Sudo_Nym

Sister companies doesn't make sense, because there is such a huge size discrepency. However, offering them a spot as a dev company for a TCW women's division could have some merit.

<p>My fans are mostly:</p><p> </p><p> Whirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirr *chnk* whirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirr *chnk* whirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirr *chnk* whirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirr *chnk* whirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirrwhirr *chnk*</p>

In 2016, your options for a women's wrestling were None, Division, or Entire Company, and this setting was independent of your actual product. I would be shocked if this was changed; the entry almost certainly means that the generic "Division" entry is being replaced, so now your options for women's wrestling will be None, Small, Medium, Large, or Entire Company.

For the specific case of people trained at a promotion-owned training school, and signed by that promotion upon graduation. Far from a general maxim, and doesn't apply to the vast majority of main event talent in TEW2016. We'll see if it get retroactively applied to people like Wolf Hawkins, but more likely the first usage will people for the 21CW graduates.

I don't think that's true, though; we've seen people jump companies all the time. Japan is the about the only place in the C-Verse where people have any loyalty to the companies that raised them up.

<p>TCW is also the most "cultish" promotion in C-Verse America, since DAVE died. They're the workrate indy-darling promotion that has been on a slide ever since they stopped being HGC. That's sort of been the tale of TCW through the years- their roster has improved in terms of in-ring quality, but worsened in terms of actual draws, and they've always had money troubles, and they've lost their biggest star.</p><p> </p><p> I wouldn't expect TCW to be gone, but I would expect that they've gone to Cult level instead of National. Either that, or they'll be the company that's made some sort of experimental change, like some of the new broadcasting mechanics or something.</p>

I think we're due an overhaul of the universe. The C-Verse was designed originally for TEW2004, and all the major players are now 15 years older, and even the guys who were originally "young and upcoming talent" are now starting to age out. Almost every company has a main event scene that is over the hill. So I'm mostly hoping that we get a lot of those older guys retired, new main event scenes all over the place, and a broad new crop of young potentials. Especially in the non-American scenes, since I've frequently run into a wall trying to find enough young independent talent in Japan or Europe to start a new company.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not to derail this thread even more, but Dave is wrong just as much as he's right.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Citation needed</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="smw88" data-cite="smw88" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Have you tried a game with the variance start option on? Adds further tweaks to all starting stats. Trying it out on my current diary, nothing too unexpected so far but a few seem better and a few worse than in previous games</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I have, and I guess what I'm looking for is a more extreme version of it. Variance can take some guys up or down a tier, but the S-tier guys are still blue chip hires. I want there to be a wide range of tiers that a person can be randomized into.</p><p> </p><p> That said, as I type this, I'm beginning to understand that it would introduce some complications- after all, what do you do with USPW, for example, if their entire main event scene gets randomized to be a bunch of D and E tier flunkies instead of the big stars that the backstory implies they should be. So I don't have an ideal solution, I guess.</p>

<p>I really want the experience of needing to hire a guy, and not being able to see "Oh, this guy has a 'Strong' in performance and that guy only has an 'Average', so I'll hire the first guy. I want to be forced to look at the indy results, and see that one guy is average a better match grade than the other. I want that uncertainty where I'm not sure if the indy darling I just hired is the real deal or not, because the risk that he may be a flop also makes it more intriguing when he's actually good.</p><p> </p><p> On a meta note, it'd also encourage people to reach out and try a wider variety of talent- no shade on people who put in the effort of writing diaries, but most diaries revolve around a pretty small talent pool, because we all know who the real talents on the CornellVerse indy scene are. I want a universe where there's a shroud there, and maybe an increased level of randomization in each new game, so that people have good solid reasons to try out different talents, because the people who are super talents in one game world are mediocre in another, and vice versa. I want to know that there's a universe where El Mitico Jr is the luchador of the future, and another universe where he's just an overhyped internet favorite, and the player is rewarded for doing the work of figuring out which. I get that the current Destiny stat is sorta meant to mimic that, but I don't think that goes far enough.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="WCGreyghost" data-cite="WCGreyghost" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>You can already do this, by turning the numeric values off. Instead you'll see guys getting grades...like A, B, C etc...so you'll know "this guy is good at X, but not at Y" without knowing the actual number value assigned to the stat.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah, but even that's a level of abstraction that I think doesn't really capture what I'm talking about. And frankly, I don't know if I'm explaining it very well.</p><p> </p><p> What I really want to there to be a reliance on the new house show system to provide more than a place for unemployed people to work. I want it to be part of the scouting system, so that you'll have a legitimate reason to pay attention to what is going on in the indies to find talent. Limiting the specific information that's available is more in service of pushing a scouting system.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BrokenCycle" data-cite="BrokenCycle" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Really hope the indies now significantly change how Fog of War works. FOW in TEW is just not that great, and I think more exposure will mean the process goes by much quicker.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I like the idea that, even for the best known guys, there should be an increased distance between the player and perfect knowledge of a person's stats. I'd like to see some system where you can't tell that a guy is a "71 in technique and 52 in psychology" or whatever, but you instead can only get "this guy is good at selling" or "this guy is a great brawler", and the rest has to be figured out by actually looking at what results a guy puts up.</p><p> </p><p> Right now, the game involves a lot of stat optimization. At a certain point, you can say "this guy has high stats, I should hire him", while ignoring all the guys with bad stats. I like the idea that you instead look at a guy who's putting up great matches on the indies, and have to decide whether he's actually a talented worker, or if he's getting good opponents. Or vice versa, that maybe you'll overlook a top talent because he's being paired up with bad opponents on the indies and putting up subpar results. It would make the idea of finding, hiring, and pushing gems feel more valuable, since it introduces the risk that you'll get stuck with a few duds as well.</p>

Or instead of a calendar, the game could use a random number generator to determine what day it is.

<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>The limit people are talking is the 4 show limit. If you book 4 Raws in one day and you can't book anymore that month (which is the assumption being made and if so i do think it is a very small limit) then while a welcomed change it still needs improvement. A company like impact, for example tapes months ahead in 2 or 3 days. I suppose that was what people were expecting, no limits, especially to simulate not only small companies today but other time eras. So yeah, if this is the case I agree that a change should be brought forward if it is feasible and there is still time. Also the title situation could be addressed.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Sure, companies in real life have taped months ahead, and there are stories of pretaping too far going horribly wrong, but given the way the games so far have worked, it fits entirely with the game mechanics that you'd go month by month in TEW.</p>

Is also stated in the entry that block taping drastically reduces the costs of running shows, since you only have to set up once. If you're trying to get over the cult hump, that can be valuable savings. Plus, you can schedule your entire month of television for a day when your full roster is available, to get around larger companies locking you out.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="enigmafrommars" data-cite="enigmafrommars" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Hello, long time lurker first time poster. About the block tapings. Is it 4 episodes a day or can you not tape 4 episodes again until one or maybe all the episodes are aired?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I would guess that you set the taping schedule in roughly the same way you do now. For example, right now you can set a show to tape on Tuesday and air on Thursday, which would result in you booking the show on Tuesday, but the ratings and overness gains don't kick in until Thursday. I would assume that in the new system, you set something like "Tuesday the 3rd" as your taping day, and then book all your shows for the month then, and then the ratings/overness gains for each show roll out individually as they air.</p><p> </p><p> To answer your question more specifically, if you tape 4 Raws in a block show, you wouldn't get another taping day until next month rolls around. But you can still block tape 4 Smackdowns on another day.</p>

But what if I want to reenact the Freebird's famous negative length tag title reign?

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.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="iruleall15" data-cite="iruleall15" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I feel like the pre internet era will be a magazine or newspaper cover most likely.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It does make sense that, if you're playing in a pre-internet era, you might learn of new workers because they're on the cover of a ragsheet or a PWI-equivalent, but it'll probably be inconsistent. It might give the game a cool flavor, though, because you might learn of a different set of wrestlers in each game. The possibilities are incredible, really.</p>

That doesn't make any sense. All the workers are clearly sorted into databases, which certainly implies computers. And the fact that you can access workers, even across the planet that you would have no way of knowing personally clearly indicates an internet, neither of which should exist if we're going to update the game to remove inappropriate technological references.

Right, it's fixing the technological refences, specifically for the purposes of immersion. So if you're in an era where internet doesn't exist, you won't be able to access it. I just want to know what gameplay looks like if you're playing in an era without computers, is all. I'm sure Adam has already thought of something, though, so there'll be an entry about it, eventually. I'm actually pretty excited to try playing "territorial style", as it were.

<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>What i know is Adam is removing references from eras and locking the initial page with said specific eras, thus stopping internet references in the 80s, for example, and so on. I don't know where you got the rest nor do I know why it would happen. The announced change is what is needed, nothing more.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Adam said he's changing the interface to increase immersion, and being able to get on the internet to look up talents from Japan or wherever is part of that immersion. So I'm curious where you're going to be able to locate new talent if you don't have access to the internet or whatever. Is it all just word of mouth? And will you be able to filter stats at all? That's all part of the immersion that Adam was talking about, so it stands to reason.</p><p> </p><p> I mean, Verne Gagne didn't get to go on the internet and look up new talent; he had to train guys in his barn or watch tapes from other promotions or whatever. If he's making a talent trade for Japan guys, he has to take Baba's word for it. He didn't get to go to the Talent page and sort by psychology or whatever.</p>

Right, but it'll break immersion if you're looking at an old-timey ragsheet and then switch to your desktop to look up wrestlers. It only stands to reason that if you're playing in an older era, you'd have to scout wrestlers using early technology, which means you shouldn't be able to sort. So I understand why Adam is removing the ability to sort from that era, but I'm eager to see the announcement for what's going to replace it.

The big problem is that all the sorting is done by computer, so if you're in a newsletter look, you won't be able to sort the workers at all, which is going to be massively inconvenient. I hope Adam has a solution ready for that.

<p>As a corollary to the above, compare the pop Bayley got when she was first called up against the pop she was getting a year later. As much respect as people give her, being booked like a geek killer her momentum, and she fell down the card. Sasha went from a multi-time champion feuding with Charlotte to midcarder real fast.</p><p> </p><p> And the Becky Lynch effect is basically already in the game- she got a gimmick change, it went really well, and she got a momentum boost that rocketed her perception to the stars. Getting a big momentum boost off a successful gimmick change is already in the game, and there's no reason to believe that it won't still be in the game if momentum is going to be a big part of audience perception of a worker.</p>