Jump to content

RocheBag

Members
  • Posts

    200
  • Joined

Posts posted by RocheBag

  1. <p>You guys seem to be misinformed on dojos.</p><p> </p><p>

    1. Higher training rating means higher chance of producing workers with better skills. Has nothing to do with popularity.</p><p> </p><p>

    2. Performance centers have more chance of producing wrestlers that used to be standouts in other sports. These are the people who start with extra pop.</p><p> </p><p>

    3. Higher facilities rating means it produces more workers. This is totally separate from training rating.</p>

  2. <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DrRDuke" data-cite="DrRDuke" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51405" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not sure I completely agree with you (Becky Lynch?) but you do make a fair point about the level of the stars not matching the level of the company in WWE and them suffering for it. When you've had Hulk Hogans, SCSA's, Bret Harts and The Rock's you've set a pretty high standard for your fans to expect. Not many on their roster are really even sniffing that kind of 'stardom' I'd argue Seth and AJ are pretty big...and Becky, Bailey and Sasha are def stars that are hard to compare to the male greats of the past...but you make a fair point.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> And all those people left so WWE doesn't book to create stars anymore. Just because WWE <strong>doesn't</strong> do it doesn't mean we shouldn't <strong>be able</strong> to do it.</p>
  3. <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="jbergey_2005" data-cite="jbergey_2005" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51405" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think its reasonable to say that the WWE hasnt even created 1 "major" star in the past 15 years(since Cena).<p> </p><p> Brock Lesnar, but he was pretty much already made by the time he came back.</p><p> </p><p> ***"major" star according to TEW gameplay</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Not really relevant. WWE doesn't create stars because they don't want to and they book in a way that reflects that. They literally publically say no one is bigger than the brand. When we take over WWE we don't book like that. So we should be able to create stars.</p>
  4. <p>Hey, I don't know how you feel about requests but your work is awesome. Me and my friend are making a brand split game in a company called All-Star Wrestling (ASW). We would absolutely love a logo and banner, maybe styled with an A, W and a star? The company is going to be based in Iceland, we were thinking Blue, Silver, White, Red, I'm not sure.</p><p> </p><p>

    Would be very appreciated!</p>

  5. I think Roman Reigns vs Brock Lesnar comes to mind. Their last main event at wrestlemania was comically long and Roman got put through all kinds of hell and it just kinda fell flat. Compare to their first WM match where it was more even (prior to the cash in), it was a much better match despite Roman being much less experienced at the time and almost certainly a better wrestler in the later match.

     

    Right yeah, makes sense.

  6. I would say the overkill main event trope falls into that category. Matches might be better if someone didn’t need to expend a double digit number of finishers in a match, but it’s done so that it paints the loser in the best possible light.

     

    That’s before you even get into the bad/dirty finishes as well (which are not separate from keep strong notes).

     

    Yeah that's the best explanation I've heard so far. I was thinking they just look good. But if they are ahead of their opponent I guess they would look good anyway. So keep strong probably makes them appear comically good to the point it hurts your enjoyment a bit.

  7. Understand all of this, mostly just saying why is it a part of the game. An opening match featuring a major star and 7 jobbers shouldn't be considered "important" yet the game considers it as such. No fan watches a New Japan show, sees CHAOS going up against Young Lions in the undercard and thinks it should go 20 minutes, yet that is a game mechanic due to the new product system.

     

    In the latest patch it was changed so the penalty doesn't apply to tour shows. I think this makes sense because no tour show match is important so they shouldn't be getting penalties. But for example if that Okada vs. Young Lions match is at Dominion, the fans would probably be a little aggrieved that this is what Okada is doing at a huge show.

  8. Worse than what? Obviously any match where not all the competitors are the greatest wrestlers on the planet is going to not be as good as a match could possibly get.

     

    You usually add things like "Keep Strong" to a match, to have a better match in the future. Imagine Daniel Bryan vs. AJ Styles having three matches.

     

    The first one ends via flash pinfall, after Styles hit Bryan with a low blow behind the referee's back. Daniel Bryan lost the match, but he was kepts strong. The storyline gets heat and people want to see Daniel Bryan getting his revenge.

     

    The next match has Daniel Bryan lose via DQ, because the referee saw the low blow this time. It protects Daniel Bryan, but obviously it's still not the best the match can be. There was a none-clean finish and AJ Styles didn't seem to be able to beat Bryan without cheating.

     

    Then there is the grudge match. The storyline is very hot, both wrestlers go into the match with good momentum, since Daniel Bryan never lost clean and AJ Styles never lost period. They now have a match with a clean finish and neither man being made extraordinarily stronger or more protected than their position+skill would suggest. This match is on PPV and the company gains more pop from it.

     

    You sacrifice short term high match ratings, for long term benefits overall. "Penalties" don't make a match bad. Penalties explain that the match can be even better in the future. Kazuchika Okada defeating Hiroshi Tanahashi would rightfully be treated as a short term loss. Long-term, however it was one of the best decisions NJPW ever made

     

    To answer your first question - worse than it would've been without using "keep strong"

     

    Again, I'm not worried about the penalties, I'm simply trying to look at the logic behind it.

     

    The issue with your examples is of course that all of them are tainted wins or cheap wins. I cannot think of an example of someone winning clean, where the loser being kept strong has hurt the match quality.

  9. TEW judges things based on the theoretical 'ideal' match, and gives penalties to things that aren't ideal. The perfect match would be 50/50, with both guys giving their all and having the fans not knowing who will win. Keep Strong is the match at 70/30, more one-sided, more obvious that one wrestler is better than the other. It's not 'ideal'. So there's a penalty.

     

    Don't be afraid of penalties. A lot of good booking doesn't provide the ideal greatest match ever. You eat the penalties to reap the benefits.

     

    Never thought of it like that. So booking a midcarder to beat a main eventer while keeping the main eventer strong may look more like the main eventer totally dominating and the midcarder just fluking into a win.

     

    I was thinking of it like if I don't keep the main eventer strong, he would just get dominated by the midcarder which would make no sense.

  10. Keep Strong means that in a 6-man Tag-Team match Roman Reigns wasn't able to prevent Dean Ambrose being pinned, because he was fighting two other people on the outside of the ring.

     

    Or it means he got pinned after all three oppoents hit their finisher on him, he still kicked out and then they had to hit a Tag-Team finisher to get the job done

     

    The penalty that comes with "Keep Strong" or "Protect" is hardly noticeable in a good match either way, but it is there and it's constantly used IRL for future title contenders

     

    Right so using your two examples, why would either of those things happening make the match worse?

  11. <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="pat666" data-cite="pat666" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51332" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Simply book ur keep strong segment anywhere but in the main event. Went fantastic in my wwe 04 game. For example,<p> Mr. Kennedy was just starting on my SD roster. My us champ was eddy guerrero. I made guerrero loose to kennedy after less than a month that kennedy Was on the roster. Booked them midcard in summerslam. Gave me a shitty rating, guerrero didnt loose that much pop. Kennedy gained alot (like went from 32 to 44 or something) </p><p> </p><p> Didnt really affect my show. </p><p> Imo thats how we should use the «*keep strong*» note.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah there are ways to get around it, I'm just trying to figure out why it works that way.</p>
  12. I just don't get it. To me the trade off should be if you use "Keep Strong" the winner gains less and the loser loses less.

     

    If a midcarder is going to beat a main eventer, of course the main eventer is still going to look strong. It would be insane if the mindcarder just destroyed him. So why does the main eventer being kept strong hurt the match? In every memorable upset victory I remember the bigger star still looked very strong.

     

    Clearly I must be missing something so I'll ask the people who know more than I. What's the logic here? Thanks for any help!

  13. Do we know yet what goes into determining a single worker's "in-ring performance" rating during a show? That seems to be the main thing holding back my card average, people are just turning in mid-60 performances creating mid-60 matches unless they're my top guys.

     

    Whichever top row stat is the best (Brawling, Technical, Aerial, Puro, Hardcore in certain products), and Psychology give you a baseline number, from there bonuses or penalties are applied for things like Selling, Charisma, Star Quality, Momentum, Gimmick. This number is then combined with Popularity based on the ratio laid out in your Product to give you the final number.

     

    That's how I understand it anyway.

×
×
  • Create New...