ios-personmd-notifications md-help-circle

Profile

  • Guest
    medal 0
  • Posts: 21
  • Post Likes: 3765

Notifications

  • No Unread Notifications

Approved
Term Contracts with Suppliers

Should term contracts with suppliers be added?

83.5% (172)
Yes
16.5% (34)
No
warning
This thread is closed. Threads older than 6 weeks are closed automatically. To continue this discussion, create a new thread.
angle-double-left ios-arrow-back 1 2 ios-arrow-forward angle-double-right
medal 5000
6 years 20 days ago

Yunus
Hey all, as you should know by now, yesterday suppliers were given more influence in how they affect the design of the car.

In order to continue maintaining a fair and balanced system, it's a good idea to require teams to lock in term contracts with suppliers for a given number of races.

For example, I can agree to use Tifosi as my engine supplier for at least 10 races. I can't switch or terminate the agreement within those 10 races. After those 10 races have passed, Tifosi remains as my supplier, but now I have the freedom of choice to switch to a different supplier or continue using Tifosi.

By having this, players with plenty of cash can't switch suppliers throughout the season without at least waiting for the term contract to expire. This maintains the fairness of the game and keeps the game away from the "pay-to-win" model.

What do you think of this? Should we add term contracts? Do you have something to supplement the idea? Let us know below.



 Very good idea ! :-)
md-quotelink
medal 5000
6 years 16 days ago
Suplliers should be locked the entire season. At the end of the season you choose the one you want.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
6 years 10 days ago
I actually would like supplier bonuses done away with.

Instead add more to car set ups, 3 options is not enough, or add many more tracks.

More set up options mean that atleast till ppl figure it out set ups are tougher and need more care, this means that there is more to do to get a good set up and makes it so that the ppl who put more tine in benefit over the ppl who jusy hit the token set up.

More tracks means more u known which is great.

Supplier bonuses are to me pointless, everyone knows about the big 4, why would you pick a supplier outside of those?

I suggest taking a look at GPRO and see how they have options for car set ups and other things to keep players playing, including the fact you cannot enter leagues with managers much higher level than you.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
6 years 7 days ago

Dan
I actually would like supplier bonuses done away with.

Instead add more to car set ups, 3 options is not enough, or add many more tracks.

More set up options mean that atleast till ppl figure it out set ups are tougher and need more care, this means that there is more to do to get a good set up and makes it so that the ppl who put more tine in benefit over the ppl who jusy hit the token set up.

More tracks means more u known which is great.

Supplier bonuses are to me pointless, everyone knows about the big 4, why would you pick a supplier outside of those?

I suggest taking a look at GPRO and see how they have options for car set ups and other things to keep players playing, including the fact you cannot enter leagues with managers much higher level than you.


Supplier bonusses aren't pointless, for example at the start of the season, you won't have your big four maxed out and much will go with Murk, but you can opt for Toymotor if you bet on a wet race or go for tifosi to have your strengths on different stages, yes nobody will use coswurth, but that's logical.

md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 331 days ago
Rik, they are talkibg about locking you into a contract so if u pick o e for a specific race the other 9 races you hurt yourself.

Everyone would pick speed as that will give u a better overall difference.

If u lock them it should be for a whole season, tie it in with sponsor payouts to make it more of a choice.
Then if you knea u locked for season u can plan a strat and build your car to suit.

Locking it to 10 races just means go speed for 10 then swap to whatever your lacking.


But ultimatly locking it just means u can tesearch the others and earn more points than before, again, scrap them.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 328 days ago
Season long contracts is a great idea. The stats of each engine could change each season so you have to be watching to know which will help your car the most.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 303 days ago
I agree, it is a good idea. As a newcomer, I dried half of my money trying to find better combinations of suppliers for each race, and my performance was getting worse and worse after I did that.

I think you should have discounts for longer contracts, with the minimum of 3 or 5 races, because someone would want to try a new sponsor but don't like it, wanting to come back. 

Also, consider the minimum period of a contract variable in tiers. Rookie has a minimum contract of 1 race, so the new players could test the sponsors and have money for it. In Pro tier, 3 or 5 races and, in Elite, 10 or more races for the minimum contract.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 284 days ago
Great idea Yunus, this will make the league more fair and competitive.
md-quotelink
medal 6012 Moderator
5 years 275 days ago
Yes, term contracts should be implemented.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 265 days ago
i think supply contracts should be reviewed ad balanced within the tier too.

choose a fuel supplier that gives a +3 on a rookie tier with 50 DP cap may be useful, but in elite tier it's useful but not so useful like in the lower tiers.

changing suppliers during the season can help balacing with CD strenght and weakness and research if they aren't locked for all over the season.

otherwise i think you could implement suppliers term contracts but they should give you some more else or an adequate boost or maybe they can let you ovverride the tier cap in the choosed / bonus stat.

md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 264 days ago
An interesting topic, or maybe we would do signing contracts like in the old grand prix world game? Fuel 4 squares to gain depending on the results in races. And the engines would have their power and weight as it was solved in the Grand Prix Manager. What do you think about it? And choose whether it is better to have a strong and heavy engine, whether light or weak.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 261 days ago
Interesting Idea
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 235 days ago
In practice it helps very little to avoid the "pay to win" system, you just stop developing the car in the bonus attribute when you reach 100. (Acel 90, or 86 for example) and focus on others, when you change the supplier, you maximize this attribute in just one race. There are other ways to avoid "pay-to-win". Example: excluding the curing of pilots in training to minimize the full 20 superpilots in exchange of tokens.

That's why I voted no, because if the goal is to avoid "pay to win" it will be indifferent.

md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 222 days ago
Yes, agree!
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 205 days ago
Eu gostaria de saber como tem sido essa situação de contrato de fornecedores, teremos sim ou não.
md-quotelink
medal 5000
5 years 192 days ago
Yes, it's a great idea, I totally agree.
md-quotelink
angle-double-left ios-arrow-back 1 2 ios-arrow-forward angle-double-right

You must be logged in to post a reply.