Bugs with contract negotiations...?

[Hive]

Hi

 

I'm having a few issues with contract negotiations. I tried searching for explanations, but failed to find any. I'm unsure whether it's bugs or WAD.

 

Issue #1:

I'm playing a 1995 mod as WCW, who are loaded with money and have Ted Turner, who loves to be flashy with his money and loves a bloated roster, as owner. Yet I cannot offer more than 55k per week in wages, meaning that I get overbidden by NJPW - and cannot extend Hogan's contract to anything but 3 months short term. This doesn't make much sense to me.

 

Issue #2:

In the same game, I have been trying to snatch a few workers from WWF. However, when I offer them a written contract, they say they do not want to be exclusive to me because they don't want to miss out on other opportunities, or something like that. I then offer them a PPA contract instead, so they can work both places, in which case they say that a promotion of our size is expected to offer them only written deals... wtf? You offer A, they demand B. You offer B, they demand A. I don't get it.

 

[Comradebot]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hive" data-cite="Hive" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28447" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Hi<p> </p><p> I'm having a few issues with contract negotiations. I tried searching for explanations, but failed to find any. I'm unsure whether it's bugs or WAD.</p><p> </p><p> Issue #1:</p><p> I'm playing a 1995 mod as WCW, who are loaded with money and have Ted Turner, who loves to be flashy with his money and loves a bloated roster, as owner. Yet I cannot offer more than 55k per week in wages, meaning that I get overbidden by NJPW - and cannot extend Hogan's contract to anything but 3 months short term. This doesn't make much sense to me.</p><p> </p><p> Issue #2:</p><p> In the same game, I have been trying to snatch a few workers from WWF. However, when I offer them a written contract, they say they do not want to be exclusive to me because they don't want to miss out on other opportunities, or something like that. I then offer them a PPA contract instead, so they can work both places, in which case they say that a promotion of our size is expected to offer them only written deals... wtf? You offer A, they demand B. You offer B, they demand A. I don't get it.</p><p> </p><p> <img alt=":confused:" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/confused.png.d4a8e6b6eab0c67698b911fb041c0ed1.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Nope, not bugs.</p><p> </p><p> 1. Some owners are tight with their finances, meaning they won't let you bid all that high on workers (how much money you have doesn't matter).</p><p> </p><p> 2. Clearly, the mod maker has it set so Hogan is a freelancer, meaning all he'll sign with anyone are three month short term deals.</p><p> </p><p> 3. That's basically workers saying they aren't willing to jump ship.</p>

[Hive]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Comradebot" data-cite="Comradebot" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28447" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Nope, not bugs.<p> </p><p> 1. Some owners are tight with their finances, meaning they won't let you bid all that high on workers (how much money you have doesn't matter).</p><p> </p><p> 2. Clearly, the mod maker has it set so Hogan is a freelancer, meaning all he'll sign with anyone are three month short term deals.</p><p> </p><p> 3. That's basically workers saying they aren't willing to jump ship.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Thanks for the reply. However...</p><p> </p><p> 1. The owner is NOT tight with finances, as I explained: he's flashy. As flashy as can be. I checked and double checked.</p><p> </p><p> 2. No, the mod maker did not clearly set Hogan as a freelancer. I should know, as it's my own mod. <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> He is perfectly willing to sign longer contracts, but as Ted Turner would only allow me to offer him a meager 55k pr. month, (which really isn't a lot for a big star, NJPW won a bidding round for Vader against me by offering ~80k!), Hogan refused. I found a tip on the boards that it could be possible to get workers on short term contracts in situations where you do not have money for more, but consider it to be a less than optimal solution - and naturally, only a short term one.</p><p> </p><p> 3. But then the workers should say that instead. They did so in 2008, at least.</p>

[Hive]

<p>Right, I now found an answer to my second question:</p><p>

<a href="http://67.19.230.90/~arles/forum/showthread.php?t=147560" rel="external nofollow">http://67.19.230.90/~arles/forum/showthread.php?t=147560</a></p>

[D-Lyrium]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hive" data-cite="Hive" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28447" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Thanks for the reply. However...<p> 3. But then the workers should say that instead. They did so in 2008, at least.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> No they didn't, it was the exact same situation. The same if you try to offer a contract to a head booker. They won't sign with you exclusively because you represent a less attractive option (losing the book, or signing for a less prestigious promotion). But they won't sign a PPA contract, because at that size they - correctly - think you should be offering a written contract and all the benefits that come with it.</p><p> </p><p> It's not a bug, it's just a catch-22 situation, where neither solution is acceptable to the worker. Same happened in '08. I'm still bitter at RDJ for up and retiring the month after I finally got my prestige higher than TCW's so I could sign him after about five years of trying (by which point the storyline I wanted to bring him in for would've been pointless as his "son" Buck Winchester was more over than he was!). Words couldn't accurately describe my feelings. :@</p>

[ritwik]

<p>I think Hive's first point should be looked into. This restriction, which I and others have also faced with Eisen in SWF [even after changing his personality to flashy and with more than thirty million in the bank] pretty much forces the player to book in a certain cycle - "I must start making Hogan lose a few since his contract is due; let's get his popularity below 85 and then sign a long term contract and build him back up". This is not ideal for an open ended game like TEW. </p><p> </p><p>

Plus it doesn't simulate the situation of guys like Hogan - who remained incredibly popular for a number of years and were used to seeing their contractual demands met by promoters.</p>

[Hive]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ritwik" data-cite="ritwik" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28447" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think Hive's first point should be looked into. This restriction, which I and others have also faced with Eisen in SWF [even after changing his personality to flashy and with more than thirty million in the bank] pretty much forces the player to book in a certain cycle - "I must start making Hogan lose a few since his contract is due; let's get his popularity below 85 and then sign a long term contract and build him back up". This is not ideal for an open ended game like TEW. <p> </p><p> Plus it doesn't simulate the situation of guys like Hogan - who remained incredibly popular for a number of years and were used to seeing their contractual demands met by promoters.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Exactly. One shouldn't have to exploit a loophole in game dynamics to keep your most over workers, if you have the money to keep them and an own who should be flashy with his money.</p>

[tristram]

I think Hive's first point should be looked into. This restriction, which I and others have also faced with Eisen in SWF [even after changing his personality to flashy and with more than thirty million in the bank] pretty much forces the player to book in a certain cycle - "I must start making Hogan lose a few since his contract is due; let's get his popularity below 85 and then sign a long term contract and build him back up". This is not ideal for an open ended game like TEW.

 

Plus it doesn't simulate the situation of guys like Hogan - who remained incredibly popular for a number of years and were used to seeing their contractual demands met by promoters.

 

I agree 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000%. The best example I can give is say Bill Goldberg. Lets say in October 1998 his contract is coming up. How do you think he would have reacted if he was jobbed unmercilessly to drop his overness from A* to B? The game dynamics say that he now realises his popularity value is less so his contract value is less. However, I would think its far more likely in reality for Goldberg to be extremely angered by a succession of cheap losses.

 

That point is my only real problem with the TEW model. To me, its an unrealistic expectation to job your top talents expecting them to drop their contract demands. In reality, a superstar still knows what his POTENTIAL to an organisation is worth and in reality he would still go after that contractual amount.

[Guest codey]

I agree 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000%. The best example I can give is say Bill Goldberg. Lets say in October 1998 his contract is coming up. How do you think he would have reacted if he was jobbed unmercilessly to drop his overness from A* to B? The game dynamics say that he now realises his popularity value is less so his contract value is less. However, I would think its far more likely in reality for Goldberg to be extremely angered by a succession of cheap losses.

 

That point is my only real problem with the TEW model. To me, its an unrealistic expectation to job your top talents expecting them to drop their contract demands. In reality, a superstar still knows what his POTENTIAL to an organisation is worth and in reality he would still go after that contractual amount.

 

That's a situation where I'll go into the editor and work his contract there. The only problem is that sometimes I get tempted undercut guys a little bit at times.

[supershot]

That's a situation where I'll go into the editor and work his contract there. The only problem is that sometimes I get tempted undercut guys a little bit at times.

 

I hate when your Cult and you have a top star at B- overness. In order to resign them you have to job them down a little. I always go into the editor and just extend there contracts by 9 months.