I would like the refreshment points (VP) to also appear in the elevation profile so that their distance from the start can be read there. As an extension, a distance measurement between the VPs would be great, in this case to be able to plan daily stages more elegantly.
Currently, the “only” option is to slide through the elevation profile until the cursor is roughly at the VP, or if the VP is the first one after the start, you are left with reading it here:
I already had something similar in Photoshop here:
Hi @Thoka,
Every additional element places an extra “load” on the UI and therefore, in my view, should offer clear added value.
Being able to read the distance directly from the elevation profile actually sounds quite appealing to me, as it’s easier than hovering over the map and reading it off at the bottom. However, I would definitely make it less invasive (e.g., just suggesting it with dots or dashes). In the proposed form, it might look at first glance as if WP5 is located on the map — that can easily be confusing and makes the view more cluttered.
Hi Kira,
I think the UI should offer all the features I need for planning. A very important step for me is dividing multi-day routes into reasonably equal-sized daily segments. VPs (via points) take on the role of „overnight stay“ here and initially serve as focal points for searching for accommodation via Google. Once accommodation is found, the corresponding VP is finalized.
Currently, I’m heading east for 7 overnight stays in the near future, which makes for eight daily legs of around 300 - 400 km.
As the screenshot shows, I have two „direct“ ways to measure the distance to a VP.
A third indirect option would be „turn-by-turn directions“.
However, I feel I’m missing a truly direct option; the mentioned possibilities always involve a lot of clicking.
VPs in the elevation profile are an option that provides a direct view of all VPs, I just have to make sure to use VPs only for overnight stays in my case. If VPs are also used for many other purposes, that naturally gets diluted again 
I don’t see any risk of clutter here; as suggested by @t00thl355, this could also be made available via this element
and the elevation profile can also be completely hidden.
The elevation profile also has the advantage that I can immediately read two values for each VP:
Alternatively, a „flag“ could be placed on the VP, then I have the value right in front of me when placing the VP, at any zoom level and even without the elevation profile.
Values from „turn-by-turn directions“. Here (1), it would be nice to also output the VP number.
I can only agree with @Thoka here. One of today’s weaknesses is definitely planning multi-day tours. Estimating the kilometers and figuring out where I need to look for a hotel. I deal with that almost every day. …Okay, to be fair, only 100 days a year. 
I agree too. One might consider whether a multi-day or even multi-week tour should be planned all in one go or if it’s better to plan it as individual day tours from the outset. But if you decide on the multi-day option, I also feel like the separating link is missing.
To start with, I help myself by putting an “Ü” in front of the daily endpoints, something like point 11 here:
However, at the latest when analyzing the tour — meaning when transferring the start, via-points, and destination into an overview, such as Excel — it becomes labor-intensive.
To do this, I take the turn-by-turn directions, filter only for via-points (intermediate destinations), and tap on Export Road Book. I copy the content (without exporting to CSV) to the clipboard and paste it into Excel.
The fact that the column headers have to be shifted one column to the right due to the missing first column header “Symbol” is a minor detail. However, you first have to laboriously convert the numbers in the table, which are given in meters and seconds, into other formats if you want things to be a bit more readable.
Table after pasting into Excel:
Only after reformatting with formulas so that data is displayed in km and h:min does the table become more legible:
But for a multi-day route, the table becomes difficult. Instead of the numbering starting over at 0 on the next day, the kilometer and time values are continued cumulatively.
Though how is Kurviger supposed to know where a new day begins.
To solve this technically in the table requires some Excel work, but it’s doable.
It would be easier if, alongside shaping points and via-points (wegebahn points), there were a third type of waypoint — virtually an end-of-day marker, something like this:
Hey everyone. I’d really like a visualization like that, or something slightly different. I use it to estimate where I might need to refuel. I’ve suggested before setting some kind of milestone along the route every 50km (or adjustable) — different in color and appearance from the WPs and VPs, and optionally toggleable. That makes it a bit easier to plan fuel stops or breaks.
You can of course hover over the elevation profile, and if that’s the chosen solution, then at least the WPs (meaning the stopping points) should be included there, as you suggested.
I support the idea.
Best,
Mario
