Ratings

[Skywalker1976]

One thing (and basically the only thing) that is bothering me in TEW is the ratings system. I simply can not get used to the ratings system of A-F.

 

I wish there was the option to have the star rating system that is so commenly known and used by Wrestling fans in regards to match quality.

 

Maybe we could have the star rating as an optional?

[1234]

1-This Belongs In Suggestions

2-Well you could create a picture to replace the current letter grade pictures on the skin.

[Stennick]

I actually prefer this system over that system.

 

I've never seen the star method take into account crowd reaction or overness of the workers. Star rated matches are generally rated soley on work rate. Scott Keith and others give Hogan/Rock around *** same with Warrior/Hogan however in TEW's world these are easy A* matches.

[djthefunkchris]

One thing (and basically the only thing) that is bothering me in TEW is the ratings system. I simply can not get used to the ratings system of A-F.

 

I wish there was the option to have the star rating system that is so commenly known and used by Wrestling fans in regards to match quality.

 

Maybe we could have the star rating as an optional?

 

You could change the grades into stars if you wish. I wouldn't do it though, because you lose out on alot of "Steps", unless your going to have up to a 14star match (or however many grades there are).

 

All you have to do is open up the letter grades in an editor, and using the same size overall, redo it as stars. In fact, Maybe I can think of a way this would work...

 

F- = 1/4 star

F = 1/2 star

F+ = 3/4 star

E- = 1 star

E = 1.25 stars

E+ = 1.5 Stars

D- = 1.75 Stars

D = 2 stars

D+ = 2.25 stars

C- = 2.5 stars

C = 2.75 stars

C+ = 3 stars

B- = 3.25 stars

B = 3.5 stars

B+ = 3.75 stars

A = 4 stars

A* = 5 stars

 

Or something like that.

[LoganRodzen]

All you have to do is open up the letter grades in an editor, and using the same size overall, redo it as stars. In fact, Maybe I can think of a way this would work...

 

F- = 1/4 star

F = 1/2 star

F+ = 3/4 star

E- = 1 star

E = 1.25 stars

E+ = 1.5 Stars

D- = 1.75 Stars

D = 2 stars

D+ = 2.25 stars

C- = 2.5 stars

C = 2.75 stars

C+ = 3 stars

B- = 3.25 stars

B = 3.5 stars

B+ = 3.75 stars

A = 4 stars

A* = 5 stars

 

Or something like that.

 

When you put it this way, I'm really glad the ratings are done the way they are now. The star-system would be too confusing in my opinion. How many of us have never had to deal with F to A (minus E) while in school? Most of us I'd imagine. The way it's done now is streamlined.

[Skywalker1976]

I just think that A* matches in TEW happen much too often and with the right roster it is not too hard to have a whole card only with A and A* matches. What I miss is the factor to determine what really a special only 3-5 times a year match is.

[The Masked Orange]

I just think that A* matches in TEW happen much too often and with the right roster it is not too hard to have a whole card only with A and A* matches. What I miss is the factor to determine what really a special only 3-5 times a year match is.

 

sounds like the problem is not the rating system but rather the level of diffuculty you are playing at. Try a smaller company, or a "worse" roster. Try to impair your own progress, it's fun, trust me

[Derek B]

#2: User Preferences

 

Different people choose to play in different ways, and so the new User Preferences has been introduced to maximise your ability to customise the gameplay experience.

 

Each player in the game has access to their own User Preferences screen, from which they can enable or disable any of the fourteen choices. Below are eleven of the fourteen (the remaining three refer to features yet to be announced, and so will be discussed at a later date):

 

- Show all stats as grades rather than number (see note 1 below)

- Owner goals are turned on

- Penalties for small rosters are turned on

- Penalties for repetitive booking are turned on

- "Perfect Show Theory" is turned on

- Characters can become stale over time

- Worker morale effects are turned on

- Momentum effects are turned on

- Time limits on negotiations are turned on

- Advance bookings cannot be deleted

- Industry and economy effects are turned on

 

Any of these features can be turned on or off at any point during the game. These features only apply to situations directly related to the player in question; for example, if you turn off the industry and economy effects it means that you will not see workers looking for more money during "boom periods" when they are negotiating with you - however, it will still apply to AI promotions. This is because in multiplayer games, users can have contradictory preferences (i.e. one player can have the effects turned on while another has them turned off).

 

This feature replaces the more rigid Straight Edge vs Free Style choice that was in TEW08.

 

Note 1: If grades are turned off, all stats are shown as numbers on a scale of 0 to 100. They do not show percentages (i.e. you will see 1% and 2%, but not 1.5%). These numbers are graphical 50x50 icons, and so fit directly onto screens where grades are used.

 

I bolded the bits that seem relevant to this discussion.

[Skywalker1976]

Maybe I am being misunderstood but I see that the current ratings system takes into account a lot more than match quality. Hogan vs Flair in 2009 is match quality wise probably only a 1-2* match but because of factors like heat etc. it would be a B, maybe even an A match.

 

But still sometimes it seems especially if you play with a big company most of your matches and segments will be B or A. I am pretty sure, if you book the current Raw shows with TEW most matches would get A or B ratings because of the workers involved (Michaels, Cena, Undertaker etc..), but I think we all agree that most of these matches are should not be rated very high and most of the fans think the same.

[Derek B]

Maybe I am being misunderstood but I see that the current ratings system takes into account a lot more than match quality. Hogan vs Flair in 2009 is match quality wise probably only a 1-2* match but because of factors like heat etc. it would be a B, maybe even an A match.

 

But still sometimes it seems especially if you play with a big company most of your matches and segments will be B or A. I am pretty sure, if you book the current Raw shows with TEW most matches would get A or B ratings because of the workers involved (Michaels, Cena, Undertaker etc..), but I think we all agree that most of these matches are should not be rated very high and most of the fans think the same.

 

Every promotion has a product... and in it there is a box which says how a promotion's matches are rated, ranging from much more on popularity to much more on performance. That's exactly what you seem to be describing.

 

Secondly, I'm guessing you play real world mods a lot as this isn't something that happens a lot in the Cornellverse. Real world mods have a tendency to rate things higher than the default Cornellverse data does so they end up getting a lot of high ratings. If you haven't already checked out the Cornellverse, I'd recommend giving it a go. It's a lot of fun.

[praguepride]

/nod. That's what frustrated me with real world mods in the first place is the workers tend to be over-inflated. Then you get people coming back saying "Why is Ric Flair at A* popularity all across the world" and we're like "he's not, get a better mod "

 

If you're playing a balanced mod (i.e. the Cornellverse Default DB) you'll see maybe 1-3 A* matches a year. As the game goes on and workers develop you might see some years that are a little heavier (6+) and some years where there aren't any, but I've run about 3 years now in my longest game and there's been about 6 A* matches in total.

 

If you're really good at the game and playing with the best workers around you can probably pull of more. With the C-verse, in the SWF (which is about the closest approximation to the WWE you can get) most of the card is in the C-B range with A's popping out for main eventers and main event promos.

[SaySo]

In my opinion, there should be two kind of ratings: one that the booker sees and the other that Dave Meltzer sees.

 

TEW rating: A* A B+ B B- C+ [the same formula used before which is awesome]

Dave Meltzer: ***** **** *** ** * with the 3/4 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4 rating.

 

So we know if two "unknown wrestlers" pulled a "MOTY" in SWF for example. They may get a rating of C or D+...but their match was *****. The Rock -vs- Stone Cold may get an A in TEW term but the match was just *** etc. Help determine the match of the year...etc. Some kind of mathematical formula could do the trick. I remember reading somewhere here that a match may get a C...but if the two competitors in the match had popularity of E+ for example, that was a great match or in Meltzer's mind *****.

[praguepride]

I don't understand what the difference is. You're asking to split up one comprehensive rating system into two indepedent rating systems?

 

It sounds like you want one rating system for popularity and one for actual performance. Well that's determined in the product setting.

 

You want "meltzer's ratings" then from pop to performance based product and watch as un-popular workers rock the house.

[SaySo]

I don't understand what the difference is. You're asking to split up one comprehensive rating system into two indepedent rating systems?

 

It sounds like you want one rating system for popularity and one for actual performance. Well that's determined in the product setting.

 

You want "meltzer's ratings" then from pop to performance based product and watch as un-popular workers rock the house.

 

The comprehensive rating is fine (letter grades, etc.) and i wouldn't change it. But i was trying to see how a * system can be implemented to help differentiate the D or C letter matches..which could have been a good match...but with two unknown wrestlers. Yeah, i was looking at it in the popularity-based product.

 

In TEW, what would Samoa Joe -vs- Kenta Kobashi match be graded as?

[Self]

As a guy who 87% of the time runs Pop-over-Perf products, I'd be interested in seeing a second rating for each of my matches. Nothing that counts towards the show rating, just something visual, for curiosity's sake. Something that tells me how 'good' the match was purely in terms of performance.

 

For example, in my diary I recently had Dan DaLay vs Harry Allen. They're both popular chaps, so they pulled a 'B-'. However, I'm curious as to how 'good' it was performance wise. They're very different workers, with very different skill sets. Neither is a Ring General. No Chemistry.

 

Maybe the Dirt Sheet will give feedback like this.

 

P.S. I HATE how people put half/quarter/three-quarter stars in star systems. With a fiery vengeance, I think it's one of the dumbest things I've ever seen. If 5 points isn't enough, make it out of 10. Three-and-Three-Quarters is such a pretentious, finicky way to rate something.

[Skywalker1976]

In my opinion, there should be two kind of ratings: one that the booker sees and the other that Dave Meltzer sees.

 

TEW rating: A* A B+ B B- C+ [the same formula used before which is awesome]

Dave Meltzer: ***** **** *** ** * with the 3/4 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4 rating.

 

So we know if two "unknown wrestlers" pulled a "MOTY" in SWF for example. They may get a rating of C or D+...but their match was *****. The Rock -vs- Stone Cold may get an A in TEW term but the match was just *** etc. Help determine the match of the year...etc. Some kind of mathematical formula could do the trick. I remember reading somewhere here that a match may get a C...but if the two competitors in the match had popularity of E+ for example, that was a great match or in Meltzer's mind *****.

 

Thanks! That is exactly what I mean.

 

I think the same problem occurs with the C-Verse. If you start off as a small promotion because your workers are not over most matches will be D, E or F.

 

Let's remember ROH in 2002. Nobody knew the workers but the matches were all great which quickly spread the companies reputation around. How do I know who the next Daniels, CM Punk or McGuiness is if the matches are only rated with D, E and F.

[praguepride]

It's called the Dirt Sheet

 

[sPECULATION]

 

It'll tell you (hopefully) the degree that things impacted the match.

 

So it might go (in my mind)

 

-For poor workers

-For no selling

-For clash of styles

+For momentum

++++++For popularity (due to pop-based fed)

 

So it might not say it was a C- but popularity boosted it to B-, but it'll give you a good impression that "wow, if these guys weren't so popular that match would've sucked

 

[/sPECULATION]

[praguepride]

How do I know who the next Daniels, CM Punk or McGuiness is if the matches are only rated with D, E and F.

 

Look at match grade vs. popularity levels if you're in a pop based fed.

 

If a guy with F- popularity is pulling off matches rated more then a couple grades above him, then he's doing an awesome job.

 

For example, if two F- pop guys pull off a D- match that means that even though it was Sports Entertainment that don't give jobbers a second glance, they were able to make the people interested enough to care. Sure it might not spread across the internet but they will gain popularity fast if they're putting on good matches.

 

I think it should quickly become obvious who your future stars will be. And even if it isn't, that's what the creative team is for. It straight up tells you who on your roster has the biggest potential for stardom (the Next Big Thing/Hot Prospects button)

[djthefunkchris]

As a guy who 87% of the time runs Pop-over-Perf products, I'd be interested in seeing a second rating for each of my matches. Nothing that counts towards the show rating, just something visual, for curiosity's sake. Something that tells me how 'good' the match was purely in terms of performance.

 

For example, in my diary I recently had Dan DaLay vs Harry Allen. They're both popular chaps, so they pulled a 'B-'. However, I'm curious as to how 'good' it was performance wise. They're very different workers, with very different skill sets. Neither is a Ring General. No Chemistry.

 

Maybe the Dirt Sheet will give feedback like this.

 

P.S. I HATE how people put half/quarter/three-quarter stars in star systems. With a fiery vengeance, I think it's one of the dumbest things I've ever seen. If 5 points isn't enough, make it out of 10. Three-and-Three-Quarters is such a pretentious, finicky way to rate something.

 

I always put that option up to bassically show how many steps a normal "Five Star" system would lose. Otherwise it would be:

 

A* = 5 Stars

A = 4 stars

B+ to C- = 3 stars

E- to D+ = 2 stars

F- to F+ = 1 star

 

With five stars, you will lose alot of insight. You could do it differently, but to me this seems the most logical.

 

The new feature where you can get a score of up to 100 should be even better then the grading system, as far as figuring out whose performing better, etc.

 

The option that people seem to want to see is a performance based rating that doesn't count, that won't take any of the features that are already built into the game into consideration (Charisma, Overness, etc.) to get a seperate, but non-counting, star rating? I don't know, to me it's like asking for the wheel to be re-wrote. I suppose anything is possible, but isn't it like asking.... "Hey, I know that guy is good in that car and all, but I think they should put everyone in the same exact car when they race each other, to get a more realistic "feel" of how good they really are."

 

Their popularity and such effect other ratings as well (Meltzer or whomever). These people will either use it as a bonus or almost as a weapon against them... How many times have you read something like "It was a decent match and all, but how many times do we need to see "X" vs. "Y". Then rate it lower because it's been done too many times. These things effect their scores as well. If your not a fan, or hate one promotion over the other (and some seem to even thrive on letting you know this), your not going to give it an equal chance as the other. If your an Indie fan, your going to be bias towards the Indie type wrestling, and be totally against the "Big Name Value" wrestling (perhaps). So your going to rate the Indie wrestler's higher, no matter if it was just a spot fest or not. Some people like one thing, other's like another, and so you get different results from their view. People tent to follow whomever thinks as they do "He knows what he's talking about, that's exactly the way I seen it too!".

 

I'm just saying, I think TEW is about as unbias as your going to get. If people making mods greatly enhance abilities of worker's, then your going to get great performance's out of them, no matter if their real life counterpart can achieve the same or not. It's in the mod, not the ratings system.

[Derek B]

SaySo, you seem to be arguing for splitting the rating into a crowd reaction vs in-ring performance thing like back in 04. Back then things were simpler as match ratings had far less variables in them to worry about... but the system now is a universal system for a reason. It measures both sides of the argument and weigh them up, with a balance worked out (partly) based on promotion product.

 

Yourself and Meltzer seem to lean heavily on the "it's all about the moves" thing which is all fine and good... but what a thousand people think is great, a million people don't care about. Which is where the universal system comes in. Two unknowns having a match packed with action would rate as lowly with most fans and highly with some. The net result, is a grade somewhere in the middle. Likewise, a decent match with two huge stars will be loved by many (for storylines and stuff) and hated by some, which is why it rates highly.

 

As for the Dirt Sheet, you're all going to love it. I ran one match recently that had almost 40 + or - points to it. Awesome.

 

P.S. I HATE how people put half/quarter/three-quarter stars in star systems. With a fiery vengeance, I think it's one of the dumbest things I've ever seen. If 5 points isn't enough, make it out of 10. Three-and-Three-Quarters is such a pretentious, finicky way to rate something.

 

Entirely agreed. If you grade things out of 10 then you can use whole numbers between 0 and 10. Start giving out fractions and you are then using a 20 or 40 point scale, so you might as well just use that instead. Giving out part numbers just shows that your scale isn't sensitive enough for you to use, which indicates that it's broken in the first place.

[Karl_Kitsch]

Eww. Star Ratings are the most pretentious, off putting aspect of pro wrestling. Either a match is worth watching or not. Star ratings are fine for anal retentive technical wrestling fans, I guess, but they cannot rate the emotion of Tully vs. Magnum T.A. in the cage or the crowd reaction to the Love Machines vs. Blue Panther and Octagon. Star ratings cannot capture the sublime absurdity of a wrestler battling a blow up doll or Ebessan vs. Kamen. F.I.S.T vs. the Death Match Kings was an amazing, entertaining, and rewatchable match, but a couple of snowflakes cannot contain it's awesomeness.

[SaySo]

As for the Dirt Sheet, you're all going to love it. I ran one match recently that had almost 40 + or - points to it. Awesome.

 

True. The dirt sheet will provide insight if the match rocked or not and other factors which could help distinguish one [insert grade] level grade match from another [equal grade level] when we do diaries.

[Skywalker1976]

Look at match grade vs. popularity levels if you're in a pop based fed.

 

If a guy with F- popularity is pulling off matches rated more then a couple grades above him, then he's doing an awesome job.

 

Isn't that too complicated if for every match I would have to do that?

[Derek B]

True. The dirt sheet will provide insight if the match rocked or not and other factors which could help distinguish one [insert grade] level grade match from another [equal grade level] when we do diaries.

 

How do you feel about numbers instead of grades? Like knowing a match is a 56 instead of a C-? Seriously, it's like no-one even cares whenever I draw attention to it and yet come release day everyone will explode with joy at it.

 

Anyone? Anyone at all?

[praguepride]

Isn't that too complicated if for every match I would have to do that?

 

As opposed to Adam re-doing the entire TEW rating system, no, it's not more complicated

 

Besides, I doubt you'd do it for every single match anyway because if you know your roster, then you should know some matches are going to be terrible and some are going to be awesome no matter what.

 

The dirt sheet will handle those unexpected situations, like when a match you thought would be great bombs or when a throwaway match turns out to be the match of the night. (I hate it when that happens. Not that it happens but that I didn't see it coming in the first place )