Suggested

Hall of Fame - Inactive Teams

I would agree to gradually low down reputation IF this guys could record their deserved 10k moment. Devs could also track and record how long the manager hold the 10k reputation.

When inactive 1 point reduction per day. This should be quickly recoverable unless the team is inactive for years.

The reduction point should return in the game - maybe in the team last played league.

First you need to define what inactive is. Is it 2weeks? A month? 90 days?
After that is decided I am all for greying out the inactive drivers, AND dropping their rep by 1 point every week.
I'd also suggest that the cap be raised to 15,000 or some other number that would take 4-5 years to reach.

Don't really see an issue. 10k rep is an achievement regardless of what the manager proceeds to do with their teams, and it's just rep in the end, so to me it isn't that much of an achievement compared to say, winning championships in some of the most competitive leagues in the game. Also, I notice that the order of managers with the same rep on the HoF is determined by when their team/account was created. Newer accounts seem to place higher.

As a 10k rep manager myself, I don't care if there were a rep reduction for inactivity, so whether there is one or not, it wouldn't change what I decide to do with my time spent in the game.

Though, if enough people wanted there to be an easier way to distinguish between active and inactive teams, apart from actually looking at a manager's profile and seeing whether they're active in a league, then something like greying out their names would be fine with me. Easy to look at a glance.

If the team is inactive I can still see where it raced just like I can see where an active team raced. So for finding top league to watch is no problem if team is inactive.

I'm split between several of these options.
Not what I selected, but I'm curious about how high the scores could climb if the limit were removed. The scoring system seems very generous if you can consistently win in even a half-populated league.

It's generous if you race against other managers with high rep. If you can consistently win in a half-populated league, your rep still won't increase as dramatically compared to say placing well against a full field which also consists of 5 or more managers with an average of around 9k rep.

Rep also does not necessarily denote a manager's competitiveness. For instance, I've seen leagues with a number of high rep managers (9k rep or more) but have the race winner's time be around 20 seconds or more slower than that of the top leagues, even adjusted for differences in temps. Considering that in the top leagues, the top 10 can be within 10 seconds of each other in 50% distance races, and not much different in 100% distance races (maybe up to 15-20s on some tracks depending on whether the managers are on the live viewer too), that says a lot about the gulf in competitiveness among even the high rep managers in the game.

I'm okay with greying out & having a button to hide inactive teams should people wish. But I'm also of the opinion that there doesn't need to be anything changed with how rep points are awarded (or deducted) simply because it does not change anything regarding finding competitive managers or teams, which I see as the main point of the HoF system: to find the best.

You'll notice most of the top managers in the HoF in terms of rep have raced in the same leagues (look at how many managers have raced in International GP Championship and The F1 World Championship among those on just the first page of the HoF). In fact, deducting points could make distinguishing the best managers more difficult. Joey McLane, often considered the best to ever play the new iGP, has his 3 currently inactive 10k rep accounts having raced in 3 of the best 2 car 50% distance leagues (excluding US Grand Prix which I consider part of the top 4). He is also the first manager ever to reach 10k rep in the game. Even though he is retired now, having a points reduction would mean affecting one of the symbols of his many achievements in this game (rep points); does not affect his staggering amount of wins and championships though!

yeah getting bit silly now, after giving some thought i like a combination of the above suggestions, the options are:

1- remove 10,000 limit.

or

2- make getting ranking points slightly less powerful (i i mean very VERY slightly less powerful) along with deducting inactive teams 1 point per week of inactivity (maybe after 4 weeks leeway for a break) thats only 48 ranking points over a full 365 days approx, still 9,952 after 1 year inactivity
but if u did no.2 you would have to do them together as it creates same problem, if u make it less powerfull but not do inactive point deduction the inactive teams just sit at 10,000 while active teams struggle to stay there.
also if u did no.2 then need a hall of fame option with Highest Ever Ranking point leaderboard to show that they were there at 10,000 or more if u remove limit..


My person preference would be to do a combination of no.1 & no.2 although need to be careful with lowering point gaining power so can maybe leave that bit alone...

but i guess just removing the limit would be the quickest and easiest way to help problem.....

In my opinion the main problem is only one: too many players with 10000 reputation (whether active or not). As a new player I went on the first page of the hall of fame to see who where the top 3 managers at the moment, you know what? I was unable to understand from that page if someone of those 20 managers had achieved anything special compared to the others. If I see so many people with such an achievement, that achievement loses meaning. But I strongly believe that none of the above proposed solutions is the optimal one.
My proposal is this one.

Have two different rankings, one for currently active players, one for all time records. Every player (even inactive ones) will have his best result saved in the all time leaderboard. At the same time (and this is very important in my opinion), remove the 10000 point cap AND change the reputation algorithm so that it is harder to get points past the 10000 mark. In my opinion somethink like ELO approach would work perfectly (obviously is not that simple since ELO is for 1vs1 games), where if you have 11000 points you should beat a 10000 point manager 80% of the time (I obviously made up this numbers, and player level should be taken into consideration too). This way there will be (almost always) at least one point to separate the top teams, but at the same time their reputation score won't be something crazy like 20000 which could discourage a new player who is trying to reach the top of the leaderboard. Moreover this would make the all time leaderboard interesting, because a manager who has reached a very high reputation will keep playing even if he risks to lose reputation beacause his best result will be saved forever.

PS: I hope I didn't make too many mistakes, english is not one of my strenghts.

A button to switch between active players' leaderboard and all time leaderboard would be even better since it could be used even for the other leaderboards, like victories, pole positions, ecc...

I personally think focusing too much on rep takes focus away from the prestige of winning championships in competitive leagues. The game already does not do much to make championships count, from the lack of prize money, trophies, a definite path leading towards the best leagues/an official iGP Championship or Leagues series, etc., which is an area of the game that I believe could be focused on more, rather than chasing after numbers on a hi-scores board.

Which is why I've been more in favor of the idea of an Official iGP Championship that floats around in these suggestions threads once in a while. To me, it's much more interesting to race against the best in a championship than racing for reputation points, especially since you can reach 10k rep without winning even 1 championship in a top league. I know other online racing manager games where players literally race only to have enough $ so their team stays afloat and for high scores, with there being little tension in the way of direct competition, i.e. whether they place high in races or even leagues/championships. I don't want to race multiplayer only to chase after high scores (you can argue time trials are different though); I want direct competition.

Also I agree an ELO approach would be hard to implement, or even unsuitable for iGP at the moment, due to how leagues work in this game. There is no "tree" of leagues you have to go through to reach the best. Rather there are multiple standalone leagues scattered about, and the only way to find the best ones is to see which leagues pop up most among those at the top of the HoF. Comparing the race winning times also helps. As I mentioned before, some 9k+ rep managers are in leagues where the race winner's time is easily 20-30 seconds slower than what the top leagues are able to reach (even after accounting for difference in temps), and in said top leagues, the top 10 finishers can be separated by merely 10-15 seconds.

Rep in the end atm is mostly just a show of activity; more active managers participating in more races would naturally get more rep even compared to someone who has lower rep than them yet has 4-5 more championships in the same league. Whatever changes could be made in rep, there is still the issue of where you can be a Joey McLane winning 30 championships in the top league in the game, or someone who has not won even 1 championship in a top league against active & competitive managers, yet still have the same 10k rep points, for example.

That is why we need a different reputation point system, since rep points are the only mean of comparison between teams in different leagues. As I said, the new system shouldn't have any theoretical cap but it should be designed so that it's almost impossible to get more than 11k points. It should also prevent two teams with 9k points to reach 10k in a not so competitive league. This way, if a team wants to be globally recognised, it will need to join a competitive league with many high rep managers and win that league. This way reputation won't be a seek for the high score but rather it will need you to win championships in highly competitive leagues to reach the absolute top of the leaderboard. Losing rep points past 10k mark should also be easier so that it's very hard to get high scores without winning competitive leagues.

how come this guy on 10k
https://igpmanager.com/app/d=profile&manager=314365&tab=stats