No changes for training cost in comparison to recent years:
Average or Stat
Cost
85
2,700,000
84
2,300,000
83
2,000,000
82
1,700,000
81
1,400,000
80
1,200,000
79
1,000,000
78
850,000
77
700,000
76
600,000
75
500,000
74
450,000
73
400,000
72
350,000
71
300,000
70
250,000
69
200,000
68
175,000
67
150,000
66
125,000
≤65
100,000
If the rider's average is higher than the stat you want to train, then the cost relates to the current average.
If the stat you want to train is higher than the rider's average, then the cost relates to the new value of that stat
The average value is always rounded: 74.4 = 74, 74.5 = 75
Low Stat Exemption
The maximum a stat can be raised to using this method is 69.
The following table is important:
69
200,000
68
175,000
67
150,000
66
125,000
65 or less
100,000
1st Increase: The cost relates to the table above.
2nd Increase in same stat per rider in the same year: The cost is double that of the table above.
Restrictions
A single rider can not receive more than 2 increases per year (2 in one stat or one in two stats), including both methods, and a team can not do more than 4 increases using the low stat exemption per year. There are no other team level restrictions.
Only maxed riders 30 years and younger can be trained, and not in the year they maxed. Training eligibility is flagged in the database.
Only the owning team may train riders although they may train riders who are loaned out for the season. Loaning in teams cannot train any rider that they have loaned in.
Early Intimation for Changes to Training Costs for 2027
With the Medium Mountain stat becoming independent and separately trainable from the 2027 season, we have decided to reduce the training costs across the board. This is to ensure some level of balance is maintained as managers now have to tackle an extra stat for level-ups and training! The spoiler below has details of the planned changes:
Spoiler
Average or Stat
New Cost
Current Cost
85
2,550,000
2,700,000
84
2,200,000
2,300,000
83
1,900,000
2,000,000
82
1,600,000
1,700,000
81
1,300,000
1,400,000
80
1,100,000
1,200,000
79
900,000
1,000,000
78
750,000
850,000
77
630,000
700,000
76
540,000
600,000
75
450,000
500,000
74
405,000
450,000
73
360,000
400,000
72
315,000
350,000
71
270,000
300,000
70
225,000
250,000
69
185,000
200,000
68
160,000
175,000
67
135,000
150,000
66
110,000
125,000
≤65
90,000
100,000
Please remember the change above is NOT FOR THE 2026 (current) season.
knockout wrote:
The government of Latvia thinks the changes are oddly targetted
They're being reined in by the MGEU from having profitable trade agreements elsewhere #Latvexit
24/02/21 - kandesbunzler said “I don't drink famous people."
15/08/22 - SotD said "Your [jandal's] humour is overrated"
11/06/24 - knockout said "Winning is fine I guess. Truth be told this felt completely unimportant." [PT] Xero Racing
Because some of us believe sport should be separated from politics, the team management of BMF again requests for a more significant overhaul of training to make it more varied and accessible, for the betterment of all teams.
We tried to get governmental sponsorship but predictably we were promptly escorted off the premises to shouts of "maybe that works for the US & FIFA, but we have integrity"
The Chinese government is in the process of monopolising the supply chains of stat changes through state-sponsored investment. The Belgian government is considering re-colonising the Congo. Neither have particular views on the changes, but thank the admins for the work/thinking that always goes into decisions like this.
The Swiss government is neutral on the changes, as always.
The management of Team Jura GIANTS however appreciates. I would however at least partly join TMM on the more significant overhaul. In particular, I would like to see support stats (STA/RES/REC/FTR/DH) get a different category with slightly lower cost. They don't really make a rider stronger, but help to make them better balanced - these support stats actually can only be used to make a rider perform according to his main stats. I think the other stats (incl. ACC) all affect performance more directly, so the price tags are fine, but I'd like to see support stat training getting cheaper.
Yes, of course I'm thinking of Schmid - I mean, just training Sta by 2 points costing 2M is insane (and I might still do it). But after all, if you train support stats, you also lose a year of training main stats, so in the end you won't get a more powerful rider, but just a better rounded one.
I'm not yet sure about what to think of different costs per division. I'm pretty sure some managers would be able to make agreements with lower division teams to "offer" their riders a one-year stint by selling them and buying them back the year after (of course a bit risky, but you know which managers are reliable enough to do this). But it could still be a good idea so even teams with a somewhat lower budget could afford some meaningful training (I'd have loved this for the upcoming season ). And yeah, it's obvious that this would be great for relegated teams
But I do honestly think that the training system could be reworked, and I'm sure there are some smart ideas for this out there
The Swiss government is neutral on the changes, as always.
The management of Team Jura GIANTS however appreciates. I would however at least partly join TMM on the more significant overhaul. In particular, I would like to see support stats (STA/RES/REC/FTR/DH) get a different category with slightly lower cost. They don't really make a rider stronger, but help to make them better balanced - these support stats actually can only be used to make a rider perform according to his main stats. I think the other stats (incl. ACC) all affect performance more directly, so the price tags are fine, but I'd like to see support stat training getting cheaper.
Yes, of course I'm thinking of Schmid - I mean, just training Sta by 2 points costing 2M is insane (and I might still do it). But after all, if you train support stats, you also lose a year of training main stats, so in the end you won't get a more powerful rider, but just a better rounded one.
I'm not yet sure about what to think of different costs per division. I'm pretty sure some managers would be able to make agreements with lower division teams to "offer" their riders a one-year stint by selling them and buying them back the year after (of course a bit risky, but you know which managers are reliable enough to do this). But it could still be a good idea so even teams with a somewhat lower budget could afford some meaningful training (I'd have loved this for the upcoming season ). And yeah, it's obvious that this would be great for relegated teams
But I do honestly think that the training system could be reworked, and I'm sure there are some smart ideas for this out there
That FL, MO and DH cost the same is frankly insane. These stats are wildly different in impact but we charge them all the same, meaning we just funnel training to the few important stats and pushing homogeneous riders and artificially inflated stat curves.
Even a two group split (still not ideal, we know RES/STA are worth significantly more than DH for example) would go a loooong way to making training more varied and available, without adding much (if any) workload to the game.
And whilst I have talked scaling training by division, i am aware how tricky this would be to implement. But i'd happily get involved running numbers if we even thought seriously about it (and I can also see a few easy rule tweeks to prevent PT teams taking advantage of CT managers who don't know better).
But the better scaling would be adjusting the gaps between stat costs even further, and whilst i can't offer numbers some change to the Stat vs OVL cost so again rounding out a rider is less crazy expensive.
Then fiddle with the low stat exemption to adjust the costs and, again radical but work with me, make it a CT exclusive option.
Lowering the training costs feels like a win to me, although I'd like to see them come down again in the future.
Ideally I'd like to see riders added maxing lower but training to be cheap enough that we can turn our regional riders into our leaders.
I'd love to live in a MG world where the managers can shape the DB by training their local riders to be their stars without messing up the top end balance of the game and the cheaper training costs are the more likely they will be spread between more teams and the less likely it will be for all the money to flow upwards to the PT.
Ideally it would make as much financial sense to train my riders as it would to buy established ones and then a lot more money would be leaving the game via training and we wouldn't necessarily need to keep the transfer tax.
Agree regarding minor stat/energy stat training coming at a lower cost.
Also agree with Sammy, I was kind of hoping this would be an effect of the de- inflation of the DB. If 'smaller' nations are no longer going to have decent riders added, then a viable path that isn't abhorrently expensive to bring them somewhat up to speed though training would be great and would help keep regional teams alive/actually worth spending time on. It's good to see training costs slightly reduced across the board as a good step in the right direction.
In terms of training cost scaling across divisions, if it's ever to be considered it might be worth having a stat cap for the 'discount' either overall, or per division. It could be relatively cheap to train riders in CT up to 76 in a stat for example, and then from 76+ the training cost would transition to the base training cost so as to not be too OP.
The Kenyan government would like to propose an adjustment to the training system, inspired by TMM's observation: "That FL, MO and DH cost the same is frankly insane. These stats are wildly different in impact (...)."
While any amount of tiers could be viable, a three-tier system would likely be the easiest to implement. Overall training expenditure could remain roughly unchanged if the increase in the expensive tier is balanced by an equivalent decrease in the cheap tier.
For example, if a rider would normally cost 1,000,000 to train to 79 in a medium-tier skill, a three-tier system with a 25% price adjustment could look like this:
- High tier: 1,250,000 (+25%)
- Medium tier: 1,000,000
- Low tier: 750,000 (-25%)
The obvious question then becomes: which skills belong in each tier?
The Kenyan government proposes the following distribution (4-5 in each tier), though the ManGame admin team may of course adjust it as they see fit:
High tier
Mountain
Hill
TT
Sprint
Cobbles
Medium tier
Flat
MidMountain
Acceleration
Prologue
Another interesting addition would be a dynamic pricing model, where skills are automatically rebalanced between tiers based on the previous season's training expenditure. Under such a system:
- The least purchased skill in the high tier moves down to the medium tier.
- The most purchased skill in the medium tier moves up to the high tier.
- The least purchased skill in the medium tier moves down to the low tier.
- The most purchased skill in the low tier moves up to the medium tier.
This would allow the tier structure to evolve organically over time and adapt to changes in the meta. However, there may be unintended consequences that the Kenyan government has not yet fully considered.
). And yeah, it's obvious that this would be great for relegated teams 
