I still think they did a great job, and the whole field of virtual sport is still very young…
by trial and error, having learned their lesson, both Zwift clients and Zwift owners /developers must come to something more “people proven” ))))
I think a lot of emotions here, also due to the false feeling that it’s something final and will always stay like this forever…
People also have tendency for a “perfect dream solution” when the actual reality doesn’t allow nor technically, nor socially to realize those dreams presently…
I have to say, “well said”.
This is true presently although it was so many years ago and all talk about false mileage has long since become silent. What was it, back in March of 2025. That seems forever ago.
Sorry to resurrect such an old thread.
EDIT This was a light hearted look pretending that this issue was years ago and had long been forgotten. I’m trying to look ahead, that this issue seems temporary.
Tell me, are you capable to ride 75km in 1 hour under your own devices through normal means while doing just about minimal power on Tempus Fugit?
You are trying to obfuscate the issue.
People are doing the upgrades properly by grinding out the distances (as I have done).
While others are sitting on the lounge while on holidays with their computer doing no riding at all using hacks, maybe doing the entire 440km of a level 5 upgrade without being on the bike or even raising a sweat. You cannot realistically say that’s right.
One is right (the folks on a bike and grinding out the distances), the other isn’t.
And it happens in every game. It’s not a game changer
An upgraded Halo bike ain’t that much better (if better) than a top tier bike. The Pina is worse.
It’s a skin. If you are worried by performance, the are some REAL issues for the 15% racing that are far more important to look at.
So what is your issue here?
I am not saying it is right or wrong IMO, but your issue is not them getting a performance boost, so what is your issue?
Let’s say I go ride Tempus for 440km at 38km/h at my normal real weight and this gets me a level 5 upgrade at roughly 11.6 hours. Highly unlikely - it’s probably going to take me a week of riding.
The guy descending downhill at 1000kg doing teleports at 75km/h relaxing on the lounge does the same distance in 5.9 hours roughly.
You cannot possibly tell me the second one is fair and correct?
All the mental gymnastics in the world won’t justify the latter.
So…One of the BIG issue here is that people can alter their weight how often and at what interval they want….And that affects the game far more and in more aspects than getting a Halo bike
I do agree thoughthat teleporting is an exploit, an unintended mechanism in the game, but it is up to zwift to do something about it.
And this thread confirms that PARTS of the community wants it dealt with
Just finished stage 5 of the Hell of the North race seriesr which finishes atop the petite KOM in France (not in a velodrome? missed opportunity).
Absolute clown show on the road that goes up Ventoux. One rider with 325km on the clock in only 4 hours. Zwift allowing this nonsense does nothing to improve Zwift’s reputation as a serious training platform.
Who needs to teleport or ‘join friends’ anyway? I can honestly say that I have not done it once in 4.5 years of Zwifting. I’ve never been riding along and knowingly had one of my friends pop up, unsolicited, beside me, either.
How about Zwift pausing accrual of XP, drops, and upgrade/mission metrics at the point when a rider deploys a teleport, until the end of that session?
That’s absurd, the feature is definitely used by people who join friends and are not cheating. There is nothing wrong with your lack of interest in the feature but it’s useful and there’s no reason to penalize people for using it. Calculating upgrade progress with an eye to people actually riding (eg, Watts > 0) is a much better solution, similar to how drops work.
Some folks commonly use bots to falsify their data so Watts > 0 wouldn’t adequately cover that. Watts > 0 would also impact the people who have ridden up the entire climb and are coasting down it (eg, vEverest types).
You would need to have a check on expected elevation already gained since the start of the climb and/or some other checks to see that the rider has passed through expected waypoints that would be normal for riding up:
Alpe du Zwift
Ventop
the Grade
Epic KOM
If the rider has gone through those waypoints uphill, then they will get credits for the distance achieved on the big descent, if they have not then they don’t get distance credits for the upgrades.
zwift will never do anything regarding bots/ant+ simulators, its been nearly 6 years since cam jeffers got a british cycling ban for his account using a bot to level up to the tron as it was at the time the fastest bike, but this then asks why a national e-race didn’t have neutralised equipment but that is a whole different debate, and nothing has changed in that time for controlling/stopping the use of them.
A couple of years ago, I repeatedly reported a Bot via the “report user” function on Zwift Companion. After a couple of months of nothing happening I messaged James Bailey and within 24 hours the account was permanently banned. Makes me think reporting via ZC app goes in to a blackhole!
Great, so if you agree it’s A) not an intended use of the system and B) it’s detracting from some users’ enjoyment of the system, then it is definitely a violation of the Zwift TOS as explicitly stated.
Seems odd to me to see people defending what is a clear TOS violation, to keep demanding some definition of ‘cheating’, etc. It’s a violation of the terms that users agree to. Simple as that.