Or if someone gets zapped by the fence in an event it could zoom into that person getting zapped with some fancy animation.
Probably would incentivize zapping a bit too much though 
Ah, I thought they were based on intensity. I donât do workouts much.
This is missing the point though. Itâs still the case that the A rider gets a lot more than the D rider. Iâm just suggesting it should be more equitable across abilities.
Edit: unless youâre suggesting that the A pacers donât go much faster than the D pacer because they have larger groups and more of a draft effect? I admittedly havenât checked the average paces of the different pace partners.
Estimated release targets are very difficult to guarantee that they will be met because they can be impacted by many unforeseen issues.
Thatâs the concept of an estimate though, isnât it? A bit of planning, a bit of risk management, a bit of communication. It certainly is an art, but surely not magic. And I think weâre dealing with professionals. 
Iâm not expecting fixed dates. Just something like: âWeâve seen that, itâs gonna be there soon.â or âYeah, we know but right now that isnât a priority.â or âWe know what it is, itâs just waiting for free resources.â or âWe bought that with the engine, probably never gonna be able to reliably fix.â
Estimates are very difficult to guarantee.
But people take estimates as the final word then get angry when the estimates donât work out.
So better just say something is being worked on and release when itâs ready without pressure to meet a particular time. Better to take time and get it right.
I would love to see the option to included climb portal in races.
OK, Iâll throw in my list of changes as well, although most are repeats of stuff others have said at this pointâŚ:
- Gradient display. As everyone else, I cannot believe why this is still left totally useless⌠One way to fix it could be to have the profile of the entire route (and I mean the route, I am actually riding at the moment, Zwift!!!) where the profile is now and then pop-up a new display everytime I am on a climb, that works like the Climb-Pro view of a Garmin.
- Customizable HUD - give us the option to hide things, we donât want, as well as the option to show things, that arenât there at the moment (like average power etc.)
- Garage organisation and clean-up: Hide stuff, favourite others, make preferred setups for climbing, racing, etc.
- Better plans and workouts: The training plans at the moment seems very much targeted at beginners. And a lot of the workouts used are really unspecific and just all over the place.
- Make the resistance of the trainer follow everything that has an effect on your speed to make it feel more realistic. Drafting? lower the resistance. On dirt? Increase the resistanceâŚ
- An option to get rid of the dust clouds when riding dirt roads. In groups, the main reason I hate dirt roads is that everything just turns into a big dust cloud. I hate it.
- An option to always ride in sunny daylight. I am on Zwift to avoid the darkness and rain outside. Donât replicate that please.
- Robopacers with a more steady pace. The current bots increase their power on hills. If you are heavier than the bots, you already have to do that, so it becomes a double increase. For me, the allure of the bots is to keep me to a steady effort, that only works on extremely flat courses if you are significantly heavier than themâŚ
- A third option for showing chats in game: I would like to be able to show it when I am in events but not otherwiseâŚ
- Route-based workouts: I read about this in an old âthis season on Zwiftâ post, but it seems to have been cancelled. I really think it sounds like a great function!
- More realistic graphics in the Climb Portal. Iâm fine with something automatically created and bland, just give me something a bit more realistic. I donât mind the looks of the current version, itâs just that I have no sense of distance or anything with it, I already have a harder time judging gradients and distances on Zwift graphics vs. real video, but this just makes it a lot worseâŚ
- Landscape mode in companion app
- More roads (preferrably in existing worlds. I really enjoy France, Iâd like more of that, please )
That was more than 10, sorryâŚ
Isnât this the correct way of doing it, A riders deserve more because they train harder and more, one does not become an A rider by sitting on the couch. In fact A riders loose XP when doing workouts because they do higher watts but get the same XP as someone doing gray zone (50w) for the same amount of time.
That was what i was thinking too - some trains hard, gets faster and then gets penalised for being fitter by getting fewer XP for the same effort.
I think there is a case for making hilly riding get more XP though, it makes no sense that someone riding for an hour on the flat gets more XP than someone riding up Venn Top for example.
No. There are a huge percentage of people who will never become A riders, or even B riders, for all sorts of reasons.
Zwift pitches itself as a social platform, yet its levelling system favours stronger riders.
IMO itâs elitist and isnât a system that supports the idea of an equitable social platform.
Theyâre not getting fewer. The other riders are being raised up to a more equitable level. 
Itâs the same argument as the recent XP/level situation, itâs a matter of perspective.
But you donât have to be a A or B to level up. You just have to put in the time. Most people ride with coco at about 38km/h if you are a A rider you may ride with a Pacer at 43km/h that is 5km/h different so 760xp vs 860xp but the amount of energy needed to ride at 43km/h is a lot more than riding at 38xp, so the one that spend more energy should be rewarded more.
If two boys get $20 per property that they mow but one run behind the mover and the other stroll, the running boy mows 50% more properties, if the walker make $100 how much will the other make?
Do they make the same should they make the same?
Simple math!
No one said you did. Youâre missing (or ignoring) the point. But Iâm not going to argue the toss over it. 
No you are pointing out that faster riders that put in the time and effort donât deserve to get more XP than slower riders that ride once a week.
Effectively, I think the debate is whether XP should be awarded based on effort versus performance.
Effort would be measured by something like Stravaâs âRelative Effortâ which is from analysis of your heart rate data relative to your maximum heart rate.
Performance otoh would simply be how many watts, or calories, or kJ for the activity.
I do agree that for reasons mentioned, distance travelled in rides, or time spent in workouts is probably less than ideal.
More watts = more speed = more calories = more kj. They are all forms of energy and all relative to each other. One system my favor heaver riders a bit more and the other the skinny riders or the flat vs climbing routes.
As the long thread on the new XP system showed, some folk will just game whatever is implemented to maximise their XP gain, be that flat courses, RPs, using workouts etc. Itâs just easier not to care how quickly or slowly someone else is earning and focus on your own efforts. Their goals probably arenât your goals, unless the only thing you care about is some number in a video game, in which case you could find one that requires less physical exertion 
Right, except for speed because of course differences. As mentioned, a Road to Sky 1 hour achievement could be more XP than 1 hour riding with Bernie.
However, the rider whoâs been up to that point sitting on a couch for the last 5 years before doing the Bernie ride, might end up as completely wiped out and exhausted as the fit rider who just did Road to Sky. So the question remains would it make sense to reward effort, or performance?
These proposals all seem like zero-sum changes with slightly different sets of winners and losers. Just like the current system picks favorites. Zero-sum changes will feel fairer to some and less fair to others depending on who benefits.
Disagree.
In cycling you go further by pedalling harder. Thatâs not elitism, itâs physics. XP isnât a ârewardâ for effort. Itâs a reward for distance. Thatâs also why you donât get more for riding up hills. A fair feature request is to reward time, or effort, in some way. But to take a distance reward distance and says thatâs not fair to slow people is ridiculous.
Anyway the point of this thread was to list your top 10, not to rip apart other peopleâs suggestions, so suggest away.