’s how I see it).
What I wanted to underline is simply that something in the game is not working, and I’m not just talking about what has been said above.
There is a silent community that complains about this every day in different chats, and you cannot tell me that it’s not true or that the issue raised is just my personal concern.
Those who FARM should be punished — I’m not saying the opposite, to be clear!

Skid Solo medal 5010 4 days ago (Last edited by
Skid Solo 4 days ago)
Salvo
...Awaiting an official response from the CEO JACK B.
I’d like to reply to the two posts above from the managers in order to clarify a few points.
If you say this, then you are confirming that in your country there are no written rules or laws, and therefore no way to distinguish between what is lawful and what is not? In the example of “financial funds,” you yourself said that controls are triggered when there are anomalies in purchases, so you actually know there is a clear and defined rule, even if you don’t know exactly where the limit is. But if you happen to cross that limit, it doesn’t mean that all your accounts are shut down.
BUT....Okay, maybe we are going too far into extreme cases, and this doesn’t really help to explain anything. After all, we’re talking about a game, guys! :)
In life, as in games, written rules have always existed: they fill pages of forums and must be constantly updated to avoid ambiguity. Of course, supervision is also needed to prevent abuse and to fill regulatory gaps.
The issue, however, exists even without rules: in fact, it gets worse, because people act “blindly.”
For example: if I were a manager and wanted clarification on an unclear rule, someone might tell me to search the forum. But the content is often neither clear nor easy to find (especially if I don’t know the exact terms in the right language). If I search for “filler,” for instance, I find nothing. At that point, I rely on common sense, convinced I’m not doing anything wrong. So why should I be banned, if I’m acting in good faith?
I admit that I misinterpreted the rule and I take responsibility for it. However, I ask you: what is the difference between “Filler” and “Bot”?
If you tell me that it shouldn’t have a strategy, a staff, or a driver… then it’s the same as a BOT, and I don’t need it, because it only interferes with the races, gives away DRS arbitrarily, or blocks the path of those who are competing.
That said, I believe there is a lot of confusion in understanding my message, and we are heading in the wrong direction.
I don’t want to talk about fillers or bots, and I don’t want to justify my own misinterpretation (judge me however you like, but that’s how I see it).
What I wanted to underline is simply that something in the game is not working, and I’m not just talking about what has been said above.
There is a silent community that complains about this every day in different chats, and you cannot tell me that it’s not true or that the issue raised is just my personal concern.
Those who FARM should be punished — I’m not saying the opposite, to be clear!
Yes I used a real life example and this rule was applied across all our funds, including those sold in Italy. its relevant since as you say there are clearly defined rules known to the company only and used to identify offenders (just as iGP has and do).
Fillers or Bots is irrelevant. Both are unusual in Elite tiers and to seem unnecessary, but that's not really relevant to your concerns.
the fact is the iGP TOS effectively allows them to do what they want and without reason which may seem unfair. However, there are enough threads on this forum where managers have received warnings or lost tokens for farming, some of whom ended up with outright bans through either repeated farming or pushing back too strongly.
I’m not passing judgement on whether you were farming or not and if I was warned for farming I wouldn’t engage in any kind of activity that would put me at risk of a ban, i.e. I would race just one account in a league and be active. As I have things in real life making difficult for me to race live or even consistently set up I withdrew all my accounts from their leagues several months ago and won’t rejoin until I know I can be consistently active
finally @iGP. Since the update the TOS is very hard to read and the text is almost the same colour as the background

Carlo Ocimmin medal 5390 4 days ago
Hi everyone, I've been playing for a while now, since 2017 to be precise. During that time, I found many people interested in the game, and there was a lot of debate both within the leagues themselves and on social media. The game had a large following and was quite lively! Over this time, I've noticed that more and more truly passionate managers have abandoned the game. I myself introduced IGP Manager to about 12 people in my group of friends, and I can assure you that for several years, a very fun and exciting dynamic has been created, like explaining car development to a friend and then watching him become better than you. The reason the game no longer has the same appeal is probably that it has gotten worse. It has lost something that lay in its simplicity and in the balance that was present in the game's structure. Over the years, we've had many innovations that have made the gameplay much more complex without changing the final result one iota. The only result is that it has become more expensive in terms of tokens to have a competitive team. The new graphics are also very complex and pointless, and seem to discourage Managers from joining. In fact, the championship noticeboard is no longer visible in the foreground (it used to be the first screen), and if you don't log in, you don't see the comments of other Managers in the championship. Not to mention the various bugs that still plague the game several months after the last release—for example, qualifying results aren't visible before a race, or the time grid isn't displayed on an iPad during a race. I think the farming issue is secondary. The main problem is that few new people are signing up to the game, and many very passionate Managers have deleted the app, causing the community of enthusiasts that once fueled the game to vanish. In fact, even the social groups have effectively died out because interest is no longer fueled.

Hille Hilla medal 5492 3 days ago
Lorenzo
I agree with all things you say
TOP

sebastiano schiesaro medal 5815 3 days ago
Kevin
I've also been playing for 10 years. Personally speaking, I would love to return to the "fixed cost subscription" model we had up until the mobile friendly update appeared in August 2016.
It would be good for the iGP revenue and (IMHO) also be good for the players, a real win, win situation. It would, at a stroke, make farming worthless and multi-accounts would only be competitive for people who are prepared to pay a subscription for each account they own.
The way in which it worked before August 2016 was that anyone could have as many accounts as they wanted, but you had to subscribe to have access to the race viewer. With no subscription you could only manage a race using the lap chart which was an enormous disadvantage if you were playing against a subscriber.
If subscriptions were to be reintroduced you could perhaps make it that certain HQs (Technology, Design, Youth Academy) were only available to subscribers. In this way, people could still play for free but if they wanted to compete against Subscribers they would also need to subscribe.
Yes, you would end up with leagues full of non-subscribers who would be on a level playing field, but my guess is that a good proportion of the player base would subscribe to get the "full management experience".
I disagree with your point because, for example, I couldn't subscribe because I'm a minor and I don't think my parents would pay for it, and neither would many of the minors who play this game.
And by doing so, I think many managers would abandon the game and not many would join, but that's just my opinion; I have no idea what the game was like before 2016, since I've been playing for less than a year.
Another observation of mine, which has nothing to do with the message I replied to above, is that the forum is becoming less and less popular.
A friend of mine created a league and advertised it on the international and Italian forums, but no one except the other manager who co-created it responded, and only three managers on the international forum responded to the survey.

Kevin Bissell medal 5003 Super Mod 3 days ago
sebastiano
Kevin
I've also been playing for 10 years. Personally speaking, I would love to return to the "fixed cost subscription" model we had up until the mobile friendly update appeared in August 2016.
It would be good for the iGP revenue and (IMHO) also be good for the players, a real win, win situation. It would, at a stroke, make farming worthless and multi-accounts would only be competitive for people who are prepared to pay a subscription for each account they own.
The way in which it worked before August 2016 was that anyone could have as many accounts as they wanted, but you had to subscribe to have access to the race viewer. With no subscription you could only manage a race using the lap chart which was an enormous disadvantage if you were playing against a subscriber.
If subscriptions were to be reintroduced you could perhaps make it that certain HQs (Technology, Design, Youth Academy) were only available to subscribers. In this way, people could still play for free but if they wanted to compete against Subscribers they would also need to subscribe.
Yes, you would end up with leagues full of non-subscribers who would be on a level playing field, but my guess is that a good proportion of the player base would subscribe to get the "full management experience".
I disagree with your point because, for example, I couldn't subscribe because I'm a minor and I don't think my parents would pay for it, and neither would many of the minors who play this game.
And by doing so, I think many managers would abandon the game and not many would join, but that's just my opinion; I have no idea what the game was like before 2016, since I've been playing for less than a year.
Another observation of mine, which has nothing to do with the message I replied to above, is that the forum is becoming less and less popular.
A friend of mine created a league and advertised it on the international and Italian forums, but no one except the other manager who co-created it responded, and only three managers on the international forum responded to the survey.
Which, in a nutshell, demonstrates an enormous problem for the game. At the end of the day, it's a business. The Devs and other staff members quite correctly expect to earn a living for their efforts, they have to provide and maintain a server infrastructure, which believe it or not, costs real money, and the owners of the game expect a return on their investment.
The more people who play. the higher their expectations of bug fixes, new circuits and gameplay complexity. All these result in more cost to the studio.
Unfortunately, a good number of the players expect all this to be provided free of charge to the end user. Yes, they love the game, but only if they don't have to pay for it.
If the studio could rely on an income it would allow them to invest in the game. Before 2016 the subscription model at least gave them a steady income.

Skid Solo medal 5010 3 days ago
Kevin
sebastiano
Kevin
I've also been playing for 10 years. Personally speaking, I would love to return to the "fixed cost subscription" model we had up until the mobile friendly update appeared in August 2016.
It would be good for the iGP revenue and (IMHO) also be good for the players, a real win, win situation. It would, at a stroke, make farming worthless and multi-accounts would only be competitive for people who are prepared to pay a subscription for each account they own.
The way in which it worked before August 2016 was that anyone could have as many accounts as they wanted, but you had to subscribe to have access to the race viewer. With no subscription you could only manage a race using the lap chart which was an enormous disadvantage if you were playing against a subscriber.
If subscriptions were to be reintroduced you could perhaps make it that certain HQs (Technology, Design, Youth Academy) were only available to subscribers. In this way, people could still play for free but if they wanted to compete against Subscribers they would also need to subscribe.
Yes, you would end up with leagues full of non-subscribers who would be on a level playing field, but my guess is that a good proportion of the player base would subscribe to get the "full management experience".
I disagree with your point because, for example, I couldn't subscribe because I'm a minor and I don't think my parents would pay for it, and neither would many of the minors who play this game.
And by doing so, I think many managers would abandon the game and not many would join, but that's just my opinion; I have no idea what the game was like before 2016, since I've been playing for less than a year.
Another observation of mine, which has nothing to do with the message I replied to above, is that the forum is becoming less and less popular.
A friend of mine created a league and advertised it on the international and Italian forums, but no one except the other manager who co-created it responded, and only three managers on the international forum responded to the survey.
Which, in a nutshell, demonstrates an enormous problem for the game. At the end of the day, it's a business. The Devs and other staff members quite correctly expect to earn a living for their efforts, they have to provide and maintain a server infrastructure, which believe it or not, costs real money, and the owners of the game expect a return on their investment.
The more people who play. the higher their expectations of bug fixes, new circuits and gameplay complexity. All these result in more cost to the studio.
Unfortunately, a good number of the players expect all this to be provided free of charge to the end user. Yes, they love the game, but only if they don't have to pay for it.
If the studio could rely on an income it would allow them to invest in the game. Before 2016 the subscription model at least gave them a steady income.
There is a middle ground and it’s buried in one of the recent threads in Suggestions, although can’t remember which one. its making a monthly pass available to buy. This would sit alongside the daily log in and provide enhanced rewards including tokens to upgrade HQ facilities or getting extra telemetry etc. its a proven approach used in complex mobile games like Star Trek Fleet Command and also more simple games like Golf Clash and Athletics Championships. it could be done with a little thought to make the pass attractive to buy without turning the game into p2w. of course the success would require the packs to rotate otherwise they would become less attractive

Kevin Bissell medal 5003 Super Mod 3 days ago
Interesting concept, seeing as this is the only game I play other than a few PS5 games which are one-off purchases, I don't really understand how "passes" work.
If indeed, they allow you to upgrade assets such as HQ Facilities, why would I need to keep purchasing once I reach the top level? I think one of the main problems is after grinding up to L30 a manager can sit back and never really need to purchase anything ever again. Especially if they choose the one-car format which is so ridiculously easy in terms of resource management.
My lack of knowledge of other games limits my thinking so my suggestion maybe needs to be thought through in a lot more detail. But basically, I'm thinking for $X per month (maybe reduced for an annual subscription) your Tech Facility, Design HQ and Manufacturing will be at the same level as the team. For non subscribers these facilities would be capped at Level 10.
Is this P2W? I don't think so. Non subscribers would still be able to play for free and would be on a level playing field with other non subscribers in the same league. In fact, for non subscribers the gap between low and high level teams would be reduced because the key facilities would be L10 for all teams, no matter what their level.
There's probably all sorts of reasons why my idea wouldn't work, just throwing it out there to provoke thought and discussion.
Edit... Additionally, the subscription would be for an account, so if people want to run multi-accounts they would need to subscribe for each if they wanted them to be competitive.

Skid Solo medal 5010 3 days ago
Kevin
Interesting concept, seeing as this is the only game I play other than a few PS5 games which are one-off purchases, I don't really understand how "passes" work.
If indeed, they allow you to upgrade assets such as HQ Facilities, why would I need to keep purchasing once I reach the top level? I think one of the main problems is after grinding up to L30 a manager can sit back and never really need to purchase anything ever again. Especially if they choose the one-car format which is so ridiculously easy in terms of resource management.
My lack of knowledge of other games limits my thinking so my suggestion maybe needs to be thought through in a lot more detail. But basically, I'm thinking for $X per month (maybe reduced for an annual subscription) your Tech Facility, Design HQ and Manufacturing will be at the same level as the team. For non subscribers these facilities would be capped at Level 10.
Is this P2W? I don't think so. Non subscribers would still be able to play for free and would be on a level playing field with other non subscribers in the same league. In fact, for non subscribers the gap between low and high level teams would be reduced because the key facilities would be L10 for all teams, no matter what their level.
There's probably all sorts of reasons why my idea wouldn't work, just throwing it out there to provoke thought and discussion.
Edit... Additionally, the subscription would be for an account, so if people want to run multi-accounts they would need to subscribe for each if they wanted them to be competitive.
download golf clash on your phone and just look at the free daily and paid monthly passes. it doesn’t need to be p2w depending on what is offered, nor do the benefits need to be permanent, some might just be for the month (Top Eleven does this, a bad game imo, but system has proved popular). In terms of multi accounts would that be such a bad thing? if you want benefits for multiple teams then you would have to pay for them. iGP would need to think about what could go in the pass and would need to be creative with new benefits, cosmetics and liveries, but it is a proven model used in many games

Aldo Bertorelli medal 5236 2 days ago
Skid
Kevin
sebastiano
Kevin
I've also been playing for 10 years. Personally speaking, I would love to return to the "fixed cost subscription" model we had up until the mobile friendly update appeared in August 2016.
It would be good for the iGP revenue and (IMHO) also be good for the players, a real win, win situation. It would, at a stroke, make farming worthless and multi-accounts would only be competitive for people who are prepared to pay a subscription for each account they own.
The way in which it worked before August 2016 was that anyone could have as many accounts as they wanted, but you had to subscribe to have access to the race viewer. With no subscription you could only manage a race using the lap chart which was an enormous disadvantage if you were playing against a subscriber.
If subscriptions were to be reintroduced you could perhaps make it that certain HQs (Technology, Design, Youth Academy) were only available to subscribers. In this way, people could still play for free but if they wanted to compete against Subscribers they would also need to subscribe.
Yes, you would end up with leagues full of non-subscribers who would be on a level playing field, but my guess is that a good proportion of the player base would subscribe to get the "full management experience".
I disagree with your point because, for example, I couldn't subscribe because I'm a minor and I don't think my parents would pay for it, and neither would many of the minors who play this game.
And by doing so, I think many managers would abandon the game and not many would join, but that's just my opinion; I have no idea what the game was like before 2016, since I've been playing for less than a year.
Another observation of mine, which has nothing to do with the message I replied to above, is that the forum is becoming less and less popular.
A friend of mine created a league and advertised it on the international and Italian forums, but no one except the other manager who co-created it responded, and only three managers on the international forum responded to the survey.
Which, in a nutshell, demonstrates an enormous problem for the game. At the end of the day, it's a business. The Devs and other staff members quite correctly expect to earn a living for their efforts, they have to provide and maintain a server infrastructure, which believe it or not, costs real money, and the owners of the game expect a return on their investment.
The more people who play. the higher their expectations of bug fixes, new circuits and gameplay complexity. All these result in more cost to the studio.
Unfortunately, a good number of the players expect all this to be provided free of charge to the end user. Yes, they love the game, but only if they don't have to pay for it.
If the studio could rely on an income it would allow them to invest in the game. Before 2016 the subscription model at least gave them a steady income.
There is a middle ground and it’s buried in one of the recent threads in Suggestions, although can’t remember which one. its making a monthly pass available to buy. This would sit alongside the daily log in and provide enhanced rewards including tokens to upgrade HQ facilities or getting extra telemetry etc. its a proven approach used in complex mobile games like Star Trek Fleet Command and also more simple games like Golf Clash and Athletics Championships. it could be done with a little thought to make the pass attractive to buy without turning the game into p2w. of course the success would require the packs to rotate otherwise they would become less attractive
Here’s one forum thread about a season pass:
https://igpmanager.com/forum-thread/62815