Dolfanar

Vince may not have been handing out guranteed money at the time but there were guaranteed contracts atleast as early as '88-89 in JCP. Hall, Nash and Bischoff have confirmed that the schedule was the primary factor with money also important.

Except Hogan actually did this in the case of Bill Goldberg...

I think the new Traits/Attributes/Tags or whatever they are called are going to bring alot more nuance while being far easier to manage as a mod creator. A handful less 1-100 skills vs potentially over a hundred binary tags is a hell of a bargain. On the worker promises : If we don't follow through and take a worker up on his offer to put someone over, what sort of reactions should we expect?

Again, couldnt agree more. The whole submission thing baffles me. The game doesn't simulate matches. At all. It looks at ratings and tries to determine a match rating. There is a difference. There is no need to go into that much detail because you will never know whether a single submission move was applied. Brawling, puro and hardcore should absolutely be combined in the same way into a Rumble skill. Puro and Hardcore are styles and should be covered by that mechanic and not by having superfluous skills imo. Again if Puro is a skill, why not lucha? Some kind of personality trait could cover a workers willingness to do crazy s--- like allowing someone to staple their head or be slammed on thumb tacks.

I tend to agree, but I think this would require rethinking more than just stats. Gimmicks for instance. I see Charisma, Intensity, Menace, Sex appeal as "aspects" or "styles" of star quality that help define what "roles" a worker can play. Andre the Giant would mske a poor damsel in distress while Elizabeth a poor enforcer. So I think we still need to distinguish between a menacing giant from a flamboyant playboy, etc... In some way, but not necessarily with stats. That's why I say there is a second trickier batch of attributes to combine that are a little less straightforward than combining technical or brawling skills. As far as the submission vs mat skills debate... As per Adam the game already just took the higher value so we're not losing anything. It was pure window dressing. I see Chain wrestler vs submissionist as a question of style, like brawler vs strong style / puroresu. I mean there isnt a skill for Lucha, which is atleast as distinct a style as puro... If the game had a visual or even playbyplay description I could see an argument, but the game abstracts in-ring action so much I think it makes sense to abstract the skills.

I always liked Macho on colour. There is definitely a relation between acting, charisma and mic skills as far as who makes a good colour guy, imo. Announcing otoh I would agree is absolutely a seperate skill. Having said that I think there are better low hanging fruit for skills streamlining. The brawling skills, aerial and flashiness, I'd argue even basics and safety would be good candidates to combine. Consistency could be come a personality trait (consistent vs inconsistent). I think these are the easiest to argue. Maybe Toughness and resilience as well? The next batch become trickier : The aforementioned Colour skill, sex appeal, menacing, etc... Are all problematic, imo, in that they overlap with other skills but arent as straight forward as the first batch. Again imo.

If you are in the minority then there are atleast two of us... Not sure which skills particularly need to be combined, but there is definitely redundance in the wrestling skills. I'm less enthusiastic about over simplifying the non wrestling skills but even there I could see some streamlining. Does someone with high mic skills and acting need a specific colour commentary skills? I also wonder if those new tags for wrestlers could replace some skills. Menacing could be a tag for instance. Intense (a former skill that I felt made at least as much sense as menacing) could as well.

A few years ago as a compromise I suggested going to a modified 4 4 5 system. Its a system used in finance to create fiscal month periods. In TEW it would simply mean that 4 months out of the year would get 5 weeks rather than 4 (I think I suggested March, May, August and December). Not perfect but it gets us much closer to our Solar year...

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Steven James" data-cite="Steven James" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>That would be kinda hard for the game's code, unless it used a slightly modified 2020 calendar forever. Most games like TEW use a 28 day calendar, because it's much simpler and easy for the game to use.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Ive accepted the weird TEW lunar calendar, BUT in what universe do most sim games use a 28 day calendar? Almost every sim game out there use a real world calendar. There are tons of code libraries out there to integrate a real world calendar and nearly all sports games dynamically generate schedules with them.</p><p> </p><p> I'm not saying TEW2020 has to do this but 99.99999% of professional software that integrates calendars use a real world calendar, including most sports games.</p>

Has your promotion shrunk to a smaller size (eg Regional->Small?)

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Makhai" data-cite="Makhai" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>On the arena point I 100% agree. The permit and the land alone on 10,000 seat venue would break 10M then building it would cost into the 100s of millions. Usually what a wrestling company will do is lease, or buy out old buildings. Cornette rented out the Lousiville Gardens with OVW for 800 a night on a sweetheart deal. And then cut the deal with 6-flags later. I'd also really like seeing financial models be editable in databases. This way we could properly design models that made sense in each era, with a base inflations rate, etc added to the game to drive up values over time.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> Agree with this. Just to pile on more, if I build a 10000 seat arena for say 50mil, im going to renting that sucker out every possible chance including trying to attract a regular sports team, concerts, etc... Building an arena can devolve quickly into a commercial building management sim!</p><p> </p><p> Advertising however is trickier 20-30k isnt out of the range of a well promoted show even for a small regional promotion if you're drawing 1500ish people consistently...</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Bojan" data-cite="Bojan" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I do absolutely love the (re)addition of mandatory pre-booking. But I also feel like you should at least get occasional attendance boosts, for example when you book a really out of the box angle or a big time match-up.<p> Also, having storyline heat play into this (like in TEW 2014? or was ist 16?) would be amazing.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Essentially you *are* getting a bonus. If you do really well you get close to 100% of your max potential attendance whereas if you only do ok you get less. </p><p> </p><p> I think the " issue " is that Adam was 100% transparent of how the background mechanic works rather than presenting the game effect (if you do pre-book really well you draw more than if you dont and if you turn the feature off the game assumes you prebooked perfectly).</p><p> </p><p> Personally I prefer the transparency as we can then get into a discussion of what merits getting 100% potential attendance (big time match, hot angle, etc...) and what shouldnt.</p>

I So if I have a figurehead with name value X and a regular wrestler with also name value X, the figurehead would give a boost both from his name value AND being a figurehead (ie the effects stack?) whereas the regular wrestler would only benefit from his popularity?

Not sure I understand, doesn't your post imply that they are related? Does the new feature replace the effect figurejeads had? Do they stack? Does one null out the other? That's what I was getting at.

Question : Does the feature today replace the figurehead feature? If not, how do the two overlap (or not). I imagine that smaller feds could easily bring in much bigger stars than their own figurehead...

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not sure why I found it funny when Adam talked about limiting a stable to only 18. As if that was a draw back, how could anyone manage a 20 person stable? Is there such a thing in real life?.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The NWO at its most bloated must have been over 20, and the alliance during the invasion was well over that amount. Can't think of any others.</p>

I have to admit that stables were not very high on my wish list. I dont follow competitor feds all that closely unless its to steal talent and i cant see myself bringing in a whole stable as is. I'm curious as to how stable ratings will drive business though which could be interesting...

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="awesomenessofme1" data-cite="awesomenessofme1" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> That said, I would love it if they did fix the calendar, regardless. So I'll just wait and see.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This is one of those things I keep waiting for. It's a little immersion breaking for me to not have a real world calendar.</p>

<p>Great stuff this week!</p><p> </p><p> 2 questions :</p><p> </p><p> 1) why would block taping reduce revenues in any way? It's a pure cost cutting move irl and at worst i could see it giving the shows a slight hit to quality for being a bit stale... And even that only for A shows.</p><p> </p><p> 2) can a child company create its own broadcaster?</p>

I had to LOL at the equating of politics to prison. Having said that, Jesse Ventura was still doing PbP as mayor and reffed a Summerslam as governor. Kane still does the odd spot. Its not wrestling but wasnt Arny governor when they filmed T3? Just saying politics isnt quite as air tight as prison...

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Vladamire Dracos" data-cite="Vladamire Dracos" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I like this adjustment to ticket prices. Back when TV wrestling was just starting to be a thing, "studio shows" were common and were free.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I hadn't thought of that. Combine it with modifyers for B shows and you can fill up a studio on a sunday afternoon of squash matches with no penalties for featuring jobbers getting ganked all day.</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>WWE Presents a house show with Randy Orton vs. AJ Styles will still outsell WWE Presents a house show with Mustafa Ali vs. Drew Gulak. Drawing power does matter despite the size of promotion and product.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> But will it sell more than WWE presents a house show featuring Randy Orton and AJ Styles on the card but not necessarily in the main event match? </p><p> </p><p> Im not arguing that the overness of the workers on the roster dont have an impact... Just that the notion of the main eventers drawing the house isnt as big of a deal.</p><p> </p><p> In the 70s OTOH your house was entirely drawn on your top match.... MAYBE your semi-main might have a bit of an impact. Maybe. Much like todays UFC.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Btw i play almost exclusively historical mods. I currently play a self brewed fictional 1920s mod and this feature would be great as in the 1920s wrestling was almost like boxing in that wrestling promotions as we know them simply didn't exist. I just think this feature will do some weird things to modern games and adding what is essentially a second overness stat will end up causing extra headaches for mod makers. My $0.02 for what it's worth.</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>As I've suggested before, I'd really like to see main event "draw level" (similar to WMMA5) introduced in this next iteration of TEW. In theory, you could have 2 midcarders steal the show in a main event of a pay per view and get a great grade in TEW 16. With the draw of a main event in pre-booking, you would be locked into using main eventers at the top of the card. It would force you to book around a big draw's weakness and more difficult to spam great grades with great (albiet not over) workers.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> Here is the issue i see with this : It would great for historical mods since wrestling worked much more like the UFC, where the main event drew the house.</p><p> </p><p> Today though, the card is secondary to the brand. All in sold out without a single match being announced. Raw and Smackdown almost never announce matches ahead of time. Nevermind house shows.</p><p> </p><p> It used to be <strong>Bruno vs Stan the Man</strong> with hardly a mention of the promotion (watch championship weestling from the 70s and early 80s... WWF rarely is mentioned). Today it's <strong>WWE Presents...</strong> and the players are interchangeable.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="piccamo" data-cite="piccamo" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I would love to see an option to play in "owner mode" where you can set your own owner goals and have someone else doing the actual booking unless you decide to step in and meddle, even if it is just booking your bigger shows. You could even decide on a main booker for each TV show, kind of like how Smackdown is written by different people from RAW.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Oooh. I like this! This would also work for other feds we own, like developmental feds.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="skinsfan55" data-cite="skinsfan55" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>There's FOUR MAIN EVENTS!</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> <img alt="star_trek_four_lights.jpg" data-src="https://wwwimage-secure.cbsstatic.com/thumbnails/photos/770xh/star_trek_four_lights.jpg" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>