thadian

I love all of this. Personally, I would NEVER give creative control or wage matching. I would rather offer the largest size offer available then edit it in the editor. I would do anything to avoid paying that. I would extend the length in the editor to never have to renegotiate again if the game's biases tried to force me to include them. Not my kind of fun. As for Hogan, he pulled shenanigans almost every time - but there were a few times where he agreed to put over someone like Kidman. But when he came back, according to Eric Bischoff, they had to rewrite the main event and title scene several times and scrap all ongoing storylines to inject him into the picture, get him the belt, and persuade him to drop it on his way out before they could breathe again. I don't think he ever did put over Flair. One of my favorite aspects of TEW is "Promises", and I would like to see Promises have some value in contract - X days as champion, X main event victories on important shows. This is by far my favorite suggestion. While I would never offer a worker the ability to essentially ruin the fun of my game, I would love to offer a worker "Fine, you can work in X company/region", but I would love to say "Work for companies except" then either list Companies and Products. "May not work for Wrestling Nerd Nirvana companies" or "May not work for SWF, USPW, or TCW". I also like the idea of giving workers a limited buy-out creative control. If I really need someone to drop a title or put someone over, I would be happy to pay them - I normally pay them a big bonus before (or two) to keep their own moral up, hoping the job doesn't make them entirely hate me and destroy the locker room. I also like the idea to pay for medical bills. How about pay relocation costs too? The more ways we can pay them, the better. We all know we have too much money and better than nerfing everything, I would rather re-look at the ways we pay, the things we pay for, and roll with it. If I want someone difficult to job, I have to pay them or they won't consent. I also wonder if paying someone to take a job should add to negative locker room morale. At what point does everyone say "Hey, booker bro, I learned you're paying people to job now and I heard you want me to lose to this guy...", so I could see consequences for how we spend our money. Maybe a "company image" and the ability to donate to charity to improve it, hire/use toxic workers and using dirty tricks/screwjobs lowers it, etc. Anything that lets us have more ways to spend a money that's not a nerf in disguise is good. And the proposed contract revamp would really add a new depth to things. It would make planning easier - "I know that I am using Aaron Andrews for an 8 month title run with 3 main event victories. I also know he will remain available to TCW so I had better book around their workrate to get good matches and avoid injury and fatigue penalties. So that would be real fun. Heck, I would let my whole roster "work for anyone but SWF, USPW, TCW" and "may not work for Hardcore Products" I lastly wonder - could there be "May work X dates for Y company over Z period of time?" - I love the idea of specializing number of appearances, and this would give it a lot of value. I like that your tolerance system gives you a clue about how close a worker is to making a decision and gives you harder limits on wasting their time with skinchy offers.

I would also like it back, but maybe an option to hide it for people who don't want to see it. By the arguments against it, we should eliminate "Future Stars" because you will notice people gradually rising, some much faster than others and figure out for yourself who's good, right?

I strongly agree. I would also like Mass Edit options to search Contracts by Brand, which would make this feature more useful.

You can also book toxic talent on B-Shows to reduce the hit. It will hurt for a little bit, but you can overcome it. The real problem is when the toxic thing is gone and the deal runs out, everyone will be bidding his price so far up you might or might not be able to afford to keep him.

<p>Using real world databases doesn't reflect TEW very well, it's up to the mod maker who has what varied stats by their age.</p><p> </p><p> I will say Star Power should decline with age, as people stop caring after a while, once you get too old. Now, I can understand people like Jericho who hold on, and people like Undertaker who, despite star quality decline is still a Major Star. At some point, fans want you to hang the boots up and they don't want to see you do this anymore. Same with Charisma - at some point, your old man dad jokes aren't funny to the next generation, and some of your innocent comments might actually be offensive to some viewers. I know that I wish AEW had a younger and more culturally in touch broadcast team, to me it's one of their worst flaws.</p><p> </p><p> Microphone and Acting are tough ones. Jake the Snake has clearly moved from 90 Microphone to about 40. He still has about 80 acting I would guess, but his voice is finished. Even Goldberg loses his voice when he tried to get hyped and shout. I would say you never forget how to act, but you can lose your voice.</p><p> </p><p> Consistency and Selling is hard. On one hand, they don't have the physical ability to really flop and sell how they used to. And even with 100 basics, they "miss a step" with their age. The faster loss of consistency does a good job of balance here - you still have 80/90 technical, brawling, basics, psychology. It's the declines of Selling, Consistency, Charisma, and Star Power that threaten someone's late stage career the most.</p>

I would love this.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="LloydCross" data-cite="LloydCross" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51483" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I generally enjoy TEW when it feels more like a game than a spreadsheet. There was a lot that was neat about the way products were defined before but from my main perspective it always felt off that you were essentially micromanaging what fans would think of your shows. The new system feels more dynamic to me because there's more of a give and take. You get to provide a general sense of what you're aiming for but then the challenge is in front of you with whatever specifics that entails, both good and bad.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I feel the exact opposite. I felt that under the older system, I was playing a game, managing my roster, managing my company, and selecting a product that is conducive to my play style. The current products offer me very little, the only way any of them work is if I turn off half the options, which feels plain dirty - I should be allowed to decide for myself what angle-match length I want and shouldn't be pigeonholed into Match Aims that I dislike as "part of the compromise", or just turn it off to avoid the penalty for not booking the matches I don't want.</p><p> </p><p> This new system - to me, just feels like a spreadsheet manager. Your product gives you a specific formula of match aims, angle/match ratio AND lengths - at some point, you're really just running the same show every week with switched up match positions and competitors. It used to be that my focus was having fun and putting on good shows. Now my focus is lining up match aims with capable workers, and the Work/Fun balance has skewed much more toward work.</p><p> </p><p> I shouldn't have to disable 1/4 of the options just to make a product "less unappealing". I also knew up front that our suggestion products would NEVER be put in. Because we have to prove the value to the dev, and argue with other players about realism and balance. In the old system, you didn't have to validate your fun through others like this. </p><p> </p><p> So, I hope TEW2024 goes back to the old system, or just has a "Product Creator" in the editor.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Remianen" data-cite="Remianen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50543" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yeah and what makes it even better is that you can tweak it as patches come out and change things.<p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> You do know that if you're not happy with the challenge of the game, you can adjust it, yes? I think what would have even more value and would make for a more "realistic" challenge is a meddlesome owner that changes your entire card on the day of the show. Maybe just scrambles the card so what used to be your world title main event match now becomes your opening match and your nostalgia match in the middle of the card is now the main event. Tailor made for real world mods!</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Especially if the owner interfered with Pre-Booking plans.</p><p> </p><p> Or if the owner decided to yank someone out of an angle, or refuses to let a specific star lose a match. Or demands a specific champion or tag team. Owners should meddle more.</p>

<p>If I play a medium+ size company with good workers, I have no struggle at all, and wouldn't unless the game were changed in a way that very few people could. When I don't have a top row of stars, I struggle. If I don't have a broadcaster, I struggle a bit. If I have those two things, I don't.</p><p> </p><p> The first several months are pure profit - TV deals, contracts, etc. locked into place. Then it becomes more difficult as renewal times come up.</p><p> </p><p> As for making the game harder, there are enough AI Cheats. The AI can run the same match EVERY show and never get penalized. They can repeat the same card every week if they wanted to, just changing the winners/losers. And they don't even compete with each other on signings unless it's like Tyson Baine, Remo, or Rich Money or someone like that. No, they compete ONLY with you, and will empty the coffers for every midcarder you want.</p><p> </p><p> So, my question is this: How do you propose to make the game more difficult for us players, WITHOUT giving the AI another cheat? </p><p> </p><p> And how would the AI fare under a different idea? I want something that permits the AI to function correctly and run successful shows and products, with minimal use of AI Cheating. </p><p> </p><p> I think the problem is, if I am correct and I've been told this on these forums, that Popularity Caps are impacted by Charisma and Star Power. So just by putting people in Entertainment Angles, they will eventually surge - as they gain better Charisma, Star Power, Selling, and Psychology - those are the seemingly most important skills that determine quality and contract price.</p><p> </p><p> I think the caps should be slightly effected by Charisma and Star Power, but the impact should be reduced. I also think that whether Charisma and Star Power are really the best metrics for contract pricing and popularity gains. Or if the impact should be as much.</p><p> </p><p> This is why it would be better to let us use the In-Game Editor to set the Popularity Caps - just like we can set other things like Popularity itself, skills, or chemistry. While having Star Power and Charisma give less impact toward going over the cap. If you cap at 70, your Charisma and Star Power 80 should bring you to about 75. If both are 90, it should bring you to about 80? Top? Even at 100 both?</p><p> </p><p> Either way, if Popularity Caps are impacted (or raised above the destiny) by Star Power and Charisma, then we CAN change the cap in the editor, just by giving people 80 Charisma/Star Power, right? Instead, please get rid of this and just let us adjust the cap itself. I shouldn't have to worry about The Rock having a cap of 70, and I shouldn't have to worry that Joey Ryan will eventually be as major a star as The Rock just by working his Charisma and Star Power up.</p>

Absolutely amazing, even better than I expected. Thank you.

I love the women - especially the older/hideous ones. They immediately inspired half the history of my women's division. Same with the pudgy/fat ones. Wow. This is just amazing. I am glad to have these disaster piece warriors. It's a fresh take from all the pretty women. Your amazing collection has literally taken a world nearly void of women outside of promotions I feel guilty for raiding, and filled it with quite a rich history of women. Some with bright futures, others who had a great run. The mean mangled redheads I named Tracy Paxton and Bertha Braxton. I asked "What if Earthquake and Typhoon had the charisma, talent, and style of Da Crusher and Dick the Bruiser?", They proudly weigh in the 280-320lb range, are muscle hawks (husky/farmer fat, not Loch Ness fat), and they are the dominant women's tag champions of yesteryear. On the second row to the right, I dubbed Sylvia Murphy, the wrecking machine. She is 6'4 and is my Chyna. Mega Macy is the big husky redheaded black woman, and she advocates to destroy prettiness. On the bottom right of the same row, is Mean Geraldine, the women's champion of yesteryear and former bodybuilder. She is also my Combat Toyota/Bull Nakano figure, and her feuds with Sylvia Murphy are legend (so were their tag matches against the Badd Beast Women, Braxton and Paxton). I would hate to trouble you with a request. Surely you're familiar with Gorgon. A while back, there were two specific alts made of her. One featured her with a soviet jacket and feather-woven hair like a soviet general. I would like an update for it, and the other alt of her I am interested in has her almost looking like a gangster with a headband. No facepaint in either one. I renamed the alt Bjorga Voshenko and use her as the Charismatic leader of "Das Commune", of which we are all a must-pay member. Thanks for the many amazing renders.

Oh my god, beautiful!! They're so hideous, I love them. I will be adding them to the House of Krazies, where they will become the "muscle" members of my own favorite stable in my game. Someone uploaded a Krissy Angelie, Ekuma, and I don't remember the third, it wasn't Steel - but they were all in Joker type of red/white facepaint. They're essentially my top stable now, and these guys are going to be added right in. The only thing I would dare sully myself to ask, is for the unpainted versions because I like to give them all the "main boring guy" for use everywhere, followed by evil clown alt exclusive to the company. And please, PLEASE post your Okada. I have a version of him, too.

This is what I've been waiting for. Will it feature JCP, WCCW, and WWA? Edit - I know it will be a while. I still look forward to it as much as I did the release of TEW2020 when it was announced.

I do know that personalities can change, but I haven't seen it happen very often. I would like characters to have a few hallmark ages where traits change. 24, 32, and 40 seem like good ages to target. I would love to see the ability to select individual attributes for Hiring Bias. I agree it's horrible when an AI company or child company signs a bunch of bums who's attributes cause negative relationships and even spread other negative attributes around like the plague. I would think it would be easy to select a few attributes. I think the real reason we won't see this fix is two-fold: on one hand, if we choose too many hiring biases, the companies just won't hire anyone. And once in a while a Sumbag or Bully is also the best guy/gal you can get otherwise. It's okay to take this jerk. It's not quite okay when a company becomes loaded with 8-12 of them. The other reason would be that we can already change the unwanted attribute in the in-game editor. If I remember TEW2016 right, there was a "No Toxic Influence" bias of some kind. In this game, there are a few really bad personality traits that aren't classified such, so when you search for "not negative influences", you will find some of those traits.

I think they are in because without this, everyone would have 100% locker room morale and there would never be a negative incident. The game is chock full of great dudes, and it needs a few more jerks, so the new debuts achieve that. It also forces you to say "I really want a guy who can both do angles AND matches but... do I want an agitator? What's my locker room like? Yeah, I can handle a few agitators." I think if someone young has high skills, there's a good chance they're one of "those types" for a few years before they calm down, especially if they're aged between 18-24. Or if someone has an attribute like A Marketing Dream, Creative Dynamo, they might be an inch extra jerky and have an ego. Now, I agree with you - too many of the new dojo graduates are bad personality dorks. If I like their pic and name, I sign them, then fix their attribute problems and touch up their skills in the editor (I don't cheat them up in skills, but I bump up their Safety and Consistency to minimum 60).

Maybe this could be handled by a temporary attribute? Debut Heat - Worker gains a perception increase for their next angle or match (that is, their on screen return). - A "well-known" would be perceived as a "star" for that segment. - The attribute would be given to someone upon their debut, or a return following Time Off or Injury Leave of 60 days or more, or returning from Excursion. - The attribute would be lost after the first appearance. If they appear in an angle then a match, the bonus is used on the angle. So, for one moment only, they will be seen as more important than they are and it will allow them to be booked up one notch for that appearance. Didn't TEW13 or TEW16 have a debut feature? Maybe I am wrong, but I think I remember at least the flavor text "_______ is waiting to debut" followed by "_________ debuted with....." something something overness/heat/something. The only way to get a good debut pop right now: 1. Stick the new guy in a Hot Storyline as a Major Role, aligned with The Rock (or whoever The Rock of your company is). 2. The Rock cuts an Entertainment rated Freestyle, 6 minutes. 3. The new guys is rated on Entertainment or Fighting. Anything else will cause a bad angle rating for being 6 minutes. Pick his highest, he shouldn't tank the angle even if he's got a 55. 4. Put in the rival. Rate on Entertainment, Fighting, or Selling. "Defeat". Rock - not succeed or fail. Debut - Major Success. Rock's Rival - Defeat. So long as both The Rock and his rival are able to generate a 90-something angle, your jobber won't really tank things just by being there. If he does, you can just "Not Rated" him and still give him Major Success. This helps him get Storyline Heat. At end of show, check his Storyline Heat, and if it's good, remove him from the angle to give him a small momentum bump. Result: His debut was introduced by The Rock. He gained some heat from storyline, then preferably tag up with The Rock in a 2v1 Handicap where Rock wins and Open Match. Hopping out of the storyline gives him a Momentum Increase, and now his return debut has been a success. It won't last forever, as momentum can be fickle, but he's on to a good start.

One thing I did without knowing otherwise (I used database before game) was set my broadcaster to Terrestrial Subscription. I since fixed it to Internet Subscription. I make a lot less money and a lot less views but I feel much better about myself. I was getting a stupid amount of views. Since we can only use 4 minute Menace angles but angles have to be 6 minutes AND be rated either on Fighting or Entertainment, I give my monsters Charisma, Microphone, and Acting 75 and just run 6 minute Entertainment angles instead. Menace, Sex Appeal, Star Power, and Charisma are only 4 minute angles, and are not good to rate 6 minute angles on. Fighting in angles isn't such a great idea, I've had people get injured or fatigued. Selling is useful if you have someone good at it. With this knowledge - if my top guys momentum starts to tank, I create an Angle, 6 minutes, 3 way storyline. I set the one with best momentum to "Defeat" and the other two to "Major Victory" and rate everyone on entertainment. This really helps save momentum or build it if you lose it. You can stick in several lower rank guys who are also in storylines, rated on entertainment, and pick one "Defeat" and one "Major Victory". They won't really tank the angle rating that much by being there. I've still gotten 80+ rated angles. If I have someone with dead momentum or someone falls in status who I need higher up, I use 2v1 Handicap Matches where they and a Major Star beat another Major Star. I set managers to "Major Role" in storylines so their Entertainment angles can advance Storylines and provide heat. I have a few managers who are the leader of their stable, so their entertainment angle Major Victories give the stable nuclear heat. If someone's momentum tanks, I make them successful in their storylines then yank them out and put them back in for a momentum boost.

I would be tempted to say - "You must win the Primary, Secondary, and Tag title of all three brands". Normally, it would mean three singles titles, and the tag team (four titles). And most companies don't have more than 3 singles titles. WWE does have the WWE, Universal, IC, US, and 24/7. But would Randy be denied Grand Slam because he wasn't a 24/7 champion? Probably not. The more titles a company has, the more convoluted it gets. In NJPW, are you a Grand Slammer if you haven't won the Jr Heavyweight and Openweight Trios? If there are Weight Splits, I would say you must have every championship you can legally compete for. So a Lightweight can be Grand Slam without the Heavyweight Championship, and vice versa with a Giant. In my promotion, I have a Men's Brand, a Women's Brand - both equal. Then, I have a reserve developmental brand, and I keep my World Titles branded but my Secondary titles unbranded. I also keep my Tag and Trios titles unbranded. My title arrangements are: Brand 1: World - Primary Brand 2: Women's World - Primary Brand 3: Futureshock - Tertiary Women's Futureshock - Tertiary (As a reminder, this is an extension of Futureshock, my developmental company. I have two other child companies, Valkyries and Warriors, but they are real companies and Futureshock is blatantly a farm system). Unbranded: World Tag - Primary Intercontinental - Secondary Trios - Secondary - Rampage Royale Diamond in the Bank (There is a Men's and a Women's version of each) So - in my company, nobody is expected to go to the Reserve Brand unless they're coming from developmental. So you don't need the Futureshock title to be a Grand Slam. But if I gave them a Primary title, you would have to win it to become a Grand Slammer.

MY 1.18 has No Style to 15 minute matches. Doesn't yours? My Three Ring has 10 minutes.

https://tewdb.com/img1036.htm

I took some of the free agents and signed them to my developmental companies in the pre-game editor so that I don't have to spend the clicks to sign them. I restart a LOT, mostly out of testing, and can't be bothered to re-sign them. I bid on stars I don't want then withdraw just to leave the AI with a bunch of crud jobbers who each make 20k/mo with 20% event and 40% merch. I am trying to stop this, but I've learned if I don't, then the AI swims in gold and spite bids me on everyone I want. If I do, the AI bleeds money, stops spite bidding against me on everyone I try to sign, and even releases a few people. I've seen USPW, SWF, and TCW go bankrupt from these tactics. They only work for one reason - the AI doesn't bargain with its own interest in mind. It only seems to bargain in a way that forces (or tries to force) you to give veto power, wage matching, creative control, and percentage of events. So it's easy to stick the AI with these bad contracts.

The problem is, the AI spite bids against the player. Their negotiation strategy seems entirely aimed at trying to force the player into bleeding out 20%+ events, 40%+ merch, creative control, and wage matching. Nobody would give these out unless they were forced to, so the game spite bids against you to basically try to make you, so you either don't get the guy or get the guy on really awful terms. It's just a fake difficulty mechanism. The companies don't even negotiate for their own self-interests: I've bankrupted the big companies just by waiting for their contracts to come up, bid up, they offer 20% events, 40% merch, over 15k/month for midcarders, then I withdraw my offer. Wash, Rinse, Repeat over a period of 2-3 years, and the AI companies will all collapse. Because they're not negotiating to improve themselves, they don't even really bid against each other unless it's someone like Remo, Tyson Baine, Rocky Golden, Nicky Champion, Rick Law, Rich Money... Outside of the top top stars in the world, the AI only really gets serious when it bids against you, the player. So if you want, you can take advantage of this by bidding the guys up to force the AI to really pay, then withdraw the offer and cackle as you inject the poison into their veins. When they're paying everyone Creative Control, giving every jobber 20k/mo and 40% merch, and their bigger stars ALL get creative control, wage matching, and like 30%-40% of events, the AI won't be able to stay afloat no matter how many millions it has in reserves. It takes a few years to kill their companies, but it's easy. I wish the AI Negotiations didn't feel like a gamey system of fake difficulty. It forces me to use the above technique with the hope the AI will begin collapsing and discontinue offering such generosities to unsigned well-known and recognizables just because I placed a bid. Most of the time when they start bleeding money, they stop signing people and even release some people. And that's when I finally get to sign some people. One final note: Many of the best potential stars to start a company with are in COTT, and if I am right, 2 of the companies (MAW, RIPW?) are affiliated with the bigger companies. So if you bid on their handshake development workers or workers the company signed on its own, then of course the AI should ask "Do I want to lose this person" and play hard to protect their roster's future. I've also noticed when I just offer 3 years for 6k/mo, and nothing from events, I usually get the worker, and don't usually get outbid, and if I do, I change strategy into forcing the AI to increase the percentage of events then withdraw.

I limit my longest show to 4 hours, with 3 brands and over 100 stars. I use a 30 Person Battle Royale, a 2v2v2v2, a 3v3v3, and that gets 47 of my workers booked within the time frame. One of my brands is women, and they get a battle royale, too. That's another 30, bringing it to 77 workers booked with 4 matches. I also use angles to feature the remaining folks for a few minutes to get their face on the screen and appease their morale. I don't book pre or post show anything for The Big Four, but I do for my other PPVs. Sometimes, I have a storyline participant "at ringside" and follow the match with a post-match brawl between both opponents and the person at ringside, then have 4 others come down to "break it up". So I am able to fit them all on in a reasonable time. My product doesn't like matches under 10 minutes at the moment, but here's the thing - only 2 of my matches need a score above 80. The small penalty on the other matches doesn't really hurt me, rather it helps me by restraining the popularity growth of my workers. If I want someone to gain more pop from a match, I book it 15 minutes. If I just want to get their momentum up and keep them in their perception lane, I give them 8-12 minute matches. So I don't mind the overuse penalty. I normally run between 3 hour PPV events, and 2.5 hour weekly shows on Mon, Wed, Fri (with events on Sat, however my Fri brand has events on Sun to give one more day of fatigue recovery). I wanted to do Tue, Wed, Thur, but that became too much work. I feel burned out after watching anything beyond the 2 hour mark. PPVs are strenuous for me. Same with UFC. I just can't watch 3 hours of anything any more without wanting to just do something else instead. I can bring myself to do it, but then I am oversaturated for about a month. So I leave burnout on. Because most of my PPVs are one brand, 3 hours is enough to cover everything. I have 4 unbranded "Big Four", one the season finale in August. I rotate - Brand 1 PPV, Brand 2 PPV, Brand 3 PPV, then All Brand PPV, then repeat. Last advice - this is a game of tradeoffs where you ask "What stack of penalties will help me gain a bigger stack of bonuses?", if you turn on Dirt Sheet and alleeingi you will see just how many penalties you really get and how many bonuses you really get, and you learn not to sweat it too much. I don't turn them on anymore, because now that I have a feel of how to get better ratings in most situations, or at least the ratings I want, the penalties don't bother me anymore unless they either tank my whole show or tank an important match. As long as your final show grade is above 80, you're not losing popularity in any region, even if you aren't gaining any. Best of luck - the biggest area I see the overuse penalty harming someone is if you plan to block tape 3 Hour Shows or run a Mega PPV and insist on a massive length. In these cases, you can turn it off the day before, then turn it on the next day after the event. Some people might call it cheating, but I call it playing within your narrative and choosing the rule set that fits your game the best.

<p>I like the change to 2020 because Child Companies no longer sign low-safety or bad personality dorks who ruin shows and maybe even drift bad attributes and create negative situations upon your future stars.</p><p> Since we can't set the "don't hire" filter to bias against specific attributes...</p><p> </p><p> The one thing I don't like is that people seem to rise in popularity way above their skill, too quickly, and complain about being there. Road Agents complain about being there.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TheChef" data-cite="TheChef" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51368" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yeah, this is a big issue in the game in general, that the AI waits until you bid. I've seen so many guys re-sign with their company because no one else bids, yet as soon as I bid for that guy, everyone is in for them. Surely the predator AI can respond to other AI bids as well as the users'?<p> </p><p> Another issue is that the wage demands are always based off the workers' pop, so well-known workers that are unemployed are often too expensive for indy companies. Also, if they're not working, their pop never moves so their wage demands never drop. Perhaps there should be some way of their wage demands dropping the longer they are unemployed?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Being objective, the one upside is that it makes it easier for COTT to stay alive unless the player kills it through mass raids. If the AI behaved in the way that it would pick up Gallows and Anderson, then in the C-Verse, why wouldn't the same AI behavior cause the various big league AI companies just loot the whole of COTT and stick 'em all into developmental? Maybe try to takeover an unowned COTT company and get in on that action?</p><p> </p><p> I suppose if the AI did all these things, that would restrain the player from running fun COTT (or NWA) games. I also don't think Gallows/Anderson should be rushing off to join just any company - they're paid, they don't need to work for some Little League Rasslin', Inc. for a few hot dogs, no nachos. They should be content to remain unemployed.</p><p> </p><p> One thing I notice is in the real world (I hate those words!) companies pay attention to the internet and if they know there is a sect of fans invested in a few stars, they will try to get them. And sometimes, a star might shy away from a smaller company even if it makes a bigger offer.</p><p> </p><p> I also imagine the CM Punk/AEW negotiations going something like (forgive me) </p><p> <strong>Punk:</strong> "I want 6 million."</p><p> <strong>Kahn:</strong> "You made 4 million in WWE!" </p><p> <strong>Punk:</strong> "You're small and I would lose value jobbing to your nobodies. You need me more than I need you, and any deal reached does more for you than it does for me. I can take your light schedule. Give me 6 million, creative control, 50% merchandise, wage matching, and I'm in." </p><p> </p><p> Eric Bischoff described dealing with Hogan in WCW negotiations this way - Hogan knew the size of the fish vs size of the pond, and protected himself from being devalued, and ensured he would always be the top guy when he was around. So, even if a company makes an offer a worker would accept - if the worker fears jobbing there might damage them, for example because the popularity caps of the company will not be good for their personal growth, they should have a much higher asking price. Not all workers are Machiavelli, but some are.</p><p> </p><p> Maybe there should be an attribute (or series) that causes workers to prefer companies based on Company Size. Not everyone wants to be on the biggest stage, some people would much rather work in smaller arenas. Not everyone wants the deep road travel life, some just want to show up 1-2 times a week, get paid, and go back to their family for the rest of the week.</p>