Proper pakaged gimmick with no gimmick plz

[Krazy Killian]

So I was trying to find a way of getting a slightly vocal crowd but more of an equal performance to popularity ratio.

 

I managed finally but after looking at the analysis it states "fans will expect wrestlers to be packaged with a proper gimmick"

 

BUT

 

"will attract fans who won't be keen on gimmicks"

 

So my question is this - WTF?! Does it mean like gimmicky gimmicks with an extra side of gimmick or does it mean no gimmicks but a few gimmicks minus the gimmick?

[Rick Savant]

<p>Always wondered what gimmicks it was that the fans wouldn't be keen on, honestly. Hope you get answered! It just won't be by me.</p><p> </p><p>

Sucka!</p>

[FRAGz]

Always wondered what gimmicks it was that the fans wouldn't be keen on, honestly. Hope you get answered! It just won't be by me.

 

Sucka!

 

me 2

[crayon]

<p>From what I've read in the past, it seems to mean that you'll have a split audience. As in some "fans will expect wrestlers to be packaged with a proper gimmick" but not everyone, and the other ones will be the fans "who won't be keen on gimmicks".</p><p> </p><p>

It's a PITA coupling of notes to get but yeah</p>

[Rick Savant]

Huh. So should some workers be given no gimmick to appeal to the 'not keen' fans and the others given gimmicks to appeal to the keeners?

[crayon]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Rick Savant" data-cite="Rick Savant" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31219" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Huh. So should some workers be given no gimmick to appeal to the 'not keen' fans and the others given gimmicks to appeal to the keeners?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If you're looking for a way to keep everyone happy, I think that when you've got those two notes, basically its not possible. Someone is going to be bugged, either way. (I could be completely wrong about this though, so anyone feel free to correct me)</p><p> </p><p> So in that case I might expect that having some with and some without gimmicks may just annoy both sects of fans?</p><p> </p><p> I'm not even sure if such a product would be able to exist in real life since people would be continually annoyed at your product (if anything, I'd expect that eventually it'd attract a different category of fan that is fine with and without gimmicks) , so I'm not really a big fan on the conflicting notes personally, but yeah, I guess I can go to the suggestion forum if I want to rant <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[Rick Savant]

<p>Ha. Well I know when I create the type of product *I* would want to see I always get both those notes.</p><p> </p><p>

I'm so conflicted...</p>

[D-Lyrium]

crayon is pretty much right. It just means you won't ever be able to please all of your fanbase, because it's so varied (usually because you have entertainment aspects in your promotion but also fairly high realism). So if you desperately want to get around it, drop realism to low, although to be honest it's not that big of a deal.

 

A product with both notes will struggle to get gimmicks above 66, though. Which counts as a 'bad gimmick' in the dirtsheet, but is only a microscopic penalty. It's one of those things which is annoying to see all the time, but very ignorable in a ratings sense.

 

My world champion with A* momentum and B+ in every region of Canada has a bad gimmick apparently - rated 63 - but try telling the CGC fans that...

[Eigan]

<p>All right, I'll share my experiences on this based on my main save.</p><p> </p><p>

My product:</p><p>

* Performance = Popularity</p><p>

* I have the "fans will expect all wrestlers to be packaged with a proper gimmick" comment</p><p>

* Also have the "will attract fans who won't be keen on gimmicks" comment</p><p> </p><p>

I got a lot of 66 rated gimmicks for a while, with a few breaking in above it. A major change occurred when I started using custom gimmicks (and specifically when I assigned 29 for both Difficulty and Subtlety).</p><p> </p><p>

I recall this post <a href="http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=415815" rel="external nofollow">http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=415815</a> and my results coincide with what ewanite's post suggests (post #5), although I've not personally tried any value besides 29 for both Difficulty and Subtlety. I haven't tried isolating one or the other to see if it's just Difficulty that needs adjusting, or Subtlety, or both. I have had flawless results though. And by flawless, I mean:</p><p> </p><p>

* 62 straight positive bonus gimmicks (i.e. anything above 71, so they will grant dirt sheet bonuses). I've tracked every single one of them and written down what each initial gimmick value was upon each workers' gimmick change. Could it be a stroke of luck? Sure, but it hasn't failed yet -- 100% success rate on 62 straight gimmicks.</p><p>

* No gimmick rated lower than 79.</p><p> </p><p>

Exact distribution of the workers' initial gimmick values are as follows:</p><p>

70-79: 2 workers</p><p>

80-89: 29 workers</p><p>

90-99: 26 workers</p><p>

100: 5 workers (and all happened to be main eventers at the time, I'm willing to accept that that's just a coincidence)</p><p> </p><p>

Gimmicks assigned: Cool, C***y, Crazy, Legitimate, Comedy, Brute, Wholesome</p><p> </p><p>

Also, my avatar has a Creativity level of 6, so it's affecting the possibility of a gimmick change slightly towards the positive side by just a bit, but 100% success is something I never expected. If it's partially determined by a random factor, then I've been extremely fortunate so far.</p>

[NWO4until01]

Now thats interesting... your definately onto something there.