Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This is a topic that comes up time and again, and seems to get sunk quickly, especially in the Small Questions thread. I'd like to try and get a comprehensive understanding of how to select gimmicks for workers as I'm repeatedly getting hit and miss results - clearly something or things I'm assuming is incorrect.

 

So, what do I know about gimmicks and what affects their rating?

 

- Gimmicks cannot be changed more than once every six months

- Gimmicks affect the rate at which a worker gains popularity and momentum

- A worker's gimmick will affect their morale (at least, a poor one results in lost morale)

- The segment rating in which a gimmick debuts will affect a gimmick's initial rating

- A gimmick's initial rating can change (slightly, at least)

- A gimmick's suitability depends on the promotion's product

 

At the very least, I'd like to get an idea on which types of gimmicks will work in which promotions. Cool/****y ones seem to work anywhere there's gimmicks expected, for example. Wholesome gimmicks seem to favour high Tradition products, Gimmicky high Mainstream - however, I'm open to correction.

 

So, how do people decide on their gimmicks? What should I be looking for to ensure accepted gimmicks every time? I'm holding off on simming a show where I revamp every sub-C+ gimmick I can, so all help is welcome :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh...I cheat a bit on gimmicks. Especially when my workers current one becomes stale.

 

For instance, the degenerate gimmick. In my CGC game I'm running right now, the fans won't accept risky gimmicks, but I still wanted to give Johnny Heizenger the gimmick, since it was the character I had in mind. So I cloned the gimmick and dropped the risk to an acceptable level. This is why I think the clone option was included in the first place.

 

When DX first began in WWF, it was a very risky group. They did unacceptable things like strip poker and what-not. When they came back in the late 2000s the riskiest things they did where the crotch chop and **** jokes. The gimmick changed with the product, basically. It was the same basic gimmick, just toned down dramatically.

 

I guess it's not cheating, really. I just feel like it is. I don't expect a biker character in CZCW to be the same as a biker in SWF, after all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good point, codey. I know I've gone that route for special workers (but not for career midcard types). When I signed Cherry Bomb in my current game, I created a gimmick specifically for her because I intended the gimmick to only be usable by her. I tailored the gimmick requirements to her skills and the gimmick characteristics to my product (risk, difficulty, subtlety, etc).

 

I'm stuck in a quandary with gimmicks. I play with gimmick effects off because I can't find a correlation that would hint at how they work (they seem to be the most random element in the game, even moreso than worker potential). One thing I can tell you with at least some conviction. If your product is open to (or requires) gimmicks, the higher a worker's charisma, the more likely a gimmick debut will be successful. Now, I have a very small sample size (only about 70 debuts or so) but I've found that workers with high (say 77.1+) charisma debuted gimmicks that were suited to them and the promotion with grades higher than 66. The aforementioned Cherry Bomb debuted her custom gimmick at 90, 92, 99, 96, and 88 in my tests. This was in debut segments rated 100, I should note. But Cherry Bomb is a very charismatic worker. In my product, most workers using gimmicks that they're suited for ("there is no reason <worker> shouldn't be able to use this gimmick successfully") debut with a 66 rating. However, a 'disastrous' turn can take a gimmick rated 86 down to 72.

 

But beyond that, I haven't a clue on gimmick mechanics. Being able to turn 'em off just makes me lazy and not even want to delve into it. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- The segment rating in which a gimmick debuts will affect a gimmick's initial rating

 

I've never noticed this - in what way? In my diary game I had Ford Memphis debut an A* gimmick in a D(ish) rated angle. Likewise in a 2006 game I've had C+s in high rated angles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never noticed this - in what way? In my diary game I had Ford Memphis debut an A* gimmick in a D(ish) rated angle. Likewise in a 2006 game I've had C+s in high rated angles.

 

maybe theres some kind of mix with the debuts angle rating and their charisma. In your first example what size company were you playing as? Maybe his gimmick got a high grade bc a "D" was good considering your size?

 

Just throwing out possibliities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never noticed this - in what way? In my diary game I had Ford Memphis debut an A* gimmick in a D(ish) rated angle. Likewise in a 2006 game I've had C+s in high rated angles.

 

Well, this is one thing in which I was going off hearsay on. I seem to remember this being discussed before and someone noting a correlation between high segment rating = higher initial gimmick rating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe theres some kind of mix with the debuts angle rating and their charisma. In your first example what size company were you playing as? Maybe his gimmick got a high grade bc a "D" was good considering your size?

 

Just throwing out possibliities.

 

USPW (so Cult). Then again, Henry Lee debuted as Professor Stern in a B rated angle and his gimmick only rated an A so who knows :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just thought I'd throw this tid-bit in here. I had a game a while ago where a worker debuted a new gimmick at D+. I was kind of upset but still pushed him anyway. A few months later, I was looking around my roster and saw that his gimmick was now rated a solid B. I have no idea how it happened or what (if anything) I did to influence that, but I remember being shocked. So yeah, gimmick ratings CAN change a lot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, following on from what Remi said, what does turning gimmick effects off do (apart from the obvious)?

 

Perhaps more accurately I should ask: What effects do gimmicks have? Do they significantly affect match/angle ratings, or are they just limited to a worker's ability to get over?

 

And on a somewhat unrelated note, what gimmicks have people noticed working in which feds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just thought I'd throw this tid-bit in here. I had a game a while ago where a worker debuted a new gimmick at D+. I was kind of upset but still pushed him anyway. A few months later, I was looking around my roster and saw that his gimmick was now rated a solid B. I have no idea how it happened or what (if anything) I did to influence that, but I remember being shocked. So yeah, gimmick ratings CAN change a lot.

 

thats interesting. I didnt know that could happen in the game. I know they degrade over time but never knew they get better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that the user's creative talent affects gimmick ratings.

 

Gimmicks affect match ratings. It seems as though B or higher is a definite positive to a match while a C or lower is a definite negative with the boundary somewhere in the C+/B- range.

 

I am currently running 21CW and gimmicks with low risk and subtlety get over very well. Stevie Stoat just debuted a Man on a Mission gimmick with an A even though he is one of the least charismatic workers. In another game I'm playing an American indy fed with high realism and the "legitimate" gimmicks seem to do very well. In that fed the product screen tells me the fans won't like risky gimmicks (because of the high traditional) but there's enough cult and modern in my product that gimmicks rated F+ in "risk" don't get over either so I need a little risk but not too much.

 

Personally, in a future version I'd like to see a change to the gimmick system so that you can constantly fiddle with the risk and subtlety levels without having to go through a full gimmick change. You see this all the time in the WWE at least where a gimmick will slowly be intensified or diminished based on the crowd reaction. The DX example is a good one. I'd say WWE has been constantly fiddling with CM Punk as he has moved from straight edge to messiah and now just a basic ****y heel without ever officially changing his gimmick. Or, in TEW terms, it would be cool if you debuted a wrestler with a new gimmick and then if it wasn't getting over you decided to start making him more and more risky, knowing that you might push too far and ruin the gimmick permanently. Or if you really liked a particular gimmick you might slowly increase the subtlety level to give the gimmick more longevity at the risk of losing the appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you turn a wrestler their gimmick gets a new rating. It also allows you to give them a new gimmick without waiting 6 months.

 

Also, you can switch someones gimmick in 2 weeks, get the note "it was too soon" and they still score an A*.

 

Ive never had problems with gimmicks though. I just make sure if I want to give Darryl Devine a wholesome gimmick that his wholesome rating is 80+, otherwise its too risky.

 

Its also just random a lot of times. You can literally turn the autosave off, change nothing and watch Darryl Devine get a A* rating for showstealer, hit the back button, do the same exact thing and watch him get a C-.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think theres a little too much randomness involved. I mean some randomness is good because in real life a lot of gimmicks are hit an miss but I think basic gimmicks like ****y for example should be more consistent.

 

For 2011 or most likely 2012 I think some gimmicks should be big risk for big reward and the basic gimmicks should score consistent but very rarely be a home run.

 

Maybe thats what the system is now but to me it feels 80% random.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think theres a little too much randomness involved. I mean some randomness is good because in real life a lot of gimmicks are hit an miss but I think basic gimmicks like ****y for example should be more consistent.

 

For 2011 or most likely 2012 I think some gimmicks should be big risk for big reward and the basic gimmicks should score consistent but very rarely be a home run.

 

Maybe thats what the system is now but to me it feels 80% random.

 

Yes. The current system seems to attempt to simulate gimmicks. So you first make them in the editor and then assign them to a worker and depending on the product and character and a healthy dose of randomness they either get over or they don't. The randomness is necessary or else it'd be far too predictable and too easy to cheat.

 

A system where the user gets to decide how far to push the gimmick would be much more enjoyable. Certainly there's a certain amount of that in the current system, but perhaps it just needs to presented differently. All you would really need would be two sliders - one for subtlety and one for originality. Put both sliders on 0 and you'll be almost certain the gimmick will at least not hurt the worker, but you'll have only the slimmest hope of getting that big A rating. Plus, there's a good chance he'll get stale in a year. Boost the originality to 100 and you increase the chance of a great gimmick but also drastically increase the chance it will bomb. Boost the subtlety and you have a much better chance he won't grow stale but make the initial momentum and popularity gain far less likely to be big. Some randomness would still be necessary to simulate real life, but at least the user would feel he controls the level of randomness.

 

The above system would also mean not having to double check the worker's ratings in "cool" and "****y" and "wholesome" before choosing a gimmick. I think this would streamline things nicely, though I admit there's some benefit to the idea that only certain workers can pull off gimmicks that require sex appeal or size or comedy skills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a gimmick question for y'all

 

Recently tried to run a promotion with Key: Hyper Realistic, Heavy: Realistic, everything else low or less. It says that the fan's wont be keen on gimmicks. So I started up and didnt give anyone a gimmick. The first show tanked because everyone 'had a poor gimmick' and no-one had a rating higher than E. So I restarted the game and gave everyone legitimate/brute gimmicks, ensuring each gimmick fulfilled the criteria for risk, subtulty, ect. So I run my first show and the same thing happens again :eek:

 

What the hell am I surposed to do??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have some questions about gimmick too:

 

First of all I am playing SWF right now and in the product definition it is mentioned that fans wont like "one dimensional" gimmicks and will not get "subtle" gimmicks? I am actually finding it difficult to categorise what can be termed as one dimensional or subtle gimmicks.

 

Secondly I recently switched Richard Eisen's gimmick to that of a Authority Figure and it bombed(44 rating). Now though I have gimmick effects turned off, I want to know whether it will still affect his popularity or momentum?

 

Can anyone help me out on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have some questions about gimmick too:

 

First of all I am playing SWF right now and in the product definition it is mentioned that fans wont like "one dimensional" gimmicks and will not get "subtle" gimmicks? I am actually finding it difficult to categorise what can be termed as one dimensional or subtle gimmicks.

 

SWF has high Cult as well as high Mainstream, and this means that it attracts two different kinds of audience. The Cult guys will want subtle gimmicks, but the Mainstream guys will want one dimensional, easy to understand gimmicks. This means you'll either need to slowly change your product so that you can capitalize on one particular audience, or that you'll need to bear the occasional low gimmick grade that comes from having to please two audiences at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...