LloydCross
-
Posts
425 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by LloydCross
-
-
Murder Hornet Underground
-
You can negotiate to a lesser timeslot whenever you want and get a lower minimum requirement. I don't see any advantage to having the broadcaster come to you to offer something you can already do yourself.
If you chose to gamble on not doing that and stick with your existing time slot then I don't think you can legitimately grumble at then getting caught out. That is the nature of the gamble you took.
Maybe the e-mail the OP mentioned could point you towards that option. I've never done a big enough TV deal to have ratings be a concern so maybe it already does.
-
To a large extent this is literally what the current morale system is. You can give them any/all of those things and it might restore their morale over time.
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="siege102" data-cite="siege102" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51595" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>That's good to know thanks. My other question is... you say they gain momentum but would they lose popularity/overness because the rating of the actual match is low? If the answer is yes, then that is sort of reason not to run them. If not, then that's fine/ <p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I guess if they are already really over (like 90s popularity) and you book them in a really atrocious squash match (weird notes and bad crowd management) and pick a jobber who is so bad they fail toe execute even the short match then maybe you get a low enough rating to at least not help them or slightly hurt. But why would you do that?</p>
-
American here. We print our calendars with weeks going Sunday to Saturday, which doesn't necessarily make much sense given that we still call Saturday and Sunday the "weekend." I never really thought much about that aspect of the game calendar before.
This thread got me thinking though, and I found this website that shows the calendar formatted for whatever country you pick. Whether calendars are printed with weeks starting Sunday or Monday appears to largely go by hemisphere, with North and South America mostly starting with Sunday, while Europe and Africa seem to mostly start with Monday. Asia is a bit all over the place (e.g. China, Taiwan, both Koreas go with Monday while Japan, India, Singapore go with Sunday). Also Australia goes with Monday while New Zealand goes with Sunday.
-
I saw a mod have this in it once. It's really just strip finish with the highest content risk.
-
That's great and everything, but the thing is you would get way better ratings if you just used 'regular' for all three matches.
The overall average rating yes, but the Main Event in that example would probably get a worse score as Regular compared to Spectacle. Given that the match portion of your show rating is pretty much going to depend on at most the top 3 matches (there might be one formula that's the straight linear average), you can get a higher overall score by properly utilizing crowd management to maximize the biggest matches with a little sacrifice to the supporting ones. Making everything Regular aim does the opposite and sacrifices potential ratings for the matches that determine the show score in order to maximizes the less relevant matches.
For a concrete example, if you book something like:
1) Regular
- Angle
2) Wild Brawl
3) Calm Crowd
4) Regular
- Angle
5) Steal the Show
6) Calm Crowd
- Angle
7) Spectacle
You maximize the potential score of matches 2, 5, and 7 (assuming you put appropriate talent in those matches) by limiting the scores of matches 3 and 6.
-
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.
-
I haven't used much in the way of time limited contracts in 2020 yet, but in 2016 at least if there was a positive relationship they seemed almost guaranteed to step in and do that. I never really got the feel for what caused it in neutral circumstances.
-
Read the burnout section of the handbook. it's strictly the length of the show, not too many exciting matches in a row (that's something else and I'm not sure what it's crowd).
-
Thanks. I have loads of spare cash as I have a decent PPV deal in the UK. However as I am a popularity based fed I will need to be very careful in my USA bookings.
I have had an issue when toured over there in a region of the USA that I am unknown in. I headlined with Roddy Piper and Owen Hart ( My 2 biggest names in both the UK and USA) However the attendance was only 64 and therefore lost me popularity in all of my story lines.
Something you can do to slowly build some baseline popularity is run Lesser type events in the area (or maybe just one region) with skeleton crews (like maybe an hour long show with 3 plain singles/tag matches and a couple angles). Since your current pop is so low, it should be easy to surpass the limitations of Lesser events on pop growth and nobody will care if you don't book them. Straight up eat the penalty for not advancing storylines and just make sure to advance all of them on the shows previous and following.
It'll be a pretty slow build, but if you have a way to broadcast some of your good shows there as well (self-owned PPV network is still very helpful for this) it adds up over time.
-
I always kind of headcannoned the initial gimmick rating as sort of the debut heat. From a Great/Legendary rating being a well-received to iconic appearance to something Awful being like a Shockmaster type disaster.
-
I guess this is still new enough that what works and doesn't work is still being discovered, but I'd argue not having announcers (and in a lot of cases not having anything remotely coherent to narrate even if they were there) has added quite a bit of awkwardness to all the ones I've seen.
-
This could be kind of cool for indies where an actual mechanic could get the AI to have this person defend their fake title in another company. Within one company, like the Internet Title, it seems like an angle pretty much covers anything interesting I can think of to do with it given that it inherently has no official lineage or prestige.
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="thadian" data-cite="thadian" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51367" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> 4. When I have a very disproportionate skill difference between two people, such as Undertaker vs Giant Gonzalas. You can't make Gonzalas perform better, but Undertaker can control the situation and tone down his own work rate to match his opponent.</p><p> </p><p> I will reflect on the Boxing Match with Mr. T vs Roddy Piper. What was supposed to happen, is Mr. T comes out looking as good as Wladimir Klitschko. What actually happened is, Piper (without meaning to), made Mr. T look really bad. T got chumped and looked defenseless, and Piper would fall down and open himself up for good shots but T didn't recognize them. Piper had boxing experience and T didn't. </p><p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think for this one you've conflated Open Match with notes like Protect, Keep it Simple, and Script Match that are designed to hide flaws. Which is a bit weird since in describing the last example with Hager/Evans you kind of switched back to Open match being about the kayfabe portrayal.</p>
-
Taping two at once is great, although my show is 90 minutes long so I can't have a pre-show without burning the crowd out by the second main event.
Three 60 minute shows with no pre-shows would be the same situation. Going towards 4 hours of taping seems like it would really start to become a problem.
-
2 I think Respect & Psychology are what you want, but I could be mistaken.
Experience also
-
Based on the Breach of Contract part of the handbook under Broadcasting & Media, I would guess a broadcast deal ended before the promised number of episodes was reached.
-
Have you actually seen a case in the game where someone on a $20 per show deal was selling enough company merch to have the percentage actually be something significant? I've noticed that by the time their pop (and the company merchandise level) are high enough for this to be a lot they have had a pretty large number of pay raises. There is kind of a gap where you have someone on a pretty high paying per show handshake deal because they're super over but they still have the 10% merch cut because they can't ask for merch cut raises, only pay.
I do agree in general that contract negotiations could be more give and take and merchandise cut seems like a great place for improvements. The percentages requested do seem lower than I would have expected.
Merch cut increases in the same vein as pay raises for handshake deals might be a nice touch as well.
-
50 isn't really that many for active wrestlers. I'm pushing 60 on my European company and it's not too much of a problem with a weekly show and two events (one in UK and one in Europe) each month. Maybe be on the lookout for guys to work out of the roster in the short/medium term, but breaking up a roster that size doesn't seem particularly necessary. I don't think a child company would help you at all unless you just really want one. Maybe you could find some way to benefit from a brand split, but I'm not sure what that would be.
Assuming most of your roster is popular in UK + Europe and has little to no popularity in the USA and the Americans you brought in are popular there and mostly not in UK + Europe, this reminds me of the situation someone brought up in Small Questions a few days ago.
Your workers from the USA count as unimportant in your company. They'll trigger the unimportant worker note if booked against each other, but I've noticed it's not that bad, especially for a card filler match that's more aimed at getting the people over rather than making the show rating.
It has some advantages in that they'll be happy to put over someone who is a Major Star on your roster but doesn't have pop in America yet even at a show in America. Also, if pop affects match ratings in your product at all, he can get star-level ratings in a match that takes place in America and if you broadcast the event back home it helps them get over pretty quick.
My advice: Use your Americans in pre-show matches at home to build some momentum and the baseline popularity, then have them fight each other in your American shows and broadcast them wherever you can. Give most/all wins to the ones you want to keep long term and then have a couple others eventually job to your main workers that you want to get over in America.
-
In 2016 it seemed like it always gave the match rating a boost (and the dirt sheet generally looked like it was trying to confirm this with "well booked" note). The dirt sheet note is gone in 2020, and it at least seems like it might not be broken in that way anymore.
I think if a less popular worker is going over someone more popular cleanly, the open match note might actually make the loser's pop drop more since they would have been expected to get more than half of the offense in probably. I haven't tried it enough to really know, but a couple times it looked like that might have happened so I have stopped putting Open Match in that situation.
-
I don't see the tournament ranking scoreboards with a payoff.
I don't see how you draw your conclusion whatsoever. By your logic, turning off natural growth or lessening it is cheating. Creating a new worker is cheating unless it's 100% balanced within the C-Verse. It's also cheating to play a real world mod because most of them have too many guys at 80+ who shouldn't be.
I bet you also don't mind "cheating" in other areas of life. Have you ever cut corners at work to get something done even if it's not the "company way", have you ever told a small lie to make someone feel good? These things could also be viewed as cheating. Do you follow EVERY rule at all times? Jay walking? Using subtlety to mask a no-no word? So why do you care what someone does in a single player game they paid money for? Sorry if I come off as aggressive, but your tone about the OP request is that of a hall monitor who wants to police what others are doing and label them by what they want to do.
Almost nothing you just mentioned fits into the definition I gave. Turning off natural growth impacts all companies in the environment and playing a real world mod where everyone's stats are too good in theory works against you as well. All of the real world things you said are doable by everyone
The only thing you wrote there that is cheating is creating a new worker but only if you were to assign them to your company without bidding. I also don't care if you do it. Calling it cheating doesn't mean I want to stop you.
All I've said here is that I thought the idea as posted was essentially a cheat code and suggested if that was the intent then it would make more sense to just actually be a cheat code. You've somehow turned that into a fantasy world where I'm policing something you're doing when this thread and my posts in it aren't even about something you can actually be doing right now.
-
This isn't specifically aimed towards you but this cheating argument I've seen pop up a few times is so weird and makes no sense, why does it matter to you how others play the game when it's single player and has no effect on you? If something is able to be done to help improve the experience for a portion of the playerbase while not effecting the remaining percentage of players, it should be a no brainer.
It doesn't, but the point of the topics in this section seems like it's to discuss the merits of the idea, and I think there are issues with this one so I added that to the discussion. Why do I need to want to change how you play the game in order to say that I think adding this feature would have a lot of potential to introduce something overly advantageous to the user to the game balance?
And the way the original suggestion was phrased, using pre-booking at all would bypass scheduling restrictions, which would come into play as long as you're using pre-booking, which would affect most players.
-
Is that a bad thing? It's the user playing the game, not the AI.
I think improvements to priority so workers take into account what the events actually are would be an improvement.
I don't think a new mechanic related to pre-booking would improve the game unless that mechanic has something resembling equal opportunity to be used against you. If you have a tool the competition doesn't, then using that tool is for all intents and purposes cheating at the game. If this was supposed to be a fantasy vs game argument, then why not just ask for a cheat code that makes the player company always get first dibs on workers?
General Gameplay Questions Thread
in Total Extreme Wrestling 2020 General Discussions
Posted
If his contract is due up extremely soon, then that may have been a really bad decision and cash bonus is pretty much your only option. Only other thing I can think of is firing someone they don't like.
If you have at least a couple weeks to get the extension done you could also try hiring someone they like or maybe get them a big win or two.
If you have a lot of time then you can book your way into a better relationship, which is why contracts should often be a factor in your management decisions.