DomNWO
-
Posts
100 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by DomNWO
-
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Poputt" data-cite="Poputt" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Nah. You can push someone higher than recommended in TEW. That is what the WWE is doing with their women's division. They're artificially taking spots from male wrestlers who are more over. Would any WWE viewer say Charlotte or Sasha Banks if you asked them who they'd like to see in a HIAC match?<p> </p><p> I think AJ Lee is the only woman wrestler who naturally made it to that midcard+ level based on her popularity. Bayley might make it if she drops the Eugene gimmick.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I mean, Charlotte is one of the only reasons I like Raw right now, and I doubt I'm the only person out there that likes the women more than most of the men. Like I said before, these stats are opinion based, and if Fleisch thinks the women shouldn't be rated high, it's his opinion. At this point, since it seems I'm the only one that wants it (at least to this extent) I'll just do it in future saves I do and let things be.</p>
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> I can only guess at the differences, but perhaps it's that I used the Eye Candy match aim?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'd say it's unrealistic to use the eye candy to get a better match rating, as it isn't used as a thing in the real life product. A Bayley/Dana match got a D+ for me without that aim.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Understood. I'm just asking what sort of rating you think they should get and trying to work out whether it's the database or the booking that explains the gap between expectation and result.</div></blockquote><p> I figured the top women (4 Horsewomen) should be at around an upper midcarder level (so around a C-/C. I said B but I did not realize that was main event level in the mod, my bad), but that could be a bit high (even though that reflects their status in real life). Fleisch's 10 point pop suggesting seems fine. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>edit: Just took a look at Sasha/Charlotte. Perversely, it didn't rate as well as Bayley/Dana. Bayley/Charlotte wasn't as good, either. In both cases, the "better" matches were being brought down by lack of psychology. Matches between Emmalina and Bayley seem to be the best-rated women's matches on RAW, because both have good psychology. I leave it up to people more interested in WWE's product to decide whether that's how it should be or not, but if an adjustment needs to be made I recommend altering the performance skills rather than overness.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That would be fine too, probably. I'd tweak both to get realistic pop. ratings and performance skills but that's just me.</p><p> </p><p> Even if this stuff isn't implemented, thank you for working with me to help and try to fix this small issue:D</p>
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>How good a performance do you want from them? I don't have any real interest in booking WWE, but I threw together a RAW show on a fresh save and a ten minute Bayley vs. Dana Brooke match pulled a 68. (Bayley carried it with 72 to Dana's 58 and it got a short time limit). That looks like Upper Midcard vs. Lower Midcard numbers to me...</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It would depend on the person. (All stats come down to personal opinion) Sasha/Charlotte (even though done 15 thousand times) can still put on great matches, and they should be able to get a higher rating than by default. A match like you suggested has a suitable rating, but from what I've seen, that's not the norm. Once again, none of this <em>has</em> to be implemented or anything, as people have different opinions on how good the women are. If you don't enjoy the women then why would you wanted rated high, right? I have them rated the way I prefer to be rated already. I've just been suggesting at least some form of popularity change for the next release.</p>
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Fleisch" data-cite="Fleisch" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Don't be so sensitive. The joke was not aimed at anyone's suggestion but more the notion that there are people out there who genuinely believe Sasha and Charlotte are legit main event stars selling out arenas. A B is not the most ridiculous request I've had for the women believe me.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I understand that B may be high, but at least put them at a level where they're capable of putting on good matches in WWE's pop. based environment. In the scheme of things the top women are at least midcarders for WWE, so their pop should reflect that.</p>
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Gungner" data-cite="Gungner" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Why include people who have left the business (like Punk and Christian), who you can't sign to any role? Is it purely so they can be added to a HOF?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well they're probably in there because TEW sometimes randomly puts them back into the business, and also so that people who want to use them can without having to make or import them.</p>
-
The women in WWE are not "too low" in popularity, whether they are trying to ram it down our throats or not, I (and millions of others) do not switch on Raw for Charlotte Flair or Sasha Banks (I do watch Smackdown on occasion for Becky Lynch though
). Charlotte vs. Sasha - Part 948576876985 in the main event just means I can switch Raw off sooner because I couldn't care less about either of them.Here's the scenario that may not have even been thought of because again "WWE focused" means you don't even contemplate the bigger picture of the mod. I give them B's, This makes them UM/ME's which they are not. To balance that change, I then have to give the likes of Kevin Owens and Seth Rollins A's, people such as The New Day B+'s and John Cena A* which then destroys the integrity and balance of the mod because I then have to boost all the midcarders to at least B's (because that's about where Charlotte & Sasha fall) and thus anyone released by WWE from the midcard will then not sign for any indy promotions because they are too small for them. It then also means I have to boost a lot of indy talent so if someone wants to bring them into WWE and not just be enhancement talents based on this new world "balance". It's at that point I re-name the mod the "WWE Universe" and stop releasing RWC to the general public. It's in the first page - this is not a WWE mod. The women put on good enough matches in the game, they are balanced into the game world and their popularity reflects the position WWE REALLY see's them, they are not Main Eventers, they are a gimmick which WWE are using to try to get more women to watch the product and get away from the "divas" reputation they built up. I'm willing to boost each by 5 points, 10 at a push but I'm not almost doubling their current popularity because I guarantee you in a few months I'll get the "why are the women so popular!?!" questions. By the way, I realise this may come off as a rant, it's not meant to, I'm just in a rush so needed to get my thoughts on the subject down quickly - tact will have to go out the window at the minute!
With regards to the WWE UK Championship, while all good ideas have been given, it turns the mod into something of a fantasy mod and not real world at all. Obviously if people want to set their games up in this way that is fine but adding in additional promotions in this way again makes the data more a WWE game than a Real World game, and while I appreciate most people only play as WWE, (I don't) and I'm apprehensive in playing a mod that is tailored so heavily to WWE. Who knows though, I may change my mind as I'm going along. I don't do well at committing to things I've said!
I get your point. On the grand scale, it doesn't really make much sense to implement it in and such. It's just with WWE's popularity oriented match ratings makes it hard to get the match ratings that the women (IMO) deserve. But hey, I understand your reasoning as to why you didn't want to up them, though.
-
<p>Ratings for the WWE Women</p><p> </p><p>
For the next update it would be cool if you could update the women's popularity in WWE. Seems like a lot of them are too low. I'd think since women are main eventing (and generally getting more attention) that their popularity should show this. For reference I put The Horsewomen at around a B (puts them at around upper midcarder/main event iirc).</p>
-
I'm PM you the full list when I have everyone!
-
Yeah I didn't see any. I added some for the NOAH, NJPW, and a few WWE guys.
-
Quick question: Have you added loyalties for workers, particularly in Japan? It's not a huge deal, but it's a bit un-realistic if Nakamura is on a PPA with New Japan and can be signed by WWE. I noticed loyalties were missing from some guys in NJPW/NOAH but there probably be more added in other places too.
-
<p>So I'm now in September of 98', and I'm doing well. WCW fell to cult after consistently putting on B shows, and I'm not on top. </p><p> </p><p>
So there's good news and bad news:</p><p> </p><p>
Good news, I got Kurt Angle from my dojo. He's already being pushed at a main eventer (suggested by the game to be an Upper Midcarder). Edge is also emerging as a good midcarder and is Bret Hart's protege, which is great for Edge.</p><p> </p><p>
Bad news is that Shawn is leaving. He handed in his notice after I sent him to rehab. I have the talent to not miss him but I'm worried that WCW will get back to national on his back. Only thing I can hope for is that his signing makes to locker room implode.</p>
-
So I've been going through a WWF Montreal Prelude save. I added another monthly PPV to increase profits: Saturday Night's Main Event. I unintentionally made what I think may be my best PPV since I started playing TEW, with Rock/HHH vs Mankind/Austin getting a 97.
-
Can't wait for this mod! I converted your TEW 13 mod and got through a couple of months in it, but decided I needed to wait for this one. Good luck!
). Charlotte vs. Sasha - Part 948576876985 in the main event just means I can switch Raw off sooner because I couldn't care less about either of them.
Mods By Fleisch
in Total Extreme Wrestling 2016 Mods
Posted