Bull

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="CashBowels" data-cite="CashBowels" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50648" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The game doesn't allow you to have more than 900 million. Anything more will just tell you that it's above the max value allowed and it won't add the value.<p> </p><p> From the wording of the patch (which to be fair, I have not played) I can only infer that the max value which is 900 million has been lowered for "balancing" reasons but the point is that if I am choosing to use the in-game editor to give me that much money, balance is is the last thing on my mind.</p><p> </p><p> If I am wrong then someone feel free to point it out.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It was lowered because it was literally crashing the game in some instances because the game couldn't parse the numbers. Someone had went in and maxed out their finances and gave another company the same amount in debt to try and buy them out and it was crashing their game. .</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Makhai" data-cite="Makhai" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50648" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>This isn't an exploit, at all. That's just clever use of game mechanics. Where would USPW be if Sam Strong didn't spam himself 20 times a show in 2010? T-Rex vs. Peter Valentine probably. I don't think it's an exploit to have a star and leverage them correctly. If WWE today knew how to spam Lesnar 20 times a night, have him run in and F-5 everybody, and pay him 50M a year, wrestling might be watchable on Friday nights. Instead, I have to pretend Charlotte is a star.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I really don't see what difference your going for between clever use and exploit?</p><p> </p><p> I can't imagine any scenario where I'd want to see the same person in every single angle on every single show regardless of what they are doing and who they are. . While you can do that in the game and get away with it I don't see any way you could attempt that in real life and not have the crowd start crapping on the person eventually. . Might just be me personally but I definitely wouldn't want to have Brock Lesnar F-5ing people every 10 minutes on a 3 hour show lol. .</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Corey" data-cite="Corey" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47811" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm doing a TCW save and am at around 79 pop. in the US and finding that whenever I do a show that's even one or two pop. points lower, I instantly lose popularity. I thought a show had to be 5 points lower or higher than your pop. to affect it? Is that no longer the case?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If the show rating is less than or equal to your popularity in a region you will lose popularity. If the show rating is 6 points or higher than your popularity in a region you will gain popularity.</p>

Back on the topic of contracts This is the deal I offered Remo compared to the one USPW made. . One thing to consider is that I have a 10 in negotiating, so that's probably playing a significant factor in this deal, but just wanted to throw it up as an example nonetheless. . Adding that event bonus and the extra year swung the deal from him considering both offers to only considering mine. .

Maybe the same process that WMMA uses could be applied for this. . WMMA requires you to book cards a month in advance except for in the first week of the game where it's cut down to two weeks. . Seems like the same process could be reworked for This situation where so long as you set up your pre booking on the first day it won't penalize you. .

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="rickson" data-cite="rickson" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47568" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>As I wrote: My company is much bigger than the other company and I offered more than double in money.<p> </p><p> I just tried the trick with event bonus and still lost even though if offered 50% event bonus and more money per month. Well...i'll will keep on trying and maybe offer 100% event bonus. </p><p> </p><p> But contract negotiations are obviously very, very weird this year.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I don't know if you can go back but a screenshot of your offer vs their offer might give some more insight. I usually always offer more money and at least equal years depending on the worker involved and I've never had to go higher than equaling the counter offer event bonus to swing negotiations.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Remianen" data-cite="Remianen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47503" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>That depends on the rest of your 'major stars'. 80 may be fine if everyone else is say 77-84 or so. I had an incident where I poached Raven Nightfall and got her to 71 popularity and 'major star' when everyone else was 68-78 in that tier. But when Alicia Strong (who I had poached previously and who started at 74 popularity when she joined us) hit 83, Raven dropped down to 'star'. It's just like previous TEWs with people bouncing from upper midcarder to main eventer (with autopush). I think it has to do with the average of the other people at that perception level. Raven's partner (Devil's Daughter) stayed at 'major star' at 74 but Raven dropped to 'star' with her 72.<p> </p><p> I think if Spencer is beating other major stars, he'll keep the average down so he's still a major star. Plus, it's also possible for him to bounce above 80 temporarily before coming back down to his cap (or so the handbook says).</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm fairly certain one workers popularity/perception makes no difference in how another worker is perceived.. It directly correlates to the companies popularity so as long as they are something like 6 points higher than the companies popularity after the buff from momentum is added, then they are considered major stars. . The main thing is momentum and the buffs you get from high momentum. I've got Major Stars that range anywhere from 95 popularity to 77 Popularity but the buff they are getting from having high momentum is what's keeping them above the threshold for consideration.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> The main issue you'll run into is how putting him over more popular guys will affect them because he's not gonna gain any popularity but they will lose popularity because of the gap between the two and then you might run into situations like I have where the worker with higher popularity turns out to have a cap lower than what they started with and will never get back what they have lost.</p>

I mentioned it in another thread but try giving them a per event bonus.. I've noticed lately that workers seem to greatly value those bonuses compared to everything else. . I've offered people tens of thousands of dollars in excess of the competition and they don't prefer my offer until I add the per event bonus. .

Tours are only broadcasted on tour highlight deals, any deal you add without a tv show selected defaults to events only..

It happens if you're booking workers on the main card who are perceived as unimportant and all of them have less than very warm momentum. To avoid it make sure at least one of the unimportant workers has very warm momentum or higher or make sure there is at least one worker perceived higher than unimportant.

Would like to see the title histories to be displayed a little easier on the eyes. Right now the dates are all bunched together along with the defenses and there's just a bunch of dead space there. Maybe go back to something like 2016 where they are in there own separate section and maybe even add a section for days held since that's now something that's displayed, but you only ever see it for the current holder but you never see it again once their reign is over. One additional thing is maybe just drop the week lost portion from the history all together. . Its only displayed when viewing title histories for your own company anyway plus since its only showing the week it was lost by the previous holder and not the week it was won it's kinda just cluttering up the space as it is. .

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="D-Lyrium" data-cite="D-Lyrium" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47811" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The quickest/only way is to go to Match History on Guy A's profile and filter by Also Involving Guy B in your company.<p> </p><p> Or book the match and see if you get a warning from your road agent. <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> There is also a match history button when booking a match that will bring up all the matches between the workers involved assuming they've had any.</p>

Just right click the box and it changes to edit mode where you can copy paste and type.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="John Waylon" data-cite="John Waylon" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47811" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Sure. But someone sent to rehab? Someone who is supposed to be totally isolated from the outside world? I take issue with that.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The main thing about it is to do with the way the game handles and displays these things. . It could be just the one available guy deciding he hates the guy in rehab(for whatever reason), but it's displayed as a two way relationship with both guys hating each other because the game can't have multiple or one way relationships between the same two workers. .</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Slash-LN" data-cite="Slash-LN" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47811" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>How do you get money from development? My child company costs me money every month but in the finances screen the money taken in from development always says 0 and when I check the finances for the child company every month it just says I broke even.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Profits and losses are transferred to the parent company so you're balance will always go to zero at the end of every month. If you check the finances of the parent company, If there's nothing in the profits section then it's not making any money.</p>

Not sure if it was introduced in a patch, but something that I've noticed in more recent patches is that those per event bonuses seem to have a pretty high value to people. You might wanna try adding, even just a 10% per event bonus, and see if she comes around. . I've offered people tens of thousands of dollars in excess of the next best offer and the opposition is still the preferred option, but then just matching that bonus will swing them my way.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="d12345" data-cite="d12345" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47503" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Right but isn't that the point of the randomness of the pop cap? You find a worker's pop cap and then decide if you want to struggle against it and push them anyway or move on to someone else with a higher cap in that save.<p> </p><p> There's really no reason why a worker's starting pop should be 100% their minimum pop cap.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> whatever randomness is supposed to be there doesn't seem all that random when the same guys wind up with the same popularity caps in every game. . Multiple people here have had Remo cap at 77 and I've had him cap at 77 in multiple different saves and it's certainly possible the cap is even lower than that but no one has let him drop any further once they realize he's never getting back above 77. .</p><p> </p><p> To be fair I haven't played far enough into most games to see if people can eventually break their caps, but for the guys who are unlikely to improve in skills it's unlikely the ever will. . With it being calculated on the fly unlike past games you'd think you'd see people more able to break caps. . I would think if someone can maintain I high level of momentum for an extended period of time it should boost their caps, but as it is now where it's based on skill and destiny once a cap is reached whether by gaining or dropping popularity its not really any different than a hard cap from past games.</p><p> </p><p> And I don't imagine it's a coverage size issue because I've had workers reach 100 popularity with SWF's default coverage size. .</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> And no their starting popularity shouldn't be the minimum cap 100% of the time, but as long as they aren't losing a step they could at least be able to reach it again and even go higher until they are declining. .</p><p> </p><p> The real unfortunate thing is the younger guys who still have room to grow but get capped in the low to mid 70s. Yea sure for some their skills can still increase which base on how the new cap system is supposed to work, should mean that initial cap is only temporary based on their current skills, but now that skills increase much slower it pretty much means those people are stuck treading water for even longer until they are good enough to hopefully break the cap if they even mange to get good enough to. Plus since destiny rolls are a thing who's to say they didn't get a poor destiny roll base on their starting skills, so even if they get good enough that they should be more popular their destiny roll keeps them locked. .</p><p> </p><p> Couple that with the already established guys getting basically hard locked and it just seems like a system that's designed to hinder more than help. Because you can try and push Spencer Spade to the main event to replace those aging vets, and he winds up capped in the mid 70s, all you wind up accomplishing is sapping Popularity from the bigger name for someone who gains nothing from it and your stuck with two guys in the mid 70s in popularity with no new star to show for it because as far as I can tell raw popularity still plays a big factor in your match grades regardless of where someone is perception wise. .</p>

It seems so, whether it's intended or not I don't know. And while it is random between saves I've had Remo drop to 77 and never get back higher in multiple games. . but I've also had games where he doesn't seem to have a cap and can reach the high 90s pretty easily. I've also had Rogue and Valiant drop from their starting 77, and while the caps will vary they never get back to their starting Popularity. . Same for Gilmore, Crippler, and most of the Older guys toward the top of the card. I don't know if it's to do with the way caps are calculated or what but you'd think they'd at least always be able to get back to their highest popularity. .

I've had people generated with literal zeros in Charisma Mic and acting but have mid 80's in Star Quality Menace and Sex Appeal, it's really disconnected lol. . I can pretty well say this is my only true disappointment with this year's game. The random gens have always been way to random for me and it's hard to feel like they are truly a part of the world. I've much preferred the preset workers since they seem much more attached by comparison.

First things is make sure you are on the latest patch. just in case. . Now, prepare the worker to turn in the roster screen by clicking on their current disposition. . Next you have to have them booked in an angle or match and use the "turn" road agent note and make sure you have the worker you want to turn selected. Finally while you are running the show once you get to the match or angle you have them set to turn in, you have to click the handle changes button to actually complete the turn.

How are you running storylines, strict or no? Could be if they are both popular enough but not in an associated in a storyline that could be causing it?

Under the companies section it's states, it's purely a visual measure of the companies current direction,(quoting). . Could be a mistake I suppose, but I was just going by what the handbook said there. And based on the way bonuses for viewership is calculated I really don't think it would make a huge difference one way or another, you aren't gonna be negatively affected by not getting the bonus and I imagine it's much more beneficial for larger companies as you only start getting it at 5000+ viewers, at which point it the bonus grows with popularity up to 1 Million, again that's at least from the section i saw on the topic. . .

I think the only thing that could possibly be more ironic would be Idaho punishing the punisher lol. .

According to the handbook the show rating needs to be roughly 5 or more points higher than your company popularity to make gains. . but as brat99 said the industry level will have an impact on how much you can grow. . however company momentum is purely aesthetic, and while it does change based on your popularity changes, according to the handbook it doesn't have any direct effect on them. .

That's valid yes but If you do the math yourself that second example he posted should score something like a 64, without knowing the exact match and angle ratio it's hard to say what it would be exactly, but based on the setting's being used and knowing how the show grade is calculated there's no way to do the math to get a 54 show grade with the matches and angles on that show, so something is bringing it down that 54. . Main Event Focus means 90% of the match grade comes from the Main Event The other 10% is the average of the rest of the card. . So you get 54 points from the main event and 6.1 from the average of the other 4 matches which give you a 60.1 match grade then the angles on tight focus is 90% the highest rated angle and 10% the second highest. . So Angle one gives you 71.1 and angle 2 gives you 7.4 for a 78.5 angle grade now the final show grade is based on the ratio of matches to angles, and CWA's TV ratio is expected to be 75% matches and 25% angles so we can assume that show is in that range +or- 10% if you assume he's right on that ratio the show grade should come out to 64.7ish or 65 rounded. . at an 85/15 ratio the grade would be still be a 62.8 and at a 65/35 ratio it would be a 66.5 The point isn't about the variance in the matches and angles themselves, as that's pretty much known to be able to vary wildly. . The point trying to be made is how overuse can impact the final show grade regardless of how well the segments themselves do, which is pretty much proven here, barring some other unknown factor at work. . Sure it's probably not wise to overuse that many people in the first place, but it doesn't hurt to know how it effects things if you do. .