SirMichaelJordan

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BrokenCycle" data-cite="BrokenCycle" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>First real disappointment here. Not into this. <p> </p><p> I was hoping that the new battles system would at least have some sort of nuance to it besides "Good show good, bad show bad." These things have always been incredibly half baked ideas built upon fairly weak game mechanics. How about just combine the two systems? Because in 2013 the complaint was that main event talent wasn't taken into account, and in 2016 the complaint was that show quality wasn't taken into account. </p><p> </p><p> The only way I could see this actually being a significant fix is if the equations for the final show rating sees an overhaul.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> I agree with this. A mix between the two would have been great. The great thing about 2016’s way is that it forced you to make stars or sign some if you were going head to head with another company. It’s a reason why TNA started signing guys like hogan when they declared a Monday night war...It was the only way they could try to compete with WWE despite having the better shows at the time.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DAVEFAN95" data-cite="DAVEFAN95" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Just a heads up this may be long, but I was hugely disappointed in the devolution of the "national battle" system, while I loved the regional battle split. I wasn't a huge fan of the SQ national battle system that was there but I don't believe that show ratings are what dictates that you are winning a battle with another company. I do think it is important (show ratings are essentially how good your storylines are doing) and the previous shows success/failure should dictate the amount of eyes on your product next week (TV rating/attendance etc). <p> </p><p> I had previously made out a new idea for a national battle system (It's posted here in the suggestions section if you want to check it out: <a href="http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=537007" rel="external nofollow">http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=537007</a>) and it had three main concepts, TV ratings/PPV buyrates, star power (2016 system) and show rating (average rating of the shows held in a month) and it would be a percentage of each of these three would be converted into points, put together and the highest number of points wins the battle. </p><p> </p><p> Now, I'm not trying to push my own agenda or anything like that, but I do think that there should be more than just one particular aspect of a company that should be taken into account. I'm also aware that these three concepts may not be perfect as some things might be missing, but I do think it would be a good start. </p><p> </p><p> Another thing is that the percentages for the concepts could be different for each region. Like the US market might have more importance on TV/PPV rating and star power and a small input from show rating while the Japanese market might be mostly show rating, some star power and no TV/PPV rating, while in Mexico all three might be of equal value.</p><p> </p><p> I do think that the last two systems weren't great and although my system may not be the answer, I think a system with more variables would be a welcome addition.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="RingRider" data-cite="RingRider" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>So I am a little disappointed to see SQ be taken out of the National Battle calculations as well. As stated by DAVEFAN95, I think a marriage between the show ratings and SQ could be a better solution.<p> </p><p> That being said, maybe the workaround is simply making "stars" more essential to broadcasters. Perhaps the biggest broadcaster demand bigger stars (both in overness and SQ)? </p><p> </p><p> The other thing is that a lack of star power could cause fans to "hijack" shows as they demand to see bigger stars--thus hurting show ratings.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Star qualification and broadcast deals is a good idea. As well as hijacking shows.</p>

A write up would be cool. Not an actual play by play like WMMA. EWR was lke that but the entries were repeated far too often.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="James Casey" data-cite="James Casey" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm genuinely surprised by this. It was <em>amazing</em> when EWR was released back in the day, but my experience was of people quickly tiring of it because it was the same few lines thrown together in differing ways - maybe there was more variety if you tried different feds, but even so. It's amazing what different things people remember positively about old games.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I personally enjoyed it. It was before its time, now days games like football manager and OOTP have extensive write ups that are not repeats. I could imagine how much the feature could have grown and avoided repeats.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Kingster" data-cite="Kingster" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Today's entry is very interesting, I like that there can now be different scheduling models for different companies. I'm also curious how the AI handles different schedules and different event intents. For example with a weekly schedule, will the AI realize that holding a normal event each week would be overkill and so would schedule lesser shows most of the time with the occasional "normal" event?<p> Some things are still unclear to me:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> So, I'll take it this model means that AI controlled companies will try to schedule several events per week? Interesting.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> I hope this doesn't mean that the AI will never run events if they have an active tv deal. For example, with a "regular" monthly schedule the AI will still run monthly events in conjunction with tv shows if they have an active deal, right?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Agree with the last part, i know WMMA 5 works that way, it’s ether events or TV. I hope there is an hybrid setting.</p>

I’m curious to know at what point does the AI try to start expanding into other regions?

UFC is based in Vegas. Company base could be used more than just cosmetics. A small attendance boost could simulate loyal/cult fans in the region. This really wouldnt matter that much for a big company like UFC or WWE (besides in TEW depending on the mod and era, it’s not out of the norm for WWE to have more popularity in the tristate region; simulating this effect) small regional companies in real life are region specific and have fighters from the area.

<p>A few small questions and suggestions.</p><p> </p><p> Are there any risk for a low level regional company that is based in Texas choosing to run events in Nevada?</p><p> </p><p> And are there any benefits to running events in your company’s home region?</p><p> </p><p> I hope this is already a thing but I feel like running events in high lucrative states should cost more financially (scaled to company size) </p><p> </p><p> In WMMA 4, playing as a small regional company I was able to just run all my shows way outside my home region and select the most lucrative place to make maximum profit every event. Not saying that I shouldn’t have been able to do such a thing but those places should have been reserved for big fights as a fight that would not draw too much probably wouldn’t make a profit after all the expensive being paid from running an event in a place like NY or Nevada as an outsider.</p><p> </p><p> Also I think running an event in a company’s home region should boost attendance.</p>

Is it possible to get the AI to run weekly events?

Probably lost heat because the storyline didn’t advance.

<p>Custom Merchandise</p><p> </p><p> Would a ME Heel who currently holds a ME championship sell more merchandise than a mid card babyface?</p><p> </p><p> In short, does hold any titles boost sells a bit?</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Phreak" data-cite="Phreak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Oh gods no! TEW attendance figures and finances were never designed to be an exact replication of real life. It will never be realistic and still balanced/playable.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Unless you edit the game world.</p>

Glad to see you make the switch and welcome back. I've been following this mod since 2013 <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

They'll all have a high ceiling. Some higher than others based on age. They still have to grow through the right develop and avoid career altering injuries. So no, not everyone will be HOFers.

<p>Any plans for updating this for the new version?</p><p> </p><p> Also, think some of the small details about ratings could come in handy as well</p><p> </p><p> like needing a certain amount of menace to be able to use dominate effectively, the effect charisma have on thing other than entertainment angles, personality traits for able to work off a script and etc.</p>

No, she was not trying to beat her opponent at her own game. She tried multiple times to get close and grapple but was getting tagged and when she finally was able to get a clinch Holm was skilled enough to defend it well. I don't see the rematch going any differently unless Ronda change camp, learn to stike and wrestle. That's not happening because of her schedule. Holm may not even be champ bout time the rematch happens assuming Ronda is not Holm's first defense.

It all depends. Maybe they are National at 77 if you are importing WWE into the C-Verse. A 70 pop overall in C-Verse would make them Cult and like you said you can change things to get them back to 15,000 in attendance. The problem is that Real world and C-verse aren't the same. I think getting the right game world settings is just as important as getting the right attributes balance for workers. Also the problem with WWE being Cult is that Cult only allows 1 tv show and not to mention the AI would probably start signing some of it's featured workers to PPA deals. Depending on how you set up the game world a 77 in pop could be a cult company or a global company which would be more correct since 1 allows 1 tv show and the other allows 4. My main point is that a RWM needs its own gameworld setting. I think the opinion of WWE is not big as it once was is hyped because of the current product and noone being on the level of Rock, Hogan and Austin. That opinion is ignoring the fact that WWE has had more bad eras then good. Golden Age and Attitude were probably WWE's peak but they are bigger than they ever were dating back to those periods. Does that mean WWE's pop should be in the 90's? Definitely not but like I said you can manipulate the gameworld.

Just want to point out that a lot of the viewers and attendence figures can get manipulated by tweaking the community size which I like to call "wrestling community size" Community size is the main culprit of inflated attendence. Those default c verse numbers could be easily be cut in half for USA in a RWM.

It's the same with indy companies. Modders would give a indy company even popularity to all regions because the company is "popular" everywhere in the US. This would have a company like PWG booking shows in florida... Popularity is subjective, obviously companies are going to book where they are going to make guaranted max profit. Modder can either work within the game's mechanism or ignore it and compromise realism. Things like TV deals could get modded to your own criteria. Inaccurate and high attentence makes money even more easy to obtain which make it even more easy to grow. But some players want to be able to grow fast.

Please please please give us the ability to edit coaching staffs

I would say 34 hours are very much possible lol. I remember when I first played Football Manager (FM12) Man, I've played the game for well over 24 hours. I did not leave the house at all. It was winter and I had a break at the time but the hours went by so fast and the game was just so deep. I never seen anything like it because I was a console gamer at the time. I don't even remember being sleepy either, I guess the dopamine just kept me going.

I haven't loaded up FM since I purchased this game. That says a lot as I love this year's FM.

Quotes from the second post of this thread. Was wondering how does the game world settings fit into things? Should one tweaked those in a RWM to reflect what's happening IRL rather than using the default numbers? I'm mainly speaking of Community Size. How does that setting help/or mess up things? Is it best to just keep those at default and adjust company size? This popped in my head because WWE AI only run 2 shows at National size and TNA AI only run 1 at Cult. I'm thinking of creating a RWM for my personal use

Hmmm, I must say that I never been into fictional mods (or even the CVerse) but reading through this thread have me very interested in trying this out!

Thanks for this! It will definitely spark some inspiration. I wasn't around for TEW 2010 or the older version but that storyline feature would have been very helpful for me.