Paul_Heyman_Guy

That is great. I did something similar in a USPW save back in 2010. They had just unretired the National title for the sole purpose of giving it to Peter Valentine, so I made the most of that by having him beat jobbers every single week until he was on the verge of breaking the record for longest National title reign and promising a big celebration when he did so, only for him to lose the title a week or two before. Then whoever beat him(usually Darryl Devine, who had the record he was trying to break) would merge it with the TV title and retire it, only for Valentine to bring it back again and repeat the process. Not a bad idea at all. It could work in any entertainment based promotion, and you could have either side being the face or heel with some minor tweaks. Kinda surprised the WWE hasn’t already done something like this…they would DEFINITELY make the nutritious side the heels. No, YOU would want to be the top champion and YOU wouldn’t aspire to be champion of the midcard, and that’s fine. But the world is a very diverse place, pro wrestling included, and people have a wide variety of aspirations. There’s lots of MMA fighters and boxers that care more about, say, entertaining their fans than winning a belt. Or fighting as often as possible. Or using their platform to spread a message. Nate Diaz and Jorge Masvidal once fought for the BMF title. Not to mention, the two most common uses for midcard titles mentioned here - youngsters who are on their way to the world title and career midcarders who probably won’t ever quite get there - both cover why someone would want to win the midcard title in their very description. Why wouldn’t somebody who aspires to be world champion want to win the midcard title as a stepping stone on their way up? Especially if that’s how it’s been used in the past and there’s a precedent. And why wouldn’t somebody who can’t win the world title go after a title that they can win? It’s more money, it’s guaranteed TV time. Maybe they don’t even want to deal with the pressure of being in the main event, or the media obligations that come with being the world champion, or having the target on their back with everybody gunning for them. Forget the hamburger thing, this is like somebody saying there should be no assistant coaches because everybody should only want to be a head coach. There should be no backups because everybody should want to be a starter. There should be no mom and pop corner stores because everybody should want to be an international chain store. There should be no employees because everybody should want to be the owner. There should be no Vice President because everybody should want to be President. If you’re running a promotion that treats wrestling like a legitimate sport, I kinda get it. If that’s the gimmick you want to go with, there’s only one title and that’s all that matters, cool, you do you. But the idea that nobody else should think differently is just silly.

I don't know if there will be another patch or if this is something that's easily doable in a patch but if there is and it is, for the love of god, PLEASE, give us the option to turn off fighter relocations. It completely ruins the immersion for me when so many Canadian men move to the British Isles, Europe, or Japan and so many American women move to Asia. There's a company able to sign them right where they are, they don't need to move at all and they definitely shouldn't be moving all the way across the world. I always edit them back to where they're supposed to be but that gets tiresome because it seems like more and more relocate as the game goes on, plus you keep doing the same fighters over and over unless you put them in the neighboring country. But there's not much you can do with the mediocre depth fighters who have no shot at being hired and shouldn't be moving, you just have to keep putting them back every time. I've been toying with the idea of putting a small company, restricted to low regional size, in every region as needed to prevent relocations, but I'm guessing that would probably cause unforeseen problems...

So far I’ve seen two different types of ads: rectangular ads that go almost all the way across the screen but aren’t very tall, and square ads that sit in the lower left corner and take up damn near a quarter of the screen. I can deal with the little rectangular ads, they’re barely noticeable and something I could get used to. But the square ones are extremely disruptive, they block all but the top two forums or subjects, and I’m definitely going to the ad free version if those stick around.

WWE knew The Rock was leaving after SummerSlam long before they knew he would be champion or who he’d be facing...hell, when The Rock signed on to film The Rundown(titled Helldorado at the time) that summer, Brock Lesnar hadn’t even debuted yet! That’s how much advanced notice they had. That’s why fans soured on him months beforehand, and that’s why they had Brock earn a title shot by winning KOTR.

As much as you may want to play the victim here, unfortunately, your previous posts are still available for us to read. You know, the one where you unilaterally declared “End of thread” because you personally didn’t see any value in it and considered it a waste of time? The only reason you didn’t do anything to stop people from having their say is because you have no ability to do so. All you can do is whine about how people owe you an apology for...what, exactly? Disagreeing with your opinion about the game? Having a conversation that you don’t see any value in? Calling you out for being rude? I do hope there comes a day when a more mature version of you thinks back to comments like this and cringes, and perhaps even feels the need to offer a sincere apology instead of this passive aggressive nonsense.

I specifically searched for your name hoping to see that you planned on converting your 2010 mod from TEW2016 to TEW2020! I really delved into the Cornellverse that year after getting my feet wet in 2008, having always played RW mods before that, and I ended up playing your TEW2016 mod more than the default database. So that definitely gets my vote!

<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="48957" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><a href="http://www.greydogsoftware.com/cornellverse/column_top10.html" rel="external nofollow">http://www.greydogsoftware.com/cornellverse/column_top10.html</a><p> </p><p> #5</p><p> </p><p> It's a shame Adam doesn't update the site anymore - although I guess I understand why as so much goes into the bios, and maybe he doesn't want to bog down players and diarists with too much 'lore'. But things like the above the Art Reed profile contributed so much to the characters way back when.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I’d pay extra just to have that site updated again. It added so much depth to things that are referenced in worker and company bios, like the “Jack Bruce, Man Under Peessure” storyline. I’d love to read about everything from what exactly happened in the SWF Election or the Commotion In The Ocean storylines back in TEW 2010, to more details how AAA and 4C went bankrupt in this version, not to mention the SWF scandal that saw Richard Eisen forced out, and everything in between.</p><p> </p><p> Marc DuBois and Nemesis were the first two names that came to mind for dark side of the ring episodes, and for a lesser name that nobody else has mentioned, Madman Boone could be on there.</p>

This. Also, you can stop companies from opening at inconvenient times by editing every company that’s not open yet to open in the far distant future instead of randomly before you start. If you decide it would be best for the game world for one of those companies to open sooner, you can change that with the in game editor.

I don’t know about anyone else but I’d love to see an entire journal exclusively about the database changes and why Adam did what he did. (Yes, I know he said he won’t spoil anything so this won’t happen.)

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hive" data-cite="Hive" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Wow, you simply can't accept being wrong. Are you by any chance a flat-earther?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That’s awfully arrogant for somebody who got something so factually wrong, despite being very well known and easy to research, in their last post.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hive" data-cite="Hive" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Nah that's not why McMahon could buy it. McMahon could buy it pure and simple because Fusion Media, whom together with Bischoff was poised to buy it, withdrew their offer. McMahon was then the only interested party left. He first bought the trademark and logo and afterwards the TV library, in two separate deals.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Everybody involved has openly discussed that aspect of the settlement multiple times. The fact that it gave Titan/WWF/WWE/Vince the right to match any bid on WCW if they were ever liquidated. Even if Fusion Media hadn’t withdrawn their offer, Vince could have(and would have) matched the offer and owned everything related to WCW. This is like responding to “the Earth orbits the sun” with “nah, that’s not it, the Earth goes in a big circle and the sun just so happens to be in the middle of it.”</p><p> </p><p> (Side note: that term of the settlement isn’t nearly as prescient as it may sound. While the lawsuit was filed in 1996, and WCW filed their own suit in 1998 that was also part of the settlement, it wasn’t settled until 2000, just a few months before they in fact went out of business. It wasn’t hard to see it coming as a possibility by that point.)</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="shawn michaels" data-cite="shawn michaels" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>No they didn't. They immediately tweaked the gimmick but WWE said that with what had been done and <strong>the implications they worked for WWE,</strong> the damage had already been done. It's in the lawsuit.<p> </p><p> Clearly they do not own just ring names, they own characters. (which is wrestling is pretty much what a gimmick is most of the time.) See TNA and Broken Matt as an example. WWE went with the woken version, but they did reach an agreement with TNA to buy the gimmick. Cause if they hadn't owned the gimmick, Vinnie Mac wouldn't even go near it. The fact that they later even got TNA footage handed to them is just another sign that it was probably a good deal for TNA as well.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> In the first paragraph, that was by far the most important part of the lawsuit. And the reason WCW had to pay WWE as part of the settlement. The gimmick stuff was secondary and likely didn’t play a huge role in the end result.</p><p> </p><p> As far as the Matt Hardy situation goes, that’s not my understanding of what happened. The agreement was between Impact and Matt Hardy, not the WWE. Matt himself became owner of all the Broken Matt Hardy and related trademarks, and in fact Impact immediately announced that they would give every current and former performer the right to use their Impact persona elsewhere after they leave. WWE paying to use Impact footage on select episodes of certain shows on their network is completely unrelated.</p>

<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>Perhaps TEW could lead the way in introducing a 13 month, 52 week calendar?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I was going to say the same thing. Another option would be to add a 5th week to four different months.</p>

<p>The ability to play as a child promotion was what I wanted most and the ability to block tape shows was second on my list. I can't think of anything else I want nearly as bad as those two. Just take my money now.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="christmas_ape" data-cite="christmas_ape" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I agree with the general consensus that these broadcasting changes sound great. Interested to hear people's opinion on this part though?<p> </p><p> To use a real life example, I believe NXT sometimes tapes an episode of it's weekly show BEFORE a PPV but airs it AFTER. Now I don't think this has ever happened but imagine they want to book Ciampa losing the title at the takeover but getting it back in a rematch the very next week. This seems plausible and certainly something I could imagine someone wanting to book. But under the system planned at the moment this would go down on record as Ciampa retaining his title on the weekly show but then losing it on the takeover that actually airs before. </p><p> </p><p> Now perhaps this is just an unavoidable issue or still preferable to the alternative of having title changes officially happen once the program is aired, I just can't off the top of my head think of a scenario where you would hold a show (with the intent of recording and broadcasting it a later date) and have an issue with the title changes not becoming official that night?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That would never happen. You'd have to have Gargano or whoever come out as champion and lose it to Ciampa, which would give away your plans to have Gargano win it at TakeOver. It would give away your plans either way if you have somebody come out with the title, but it'd be much more obvious if you had a new champion like that.</p><p> </p><p> I believe NXT almost always tapes the post TakeOver weekly shows immediately after TakeOver. I may be wrong here but I believe the only time NXT has taped post-TakeOver episodes before TakeOver was before TakeOver WarGame, only because they didn't want to do the weekly show in a double ring like they did the year before, and that was basically just a televised house show and IIRC didn't have any champions featured for that very reason.</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>The entry specifically says that references to technology that doesn't exist has been removed for the sake of immersion. Everything I've posited is a natural extension of that statement, which Adam made himself. But fine, I'll drop it, since apparently people are getting annoyed by speculation in a thread that's specifically about speculating on the nature of game features as Adam announces them.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> A+ trolling, bro. I was really hoping this would go on for at least another page. I can’t believe nobody pointed out that the entry specifically says “This doesn't change the functionality of the screen,” Maybe they all wanted you to keep going too?</p><p> </p><p> Anyway, I love this cosmetic change and I wish it could be patched into WMMA 5, especially since the default database is set in 2002.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Mammoth" data-cite="Mammoth" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I love TEW fans because they're so passionate, but you guys give me a headache sometimes. xD There are far too many ifs, buts and maybes to have such in-depth debates. All we get are a few lines/paragraphs about new features simply to hype that they're happening but we're all such pessimists that we make a judgement on them before seeing them in action. The fact is we (and that possibly includes Adam himself) don't know how it's going to work until the game is released. I love the fact that the game feels like something brand new this time around though, and I can't wait to get my hands on it.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> See also: wrestling fans in general.</p><p> </p><p> People talk about the current WWE storylines the same way and I think it’s an even more widespread problem than this. Or sports fans in general who overrract to every play or every game. Overreaction theater. Believe it or not, it’s possible to discuss what’s happened already while still acknowledging that there’s a lot of time left and things will change.</p>

I agree with everybody who's said that battles should be based on multiple factors, but I just wanted to add one thing: I don't think they should be determined at the end of the month every month. I'd like to see battles be more fluid, changing with every show held by any of the companies involved. The result would be the same for regional battles with companies that only have one show a month, but battles should be able to swing back and forth weekly when companies have weekly events or TV shows, IMO.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Adam Ryland" data-cite="Adam Ryland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think you're getting the wrong end of the stick - what I'm saying is that if people post their suggestions in this thread and don't bother with the suggestions forum then they're running the risk of their idea not being considered. That's why the journal post specifically asks people to post there, because I'll catch their post during one of my regular sweeps. If it's hidden away in this thread, chances are it's going to get lost amongst the chaos. I've edited my post to try and make that crystal clear.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That's not what you said the first time. For reference, here's the original version:</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Adam Ryland" data-cite="Adam Ryland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>As a general note, please could people <strong>stop posting their suggestions in this thread</strong> - we have an entire subforum dedicated to them.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> And here's the edited version:</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Adam Ryland" data-cite="Adam Ryland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>As a general note, please remember to post your suggestions in the Suggestions forum. If they're <strong>only</strong> in this thread, as some of you are doing, your idea runs the risk of being missed.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I added the emphasis to both in order to highlight the fact that this wasn't a clarification but a explicit change in what was being said.</p><p> </p><p> I've seen you tell people to choose their words more carefully and try to avoid being inflammatory or combative, rightfully so, and this is a good example of how your words matter too. Telling somebody that they misunderstood and you had to edit your post to "make it crystal clear" when, in fact, you completely changed what was said will rub people the wrong way and encourage others to speak to each other in the same tone, which will only lead to further problems. It's okay to acknowledge that you misspoke or changed your mind.</p>

Playable child companies! Day 1 of the journal and I'm already sold. Especially the fact that a human controlled child company can have a human controlled parent company, that was a very pleasant surprise.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GUINNC" data-cite="GUINNC" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44604" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>So, I've been having one night tournaments using the 2x5 with Decider round. Although I've had many fights where the Play by Play says we're tied up at 19-19, it always is a split decision where two judges give both rounds to one guy while the other judge to the other. Sometimes it makes no sense because one guys will clearly win round one and another will clearly win round two, but I've yet to see any 3rd rounds (nearly 20 fights with this setup). Anyone else had this issue or is this a possible bug?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I wonder if the game even allows draws in a one night tournament. (EDIT: I'm quite sure that it doesn't, since it doesn't allow you to use Automatic Draws in a one night tournament - it says a fighter must advance from each bracket.) It may be that the game is coded to prevent draws in a tournament by any means necessary and it doesn't recognize that it doesn't need to "cheat" the judging to prevent draws when there's a decider round. If that's the case, it could be an accidental oversight or a bug. Either way, you might want to post it in tech support to make sure Adam sees it.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Cornfed" data-cite="Cornfed" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44604" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Is there a way to set up companies in the Middle East? For example UAE, Israel? Jordan? I was trying to set up one to random debut in my save and couldn't figure a way to do so with the given options.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yes, just set them up in Western Asia. That's the Middle East minus Egypt, which is part of North Africa.</p>

Don't worry, it doesn't mean what everybody thinks it means. Apparently I can't post the picture, but if you actually look at the full advertisement...and not just the one little paragraph everybody is running with...it tells a different story. It is NOT saying that Rock vs. Cena will happen at WrestleMania 29, it is advertising The Rock vs. John Cena for the WWE Championship at the Royal Rumble. It is an advertisement for the Royal Rumble. There are no spoilers whatsoever, it is full of questions - "Will the Peoples Champ finally bring the WWE Championship home to Team Bring IT for the first time in over ten years?" "Who will add their name to the illustrious list of Royal Rumble winners this year, and will they have a date to go one on one with the great one, The Rock at WrestleMania 29?" This is consistent with every other PPV advertisement I could find - no other Royal Rumble DVD material gives away the winner of the match or mentions the WrestleMania main event that was set up. It says Rock and Cena facing off for the first (or fist) time since WrestleMania 28 is a "selling point" for the Royal Rumble. Then it has "The Rock vs. John Cena" and "WWE Championship" in big, bold letters at the bottom. No mention of WrestleMania 29, or Rock vs. Cena being set up at Royal Rumble. And nowhere does it mention CM Punk is the WWE Champion. So, people are definitely jumping the gun on this one. If you read the full text, it's pretty clear that when this was written they intended for John Cena to be the WWE Champion and defending it against The Rock at the Royal Rumble. This doesn't change anything vis a vie WrestleMania 29.