Suggested

Proposal: 'Soft' level-cap system

After discussing how to handle high-level team relegations and evening out progression through the game for managers of all levels, a new ‘soft’ level-cap system was by far the most liked idea. I will outline a first draft of the system here, and I will also comment on potential challenges we face as the developers of these systems. We appreciate and welcome all constructive feedback.

Here is the proposed system in a nutshell:

• The tier level caps are 8 in Rookie, 12 in Pro and 20 in Elite. These would remain as they are for now
  
• Most elements currently capped by the manager level would be uncapped completely, allowing everyone the possibility to upgrade items to level 20 but with the ‘soft’ level cap enforced to ensure performance levels respect the tier a team resides in
  
• The soft level cap will be enforced if anything exceeds the tier level cap. In Rookie, teams above level 8 will all perform as if they were level 8, the maximum allowed in that tier. And if an Elite team with all levels at 17 relegates to Pro, they will have the performance of a level 12 team while in Pro. If they promote back to Elite, they will operate with the full 17 levels of performance again.
  
• Interfaces will make clear when a team is being capped with tips and icons
  
• Everyone has access to unlock the same levels of performance, rather than being ‘hard’ level-capped where they can’t upgrade past their own level which takes time to raise
  
• Everyone will see good training progress up to the tier level cap
  
• Transfers will still be set to hire from the manager level, but will train well up to the tier level cap, which is the same level anyone else in the tier can access
  

A point which needs addressing is obviously that tokens can still be used to accelerate driver and HQ development. The current ‘hard’ level-cap system places strict limits on this, and although the soft level-cap would still do that, it would widen the available range of levels. So, after giving it some thought, this would be my solution: Training gives diminishing returns each time healing is used on a given day, acting as a daily cap on training progress and increasing realism. The HQ does not need such limits on progress as it is already balanced with research.

It’s worth mentioning that the free service is subsidised by people who like to spend lots of tokens at once, but everyone plays an essential role in the health and growth of the community. So, we don’t want to prevent those who want to use lots of Tokens at once from being able to do so, but the system also needs checks and balances for fairness. This proposal with the revision on healing should achieve a great balance for everyone.

As long as managers can only train within a fair range, allowing individuals to train as much as they want is fine. The hard level cap currently enforces that, and the proposed "wearing out" of drivers each day (regardles of their health) addresses that within the soft level cap.

When we talk about these things we tend to talk about advantages, but give little thought to people at a disadvantage who just want to catch up and start racing their friends. 99 out of 100 cases are people who want to catch up with their friends who might be more experienced, and we've set healing and progress such that it always remains fair.

If you don't feel that the current level cap system prevents you from doing this, you are in the minority in this particular case (as you acknowledge). It is why changes are being demanded and proposed, so friends and people in the same league can enjoy the same level of opportunity and progression.

I didn't quite understand your meaning, James. Could you rephrase it?

Edit: do you just mean that you would call this "soft" limit a "hard" limit and the "hard" limit a "soft" limit? I just went with the terms that got adopted by the discussions, but maybe you're right!

We've also seen strange situations like this, and this one, where someone gets relegated and then their HQ is "stuck" and can't function in the middle of a construction project. The proposal would fix this without the need to do anyhting strange like cancel construction or demolish the upgrade. Plus the benefits of HQ upgrades get countered with research gains for the opposition, acting as a natural leveller of the playing field.

I was thinking about raising the pro limit also, since gaining levels gets slower the higher they go, maybe as high as 15. Then it would be 8 levels in rookie, 7 in Pro and 5 in Elite, better reflecting the pacing of levelling up.

N, the "soft" cap is about removing caps from the picture to the largest extent possible. Random retirements and failures wouldn't be as popular as you imagine, but we are working on the safety car behind closed doors, which should really spice up races in a similar way.

The reality is there are many more constraints placed on developing a game than coming up with ideas for it. We have to work within certain constraints, and that's how it will always be. Together as a community we've proposed several alternatives and variations, and each has its critics, but cutting through the noise and realising what is feasible is our job. We want to at least be sure that each path has the potential for long-term success and not just appeasing some short-term criticisms of whatever exists at the time, and I think the soft level cap achieves that.

There are still a couple of alternatives I quite like personally, and in the end I may set up a poll for the decisive answer from the community on which is the most popular. It's not something you can read in to each thread on each system as they tend to get populated with the critics of that particular idea as everyone else goes about their day. I feel we've reached a very informed point though and can say which 2-3 ideas are best and most liked, the soft cap being one of them.