We have a lot of great ideas expressed on this forum. The great ideas turn into code and settings, offering more and more options to users. So many options, most are simply turned off by how much information is present and how confusing the system appears.

Phoenix has a lot of ideas that have turned to settings. Some people like them and some people don't. Phoenix 6 is built around a very extensible code base, with lots of places to insert other more complex strategies present in some commercial EA. Many of these code extensions aren't really useful for Phoenix, and I plan to trim them out. (Phoenix doesn't use any pending trades for example.)

A simple EA lacks the features that many experts desire. I want things like delayed trailing stops and delayed protection of winning trades. Months ago, I made a post about creating an EA that only did one thing: manage exit strategies. I'd like to incorporate many useful aspects of that design into Phoenix 6 over time. In Phoenix 5, the exit logic was married to magic numbers and modes. In Phoenix 6, I'm separating them clearly but still keeping magic number tracking. In Phoenix 5, we really lacked the ability to monitor what was going on. In Phoenix 6, we have signal debugging separate from code debugging (for programmers vs optimizers). All of these options create a formidable wall to new users.

Phoenix in the contest brought many people over to the idea that automated trading could be viable. Phoenix as an experts system is a horrible way to introduce it. Phoenix as a simple system doesn't meet my needs, and I imagine many others as well.

Here is my proposal: fork development into two versions. A simple system has only a single trade, only the most basic common exit strategies, but full signal use. (If nothing else, a fast and lightweight EA useful for signal optimization.) The expert system would use the complete template, but not all possible functions are programmed at release. Settings similar to mode 3 will be available, multiple simultaneous trades, confirmation signals to adjust lot size based on signal data, etc.

Both expert and simple systems will come with optimized by default settings for a single currency. PhoenixSimple would be mostly compatible with PhoenixExpert for settings, but Expert would have more settings available. We should have tools to convert between one and the other, but performance will be different with some expert settings (changing the exit definitely changes the performance).

I have been thinking of "how do I satisfy as many users as possible?" and I think this is the best way. I'm interested in any and all reactions to this separation. I welcome flames and constructive suggestions.