Croquemitaine

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="cooldude" data-cite="cooldude" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47567" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> also croquemitaine i am wondering - have you rendered on here before? i've not seen your name before now</p></div></blockquote><p> No renders. Before last week I'd only posted <a href="http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=546075" rel="external nofollow">logos, banners, and event graphics</a>.</p>

Thanks everyone. It's great to get some encouragement. Ursula Saez

Finally got a lighting setup I can live with, so here are updated renders of Team "Back-From-Excursion": Machiko Matsuda MAYA Bonus images: Machiko wants everyone to know that an alternate 5SSW logo is available while MAYA just wants to rep her favourite North American wrestling program.

Machiko Matsuda / MAYA

Here you go:

This one makes me want to play a mid-70's mod.

<p>Great stuff!</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Christian_Shane" data-cite="Christian_Shane" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48014" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> <img alt="edpJTdd.jpg" data-src="https://i.imgur.com/edpJTdd.jpg" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> <img alt="eR1DfqX.png" data-src="https://i.imgur.com/eR1DfqX.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> They say that if you stare at the side plates for too long, they will <em>devour your soul...</em></p>

As badly as I want this mod... stop working on it and play the damn game for a while! I say this selfishly because I believe the mod will be better the more playing time you get in before setting up the companies, broadcasters, and general worker balancing.

I'm with Duane here. Knight and Vessey are your best guys and anything that shines them up even more is good. Bloodstone's plan is okay if you see JJ as a future champion. I'm not high on Price and see him as a stopgap champion at best. I wouldn't waste this unique opportunity on him. Stones vs DeColts might be money now but it risks taking the spotlight off your current and future stars. You also devalue your top title if the championship feud gets overshadowed.

I "think" that the road agent report will specifically name a performer who "eats up" their opponent(s) in a match, so I don't think you're interpreting that correctly. Personally I get the "not following the script" ding when someone in the match has the Scatterbrained attribute. EDIT: Just looked at the match. I doubt Higa or Grunge have Scatterbrained so maybe you were right.

<p><p>T.G.I.F.W.F.!!!</p><p> </p><p></p><p> <span style="font-size:8px;">(Thank God It's Free Worker Friday)</span></p></p>

The actual logo is by the amazing Kamchatka. I just put it to good use.

My feelings exactly! I noticed from the first show that her matches got the worst ratings. I'm thinking you gave her the Scatterbrained attribute? I've found that one's a bigger drawback than it sounds like. I'm still getting an Aviator Agarwal t-shirt though. And I'm wearing a cap and goggles to the show.

The problem with the 25/75 split (and this applies to Sex Appeal too), is that it renders the actual stat almost meaningless. We might as well go back to the days when everyone was rated on Overness for everything*. In TEW2016 (and 2013 too, I think), the split was 60/40 in favour of Menace. This is what made Menace angles so effective. It doesn't bother me that the ratio got nerfed, but dropping from 60 to 25 is massive overkill, especially with the further penalty if the angle goes over 4 minutes and the new active/passive mechanics** The truth is that a big scary guy can pop a crowd even if he's unknown***. There's a limit to that, sure, but something like a 50/50 split (or even 40/60 to match the other angle ratings) would be enough to achieve realistic results. It would prevent a rookie monster from getting a meaningfully high angle rating in a national promotion, but allow them to be something special in an indy fed. * Yes, this is deliberate hyperbole. I understand that while it's true that a popular small guy will rate better in a Menace role than an unpopular big scary guy, it's also true that the popular small guy will rate even better on pure Overness so you'd be an idiot to book him to use Menace. ** I'm not a fan of the 4 minute penalty, but the active/passive mechanic is an excellent addition to the game. *** Actually, and this would be difficult to model in the game, a lot of these guys get their biggest pop when no one knows who they are. It's only after a few weeks when they get exposed as lumbering no-talent charisma-holes that the audience loses interest.

Thank you.

How is this nonsensical? - Company A keeps the worker they want. - Company B keeps the worker they want. - The worker continues to collect two paycheques (which they're presumably fine with or else they wouldn't have signed any of these deals). Win - win - win. If Company B really wants the worker all to themselves (or if Company A does after this loop has started), they can offer a non-exclusive that ends when the other company's does, then offer an exclusive when the 30-day window opens. Then both companies know the situation and can bid against each other. This benefits the worker, which is how it should be. Allowing a company to "slip in" an exclusive without letting the current employer attempt to outbid is the cheaty exploit.

It's not about my liking (I'd never play USPW ), it's about the largest company in the world not being able to run killer angles. If the audience only wants 4 minute angles, then 4 minute angles shouldn't be capped in that product*. Yes, I know penalties can be overcome and the top guys with the best skills and high momentum and various other bonuses can still get maxed out grades, but an SE company, any kind of SE company, lives and dies on angles, and they shouldn't have to be overcoming/compensating for penalties 100% of the time. It's highly unlikely that USPW would have attained the status it has while dealing with that kind of handicap. There's a concept in game design called "process vs effect" that says accurately modelling processes is meaningless if the final results create an undesired or inaccurate effect. So in this case, it may make sense that a casual entertainment audience (i.e. kids) can't follow long angles, and it may make sense that angles less than five/six minutes can't achieve the best reactions**, but if the final effect of modelling these processes is that your monster sports entertainment company is at a permanent disadvantage when running angles, then your system has failed***. * I don't think 4 minute angles should be capped in any product, but that's an argument for another day. ** Again, I don't agree with this, but for now it's how it is. *** In this case I'd say the system is conceptually sound but the execution has missed the mark. The product system is excessively restrictive and punitive, and many of the product definitions are creating unintended effects.

<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>In terms of actual length, I have seen that longer angles between talented workers tend to do better. USPW in particular are a little bit hamstrung (intentionally IMO) by their product. Their fans aren't interested in sitting through angles longer than 5 minutes, but angles shorter than 5 minutes struggle to get excellent ratings (though can still get very good ratings) - at least in my limited experience with them.<p> </p><p> There are two kinds of penalty related to angle length:</p><p> Fan attention span (the ADHD penalty, as I call it), ie, "the fans didn't want to see an angle this long". That's related to the product, and from what I've seen so far, the talent of the worker doesn't affect this. They won't want a 6 minute Rock promo and more than a 6 minute Dean Malenko promo.</p></div></blockquote><p> Here's my problem: What real world fan base is being simulated here? I can get why an all-workrate fanbase might not want to sit through a six minute promo*, but USPW is a Sports Entertainment company. What kind of SE fanbase is going to reject a six-minute Rock (or other popular+entertaining worker) promo?</p><p> </p><p> If the system results in USPW, the largest, most-successful Sports Entertainment company in the setting, struggling with angles, then maybe the system needs rethinking.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> * Well actually, I disagree with this. I think a six-minute interview or match preview segment would go down fine, but I acknowledge this is a difference of opinion.</p>

Product settings will always be useful because they serve as a template for the AI to book different companies in appropriate styles. Applied to players, however, they've been designed in far too restrictive a manner. Rather than serving as a guide or roadmap, they've feel very much like "stray out of this very narrow line and you will be punished!". As a general modification, I'd like to see less "this will be penalized" and more "this will be penalized unless it's good", particularly in regards to match and angle lengths being too long. We've seen in RL that fans have embraced long matches and angles when they're carried by strong performers, even in the Attitude era WWF (which ran a product that favours shorter matches and angles). Booking a segment that strays outside your core product definition should be a risk, but it shouldn't automatically fail. Audiences will often embrace something a little different or unexpected... if it's well-executed. It keeps shows from becoming stale and predictable. And from a gameplay point of view, it's simply more fun to be allowed to experiment a bit. I know we're constantly told that it's okay (and often required) to accept a few penalties when booking in TEW, but the game gives us no incentive to try things outside of whatever small box our product setting allows. If there's a penalty for booking a match longer than 25 minutes, we won't book one, even if the occasional 30-minute iron man match might make a great feud-ender and we've got the right workers to pull it off.

Yes, it's impossible to say how many people feel one way or the other about the UI. Nonetheless, the UI is objectively bad. If more of us aren't banging on about it, it's because: A) Enough people have already brought it up. No need to pile on. Adam is aware of the issues and whatever can be done will be done. and... B) The discourse about this demo, from all sides, has been rather unpleasant. Some of the complainers have been rude and insulting, and some of the demo's defenders have been rude and dismissive. A lot of us just don't want to get into it.

Damn you, Photobucket!!! *shakes fist at sky* I still have (and use) Luchador Canadiense's FCW events, although for some reason I edited them to use brown backgrounds (a task that I remember being more complicated than it sounds but that I can't remember why I wanted to do it). I could post them, but it's entering that grey area where I'm not sure if it's cool to post edits of someone's work without permission.

I get most of mine from a site called dafont. I can't find a link right now but I think it's easy to find. After that, I just futz with things pretty heavily in photoshop. Different filters, bevels, textures, fills, borders, etc. Sometimes I'll mix different fonts or font sizes, or stretch/morph words or parts of words, all in an effort to hide the fact that I keep using the same 12 fonts over and over again despite having hundreds to choose from.

Luchador Canadiense made one back in 2013. You can try the TEW2013 mod index to see if it's still available. If not, I can post it up here.

I love this. You could also add its negative counterpart: Enabler, or Bad Influence.

I always felt that low (or ignored) travel costs was the game compensating for the shallow talent pool. I mean, realistically I would never hire a guy from California to work my New York show if he wasn't a draw (and therefore worth the travel costs), but also realistically I wouldn't have to because there'd be thirty to fourty passable workers available in Tri-State. Since it's not practical for the game to run the thousands of extra characters you'd need to effectively populate every region, I think those of us who like running tiny startup feds will have to get used to the idea of creating 10-15 warm bodies in our home regions via the Quick Fill function.