SirMichaelJordan

I was already using the presets tbh...Most mods, especially those with a lot of companies seem to set products to a basic setting and multiple companies looked the same. No one really had unique settings outside maybe a select few of companies in said mods.

Good to see styles updated. Was going to suggest a tag team tag but after reading the entry, it might be better if “tag team specialist” was added as an attribute instead.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lavelleuk" data-cite="lavelleuk" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Unless I'm mistaken aren't those styles just the styles that will get a boost from the match? As in two high flyers with 0 hard-core won't put on a terrible barbed wire match, it's just if they were hard-core workers the match would be improved by being a barbed wire one.<p> </p><p> So two technical wrestlers can still put on a technical classic in a cage, it's just that if they were brawlers the being in a cage is more likely to help the match.</p><p> </p><p> I could be wrong though lol. But to me that's how it should be</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think so. I seem to get better results if I put two spot monkies in a match with weapons and list it as a high spot match rather than any other match type especially hardcore if they have low hardcore stats.</p><p> </p><p> I think it’s a legit way to book though. A cage match can be technical as well as brawl. I would imagine a brawl base weapon match will feature a lot of punching and slams involving the weapons based on that wrestling style vs a high spot weapons match where it’s alot of spots involving the weapons. I guess one could just use Regular but when i use a specific style, the match always rate better which I’m not mad at. In theory, a worker with good aerial or flashiness but poor brawl skills should fair better in a match focusing on high spots with a worker who has good brawl skills and good aerial or flashiness vs if they were in a regular style match which uses both workers highest top row stats. Worker A is brawling against Worker B who has poor brawl stats. Worker B is using high spots vs Worker A who has good high spot stats. A match where both guys are focusing on one style they are both good at should rate slightly higher than a regular style match in that situation imo.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Skallux" data-cite="Skallux" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Before I post this I have to say that I didn't read all the posts/suggestions so I don't know whether or not it has been asked and answered before, sorry for that. I got a suggestion involving Matches, in this case the Match Style. As of right now, a created match has a pre set style (e.g. 1 vs 1 Regular, 1 vs 1 Cage Brawl based). My suggestion would be that instead of assign the Style in the edited match, I may suggest to let the booker assign the Style of the match in the booking phase of a match (Booking screen, Add Match) in the Road Agent Notes. Imo, a 1 vs 1 match aswell as a Cage match can both be worked in a regular base or brawl based style. It may also be worked in a high spots style etc, depending on the style and/or story you want to tell. I hope you get what I want to say as I'm not too good arguing in english. and again sorry if this was requested/asked already.<p> </p><p> Greetings</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This would be helpful as this is how I book matches. I currently have multiple 1 vs 1 matches that are specific to brawl based, high spot, etc. It seem to me that those options should definitely go under match aims or road agent notes...</p>

Good question, this is big! Would be cool to see the AI even sign some of the other members of the stable to add them along with new members.

That’s up to the specifics of the belt. And as far as I know, there isn’t any pushes.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="iruleall15" data-cite="iruleall15" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Gotta wonder what the % is of the other worker being signed though. Realistically this could continue to be a big issue for AI and tag team signing/booking if Adam doesnt make it a big push.<p> </p><p> But also at what point can a team be permanent(like Edge and Christian) than after years and years of them being together split up. I feel like Adam cant win with this as everyone will complain that "the AI didnt sign the partner" when the AI could have wanted the one guy instead.</p><p> </p><p> I look at it like Brown Pride the team in the CV. Latinofear isnt much of a star. Lower card guy. But Mexicain has potential to be a big player if he develops(he did for me in my TCW save). What happens when in a few in game years one member of a team heavily develops into a stud while the other caps kinda early. Why should they stay permanent when the other guy can truly go off and get a real job instead of holding himself back to the AI just for a partner.</p><p> </p><p> Theres no way to win this for Adam without there being 3 other ways for it to be annoying to us the player</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Adam said that there will be a high chance of the partner being signed. </p><p> </p><p> I would not call Edge & Christian a permanent unit...</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Hopefully the same large bonus is given to regular units as well.</p>

Not to mention that one would be solo until the other half is hired.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DatIsraeliGuy" data-cite="DatIsraeliGuy" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Good to see the new additions, although it kinda feels like it should've been implemented already, but I won't mean about such a small thing.<p> I am however disappointed not to see any changes to tag teams in regards to specific skills, like tag psychology or something in the likes.</p><p> </p><p> As for the numbered shows, again a welcomed small addition, although I hope landmark shows will be a thing, for example your 100th, 500th, 1000th show etc will be more special than normal, have better ratings and as such be expected to deliver better grades.</p><p> </p><p> Still time though</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If tag team specific skills or attributes doesn't make it in the game then i hope ”tag team” becomes a ”style” much like Lucha, hardcore, spot monkey, etc.</p>

It’d be nice if the AI actually ran the storylines that they claim they have going on...

Yea i hope that the AI will try to seek out the partner when signing one half of a unit especially permanent units.

<p>The AI is most definitely lacking (its not on the level of top simulation games)...</p><p> </p><p> but with that said, it's s been getting better every version of the game and with the game possibly being a year away I'm sure the AI will get upgrades considering that the game was rebuilt and most of the features we have been asking for are talked about early in the journal already. We literally have about 6+ months of journal left...</p><p> </p><p> Let's not exaggerate both sides.</p>

<p>The important question is... </p><p> </p><p> Is New Day a stable or Tag Team? Lol</p><p> </p><p> I hope this also cut down the need for things like New Day I, New Day II, Shield III, etc on real world mods...That always bothers me.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BiffJordan" data-cite="BiffJordan" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>About TV taping days. Adam says that the further from the taping the lower the rating. So am I to assume that no matter what I put on my week 4 show that it will get lower ratings than week 1 because of the time between air date and taping? <p> </p><p> While Meltzer has more than once concluded that tapings do not hurt ratings, I understand the old school and in game reason for the penalty. But is it as simple as I've expressed above? If so that kind of stinks because no matter what my ratings will decline. </p><p> </p><p> Or is it just a general handicap to my ratings?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> He mentioned it’s not a huge loss and if week one show is worse than the 4th show booking wise, I am sure that the fourth show would rate better. I don’t think it’s as black and white as the farthest show is always the worst.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TeemuFoundation" data-cite="TeemuFoundation" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>But consistency - or lack thereof - is also a personality trait. Some people are super consistent with their work, others aren't. It has to do with how seriously one takes their work and whatnot. I can see it affecting both in-ring and mic work tbh.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Agree with this 100%</p>

<p>Love this.</p><p> </p><p> Now if only consistency can effect some non in ring stats like mic skills and acting to add more variety. Would like to see some stats applying to refs also!</p>

<p>One thing I really hope is improved is AI storylines. It never failed to click on a AI companies story lines, see a bunch of matchups then go look on their cards and never find any of those people working together...In a rare occasion it would be 1 match or angle in a months worth of programming with no PPV payoff.</p><p> </p><p> I would like to see these guys in angles together and possibly a pay off match at a event.</p><p> </p><p> I don’t remember well but I don’t even think auto booker books your storylines as a user.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TheChef" data-cite="TheChef" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I agree that it's too specific and leaves nothing for the player to figure out by themselves. Something that would help, and I think would be easy to implement, would be the option for the player to limit the Scouting Level. When we first see a worker, they are at level 1 and all we see is In-Ring & Performance, Physical and Entertainment, rated from Poor to Excellent. By the time they reach level 10, we know everything there is to know about them. I'd like to see an option to limit this across the board for every worker, the lower it's set, the more difficult judging the worker would be.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Whenever I get s mid, the first think I do is lower everyone’s scouting level to 1. Lol so I agree with this!</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Sudo_Nym" data-cite="Sudo_Nym" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yeah, but even that's a level of abstraction that I think doesn't really capture what I'm talking about. And frankly, I don't know if I'm explaining it very well.<p> </p><p> What I really want to there to be a reliance on the new house show system to provide more than a place for unemployed people to work. I want it to be part of the scouting system, so that you'll have a legitimate reason to pay attention to what is going on in the indies to find talent. Limiting the specific information that's available is more in service of pushing a scouting system.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I personally would love to be able to send a road agent/scout to a show to unlock a layer of fog.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="WCGreyghost" data-cite="WCGreyghost" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>You can already do this, by turning the numeric values off. Instead you'll see guys getting grades...like A, B, C etc...so you'll know "this guy is good at X, but not at Y" without knowing the actual number value assigned to the stat.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Workers profile I think it still show up as numbers if I’m not mistaken</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="steev42" data-cite="steev42" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'd like that. I was also thinking that instead of just "Independent Show from XXX", give the 'company' an acronym of 3-4 letters. Doesn't need a name, but if it was something like "GYE (Independant Company in XXX) held a show..." Even better if it remembered the ones it used and occasionally went back to them.<p> </p><p> The Independents, after all, would theoretically just be promotions too small to be modeled in TEW.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Sounds good but I think Independent Show from “tri state” covers more area than it would if we would give it a specific name. It would be great if we had an unlimited source of names for it to choose from but considering small Indy shows usually run once a month if lucky, seeing (insert random name here) every month or week depending on FA size in that area, it wouldn’t be as immersive as Independent Show from (area) because that could speak of multiple companies each time instead of the same one if that makes sense.</p>

<p>Yes I hope incentives play a much bigger role in negotiating. Would like to see new ones added along with promises and clauses. I don’t want to just generically offer the highest amount of money. On the other side, I would like to see workers demand certain things. I don’t think Kenny Omega would even talk to WWE unless creative control was given before a price is even negotiated.</p><p> </p><p> And if pushes are truly gone, maybe more emphasis on promising roles like “major star” Icon” “gatekeeper” and things like promising to keep someone strong (keep momentum or perception above a certain number) or promise main event (book no lower than the second to last match on a card)</p>

Not being able to maximize eyes on the product isn’t a penalty. Even before the internet people knew results of RAW because of word of mouth. I highly doubt that it is a huge drop of in viewers. No matter what the genre is, sports, TV, etc. Live is always going to draw more eyes than something previously taped and I think this represents that. Also the extra income you will not see will be made back from the money you will be saving from not doing a show live. So that in itself does not make it a penalty.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="a0161613" data-cite="a0161613" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'd expect the maximum for block taping is four hours per day, to keep things realistic. I don't remember if that's been confirmed.<p> </p><p> But that makes 4x1 & 2x2 equally feasible.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yea up to 4 hours per day would be great but I’m just happy we have block taping...</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BuddyGarner" data-cite="BuddyGarner" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not really digging the broadcasting stuff. The financial stuff I don't really see being a big draw to players.<p> </p><p> In my opinion the financial parts of the game should be streamlined so more effort can go into the core (booking).</p><p> </p><p> I mean you see all the suggestions that go in the suggestions forum. How many are about finances that aren't about streamlining things like contract negotiations?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I don’t see how it’s complicated or not streamlined, all it is risk reward for making decisions. If you want to do something crazy like broadcast PPV while also giving it away for free, there is consequences in doing so.</p>