losttrem Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 One thing I realized is that the popularity penalties for aging workers are severe. As soon as the appear on the "time decline" list they start losing pop for every match they are in. Even if it says "it will be a couple of years before his in ring work will suffer too much". I am playing as CGC and I find that even putting those workers in twice or even three times as many angles than matches is not enough to combat the declining popularity. I noticed that AI controlled promotions let those workers go even if they have good stats and are still reasonably over. I guess it provides a challenge because now I really can't use someone like Jack DeColt in too many matches because even though they are rated highly, he loses pop through them. He already went from a 91 pop down to 82 in highly rated matches which he won. So how do others use these workers and deal with the severe penalties for them being past their primes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 If that is really the case, it needs to be addressed asap in my opinion. Without being able to use aging workers at stars at all, the game becomes nearly unplayable to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hive" data-cite="Hive" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>If that is really the case, it needs to be addressed asap in my opinion. Without being able to use aging workers at stars at all, the game becomes nearly unplayable to me.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well, it's been my experience as well. Its been very hard to book Handsome Stranger, as even at "showing occasional signs" he's getting hit with pretty stiff popularity penalties.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowsong Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 This doesn't really make sense to me. Workers shouldn't be losing popularity when they're past their prime. Skills should start to deteriorate, yes but in real life people tend to put on their nostalgia goggles when it comes to wrestling veterans and they still remain popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <p>To add on, I'm happy that time decline actually has a noticeable effect on in-ring skills now (even if it may be a bit extreme in the early years of it).</p><p> </p><p> But this whole "You lose overness because you can't wrestle quite as well as you used to" is silly. Some of those guys are still talented workers, just not as talented as they once were. Its not like the Undertaker is now a midcard jobber because his in-ring skills have been slipping for over a decade now. Yes, some of that has been keeping him out of matches, but time decline overness penalties should be restricted (I'd argue realistically) to workers who are in the terminal stages.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losttrem Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 I agree. It adds a new layer of challenge but at the same time it makes anybody over 35 a risk because any day the could start their downward slope and stop being viable main event talent unless you just use them in angles and have them wrestle very very rarely. And realistically it really makes no sense to have workers lose pop in highly rated high profile matches because they are 36 and past their prime. (As is the case with Jack DeColt in my game). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <p>I started a thread in the suggestion forum, as my gut says this isn't a bug but a misguided "balance" feature that simply needs some serious tweaking.</p><p> </p><p> Ugh, without editting their roster, I can't imagine using USPW this TEW so long as this is how the game works.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losttrem Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 Yes in between the "brute + dominate" mechanic being gone and the older worker pop penalties, you would really need to do a complete overhaul of USPW's roster and do it fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I wondered how long it was going to be for this topic to come up, took a bit longer than I expected. Right... the best thing to do is to compare decline in TEW to any real athletic competition (so I'm ruling out golf and darts here ). In most of those sports a 35 year old still competing at the highest level is highly unlikely except ina handful of cases. Yet in TEW, 35 is the lowest age for which you'll see a wrestler going into decline, with the upper end of that range being about 45 years old. That means a wrestler is already enjoying a far longer career at the top than in any real sport and that their ability to stay on to top is extended far beyond their natural lifespan as a real athlete would allow. Which is where decline steps in. There are a few different mechanisms in place in decline. The most obvious is skill decline, which starts to fade quite quickly and is one of the key mechanics in actually encouraging the AI to build new workers up whle also making the veterans less appealing in general. This actually leads to workers moving up and down the card, so that you won't see the SWF keep the same main event scene for a decade because no-one ever really loses any skills. Another mechanism is overness gains becoming more difficult and losses becoming more severe from matches. This is a graded curve, so in the early years of decline it shouldn't only be a small effect (1% slower growth I think, can't remember the decline rate) that makes it a little harder to keep someone at the top. Each year this gets a litle bigger with it becoming something like 3% on year 2, 6% on year 3 and so on up to something like 36% for 8+ years on decline... I think that's where the maximum limit was set on grades being penalised. The result of that is also that workers move down the card a bit, so that the AI will mix up veterans on the downslide with youngsters on the rise. With stats like basics and psychology never declining now (also useful stats for becoming a dojo trainer) that means that the development of youngsters has been greatly improved. And ultimately a large company is going to release veterans who are far past their prime, creating more spaces for youngsters on their roster and keeping the cycle of talent rising to the top at a fairly realistic pace. In terms of overnss changes, there are still overness floors for workers so as long as someone has been super-popular during the save there will always be a limit on how far they can ever fall. A big name veteran who has been deemed surplus to requirements should still be able to find a home with a smaller company even late into his career, being able to teach them things and use his popularity floor as a base to maintain a good career. The lesser stars may struggle a bit as they will have low floors to sink all the way down to, which also helps move people towards retirement and filling up the gameworld with more road agents, commentators and the like. Incidentally, I hope people have noticed that very few non-wrestlers will ever be generated now except in game areas that are short of them... that in part because of the way decline is handled now. So I hope that helps a bit. Obviously there should be more discussion on getting the balance exactly right as it's something that there could only be limited testing of due to it requiring so many sims. The more people look at it, the better. But I think the balance is pretty good and things work out pretty well overall in the long term. And if I've explaining things well enough here (I probably haven't ) then you should now know roughly how things are meant to work, so if you see something misbehaving badly then definitely mention it and things could be tweaked if required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losttrem Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 <p>Thank you for the detailed response Derek. I agree with Comradebot that it is nice to see growing age having a bigger impact this time around. But imo this feature needs some serious tweaking. </p><p> </p><p> To stay with my example: In my CGC game Jack DeColt (age 36) started to show first signs of ageing. This led to him dropping from a 91 pop to 82 in 4 months without losing a match while being involved in the company's main storyline, in 1-3 highly rated angles every show and highly rated matches. This to me seems way too big for someone who just started on his decline.</p><p> </p><p> It's just really hard for me to get into the mind set of a fan in some of these cases. "Yes you are still very talented and you just put up a great match that was probably the best on the show. But eww you're 35... go home grandpa".</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I wondered how long it was going to be for this topic to come up, took a bit longer than I expected. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /><p> </p><p> Right... the best thing to do is to compare decline in TEW to any real athletic competition (so I'm ruling out golf and darts here <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />). In most of those sports a 35 year old still competing at the highest level is highly unlikely except ina handful of cases. Yet in TEW, 35 is the lowest age for which you'll see a wrestler going into decline, with the upper end of that range being about 45 years old. That means a wrestler is already enjoying a far longer career at the top than in any real sport and that their ability to stay on to top is extended far beyond their natural lifespan as a real athlete would allow.</p><p> </p><p> Which is where decline steps in. There are a few different mechanisms in place in decline. The most obvious is skill decline, which starts to fade quite quickly and is one of the key mechanics in actually encouraging the AI to build new workers up whle also making the veterans less appealing in general. This actually leads to workers moving up and down the card, so that you won't see the SWF keep the same main event scene for a decade because no-one ever really loses any skills. Another mechanism is overness gains becoming more difficult and losses becoming more severe from matches. This is a graded curve, so in the early years of decline it shouldn't only be a small effect (1% slower growth I think, can't remember the decline rate) that makes it a little harder to keep someone at the top. Each year this gets a litle bigger with it becoming something like 3% on year 2, 6% on year 3 and so on up to something like 36% for 8+ years on decline... I think that's where the maximum limit was set on grades being penalised.</p><p> </p><p> The result of that is also that workers move down the card a bit, so that the AI will mix up veterans on the downslide with youngsters on the rise. With stats like basics and psychology never declining now (also useful stats for becoming a dojo trainer) that means that the development of youngsters has been greatly improved. And ultimately a large company is going to release veterans who are far past their prime, creating more spaces for youngsters on their roster and keeping the cycle of talent rising to the top at a fairly realistic pace.</p><p> </p><p> In terms of overnss changes, there are still overness floors for workers so as long as someone has been super-popular during the save there will always be a limit on how far they can ever fall. A big name veteran who has been deemed surplus to requirements should still be able to find a home with a smaller company even late into his career, being able to teach them things and use his popularity floor as a base to maintain a good career. The lesser stars may struggle a bit as they will have low floors to sink all the way down to, which also helps move people towards retirement and filling up the gameworld with more road agents, commentators and the like. Incidentally, I hope people have noticed that very few non-wrestlers will ever be generated now except in game areas that are short of them... that in part because of the way decline is handled now. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> So I hope that helps a bit. Obviously there should be more discussion on getting the balance exactly right as it's something that there could only be limited testing of due to it requiring so many sims. The more people look at it, the better. But I think the balance is pretty good and things work out pretty well overall in the long term. And if I've explaining things well enough here (I probably haven't <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />) then you should now know roughly how things are meant to work, so if you see something misbehaving badly then definitely mention it and things could be tweaked if required. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Which, I'm cool with the logic behind it, but in practice at the moment it feels overly harsh and unbeatable.</p><p> </p><p> My best example is Handsome Stranger: he's just now started the decline, but even putting up the best match grades in the company some nights he sees a pretty hefty hit to his popularity. Surely a worker would only have the fans start to turn on him for his declining in-ring performance if he could no longer produce decent matches? I think a mechanic where a worker sees the popularity hit for putting up worse than expected would be awesome. </p><p> </p><p> Even look at the real world examples. Steven Jackson isn't quite the RB he used to be, but he still sells the jerseys and has a sizable fan following. Its because, while age is starting to get to him, he's still got talent... just not quite as much. The current TEW model treats even guys just starting to show signs of slowing down like they're some haggard veteran who has fallen to third string as they refuse to hang it up.</p><p> </p><p> And that's how it should be. When it's clear they have nothing left to bring to the table (again, its wrestling, a direct comparison to actual sports seems a bit misguided, unless you're booking ROH), then people should turn on them for still being around, Kevin Nashing up their TV screens. But if the old guy can still go? If he still has the look and the skills, just not as much as he once had? Is it really realistic for the fans to go "Yeah, but you're not AS good as you were, so go away"?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="losttrem" data-cite="losttrem" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>To stay with my example: In my CGC game Jack DeColt (age 36) started to show first signs of ageing. This led to him dropping from a 91 pop to 82 in 4 months without losing a match while being involved in the company's main storyline, in 1-3 highly rated angles every show and highly rated matches. This to me seems way too big for someone who just started on his decline.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> While Derek makes a reasonable and sound point, an example like the one above is simply just too drastic an effect.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eayragt Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I wondered how long it was going to be for this topic to come up, took a bit longer than I expected. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"><p> </p><p> Right... the best thing to do is to compare decline in TEW to any real athletic competition (so I'm ruling out golf and darts here <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png">). In most of those sports a 35 year old still competing at the highest level is highly unlikely except ina handful of cases. Yet in TEW, 35 is the lowest age for which you'll see a wrestler going into decline, with the upper end of that range being about 45 years old. That means a wrestler is already enjoying a far longer career at the top than in any real sport and that their ability to stay on to top is extended far beyond their natural lifespan as a real athlete would allow.</p><p> </p><p> Which is where decline steps in. There are a few different mechanisms in place in decline. The most obvious is skill decline, which starts to fade quite quickly and is one of the key mechanics in actually encouraging the AI to build new workers up whle also making the veterans less appealing in general. This actually leads to workers moving up and down the card, so that you won't see the SWF keep the same main event scene for a decade because no-one ever really loses any skills. Another mechanism is overness gains becoming more difficult and losses becoming more severe from matches. This is a graded curve, so in the early years of decline it shouldn't only be a small effect (1% slower growth I think, can't remember the decline rate) that makes it a little harder to keep someone at the top. Each year this gets a litle bigger with it becoming something like 3% on year 2, 6% on year 3 and so on up to something like 36% for 8+ years on decline... I think that's where the maximum limit was set on grades being penalised.</p><p> </p><p> The result of that is also that workers move down the card a bit, so that the AI will mix up veterans on the downslide with youngsters on the rise. With stats like basics and psychology never declining now (also useful stats for becoming a dojo trainer) that means that the development of youngsters has been greatly improved. And ultimately a large company is going to release veterans who are far past their prime, creating more spaces for youngsters on their roster and keeping the cycle of talent rising to the top at a fairly realistic pace.</p><p> </p><p> In terms of overnss changes, there are still overness floors for workers so as long as someone has been super-popular during the save there will always be a limit on how far they can ever fall. A big name veteran who has been deemed surplus to requirements should still be able to find a home with a smaller company even late into his career, being able to teach them things and use his popularity floor as a base to maintain a good career. The lesser stars may struggle a bit as they will have low floors to sink all the way down to, which also helps move people towards retirement and filling up the gameworld with more road agents, commentators and the like. Incidentally, I hope people have noticed that very few non-wrestlers will ever be generated now except in game areas that are short of them... that in part because of the way decline is handled now. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p><p> </p><p> So I hope that helps a bit. Obviously there should be more discussion on getting the balance exactly right as it's something that there could only be limited testing of due to it requiring so many sims. The more people look at it, the better. But I think the balance is pretty good and things work out pretty well overall in the long term. And if I've explaining things well enough here (I probably haven't <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png">) then you should now know roughly how things are meant to work, so if you see something misbehaving badly then definitely mention it and things could be tweaked if required. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I know the game's already written and I'm a few iterations away from having a clue about how some of the mechanics work, but the examples that have been given sound overly harsh. However, I fully understand that reverting to a 2010 model means stagnant Main Event scenes and little progression for youngster.</p><p> </p><p> I'll have to admit to not knowing how it currently works. I'll also admit to not even having downloaded the demo yet - it's going to be a New Year purchase. However, this is how I would see it would work:</p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Overness improvements are majorly affected by time decline<br></li><li>Overness decreases are only slightly (or not at all) affected by time decline<br></li></ul><p></p><p> </p><p> The theory is that it is harder for people on the decline to get more popular, as people recognise they're on there way down. However, decreases in popularity would be treated as usual - taking defeats, and taking part in bad matches (which will happen more as skills decrease - and there's no argument that skills shouldn't be decreasing). You don't automatically default to getting more unpopular just because you are seen as past your prime - however if you took a few cards and your position took a knock on the card, it would be much harder for someone past their prime to make their way back up the card, and this is where a youger person would end up taking their spot.</p><p> </p><p> That way, in the examples given, if the workers are still winning in great matches and involved in hot storylines and angles, their overness would unlikely deteriorate. This would happen when they started to take losses or their skills declined to where their match quality isn't up to scratch, and once this happened it would be hard to recover from this (of course, the talented Shawn Michaels of this world should be able to achieve this).</p><p> </p><p> Again, it could work like this already, it might be impossible for it to work this way, or we may just have found two extreme examples which don't play out how the majority of wrestlers turn out. Just two cents from someone who doesn't even have the game <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Ryland Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 eayragt, you'll be glad to know that that is how it works, more or less. There was a mild fixed penalty as well, but that has been removed since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eayragt Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Adam Ryland" data-cite="Adam Ryland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>eayragt, you'll be glad to know that that is how it works, more or less. There was a mild fixed penalty as well, but that has been removed since.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Consider me glad, and now not planning to cancel my planned purchase.</p><p> </p><p> Admittedly that was never my plan, but hey <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <p>Thanks Ryland <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> Ill report back when I get a chance to book some old folks.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I hope I'm being helpful, so going to chip in again. People aren't suddenly taking hits to their popularity because they are "being seen as past their prime". They realistically are already 4 or 5 years past their physical peak before any decline is even starting, perhaps as many as 15 years past their realistic peak for guys who only start their decline at 45. It's probably a better way of phrasing it as... "Fans have now realised that Worker X has been on a downslide for a while and it's not possible to hide it any more". They might've been losing some muscle tone (power/star quality/sex appeal), or finding it that little bit harder to do a backflip (athleticism/flashiness) or just waking up a little sorer after wrestling (resilience/toughness fading) but it's basically a point where a worker can no longer hide that he isn't as good as he once was. I know that isn't reflected in the way stats are declining which is why I'm mentioning it. If worker's physical stats declined as they do in reality, you'd get notes saying they were declining far sooner... while at the same time they'd still be at a point in their career where they should still be learning the mental aspects of wrestling (performance skills) and perfecting their techniques (top row skills) or improving their character (entertainment and gimmicks skills). In TEW the decline note shows up much later, when basically a worker has learned as much as he's going to be able to and he's not going to get any better. This is a point significantly after he'd be declining in some areas, which means that workers are allowed to grow for much longer than they probably should be in some areas at the cost of declining all at once instead of in steps. Personally, I'd love the stepped approach where a worker would start his decline in varying stages, but that would be complicated. Instead, it's a simpler approach that makes it very clear when you should start thinking about moving someone away from the main event. However! The most important thing is the experiences with popularity falling with human players. The AI is pretty sound whenit comes to ageing workers, but obviously it was harder to test for human players while in development as there aren't that many of us and new patches every couple of days, meaning long term tests were unlikely. I don't see there being any changes made to the way things are done in general, but if popularity declines are too steep with human players then that's one area that could probably be worked on and improved. It'll just need lots of people to give feedback on it because the more voices there are, the better. EDIT: USPW is also getting the brunt of this feature somewhat... but that can be made up for to some degree by the highly angle intensive product. Ratings will stay high there so putting some charismatic individuals out for an A rated angle with a 50% match ratio makes that angle worth as much as an A rated match in the main event. And that's the secret to booking USPW, since their roster is ooooold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eayragt Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I hope I'm being helpful, so going to chip in again.<p> </p><p> People aren't suddenly taking hits to their popularity because they are "being seen as past their prime". They realistically are already 4 or 5 years past their physical peak before any decline is even starting, perhaps as many as 15 years past their realistic peak for guys who only start their decline at 45. It's probably a better way of phrasing it as... "Fans have now realised that Worker X has been on a downslide for a while and it's not possible to hide it any more". They might've been losing some muscle tone (power/star quality/sex appeal), or finding it that little bit harder to do a backflip (athleticism/flashiness) or just waking up a little sorer after wrestling (resilience/toughness fading) but it's basically a point where a worker can no longer hide that he isn't as good as he once was.</p><p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The trouble is people will always instantly try and compare to the long lasters. 'Taker is the prime example, but there are plenty of other examples - Batista would probably be my best example. It's probably also a little harder for smaller promotions - someone might be well past their prime but actually still be the most talented worker on the roster, so even though they are definitely past their best it would be a little odd in that situation to be penalised.</p><p> </p><p> But the theory on how it works is sound. For everyone that there is going downhill at 36 there's probably someone else still going on strong at 44. It's easy to moan about the decliners while ignoring those still going strong!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I hope I'm being helpful, so going to chip in again.<p> </p><p> People aren't suddenly taking hits to their popularity because they are "being seen as past their prime". They realistically are already 4 or 5 years past their physical peak before any decline is even starting, perhaps as many as 15 years past their realistic peak for guys who only start their decline at 45. It's probably a better way of phrasing it as... "Fans have now realised that Worker X has been on a downslide for a while and it's not possible to hide it any more". They might've been losing some muscle tone (power/star quality/sex appeal), or finding it that little bit harder to do a backflip (athleticism/flashiness) or just waking up a little sorer after wrestling (resilience/toughness fading) but it's basically a point where a worker can no longer hide that he isn't as good as he once was.</p><p> </p><p> I know that isn't reflected in the way stats are declining which is why I'm mentioning it. If worker's physical stats declined as they do in reality, you'd get notes saying they were declining far sooner... while at the same time they'd still be at a point in their career where they should still be learning the mental aspects of wrestling (performance skills) and perfecting their techniques (top row skills) or improving their character (entertainment and gimmicks skills). In TEW the decline note shows up much later, when basically a worker has learned as much as he's going to be able to and he's not going to get any better. This is a point significantly after he'd be declining in some areas, which means that workers are allowed to grow for much longer than they probably should be in some areas at the cost of declining all at once instead of in steps. Personally, I'd love the stepped approach where a worker would start his decline in varying stages, but that would be complicated. Instead, it's a simpler approach that makes it very clear when you should start thinking about moving someone away from the main event.</p><p> </p><p> However! The most important thing is the experiences with popularity falling with human players. The AI is pretty sound whenit comes to ageing workers, but obviously it was harder to test for human players while in development as there was only 5 of us and new patches every couple of days, meaning long term tests were unlikely. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I don't see there being any changes made to the way things are done in general, but if popularity declines are too steep with human players then that's one area that could probably be worked on and improved. It'll just need lots of people to give feedback on it because the more voices there are, the better. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> EDIT: USPW is also getting the brunt of this feature somewhat... but that can be made up for to some degree by the highly angle intensive product. Ratings will stay high there so putting some charismatic individuals out for an A rated angle with a 50% match ratio makes that angle worth as much as an A rated match in the main event. And that's the secret to booking USPW, since their roster is ooooold. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You are being helpful Derek, and I appreciate it.</p><p> </p><p> I'd argue, though, that part of the reason USPW has such an old roster is the nature of their product, and supports my viewpoint on this matter (which hopefully will be more accurately reflected with the new patch, which I'm patching in now). While they can be abused in angles there, they also have less fear of having the fans turning on them for being old, over the hill has-beens as USPW's fans don't give much of a frak about how good their wrestlers can actually wrestle.</p><p> </p><p> A natural progression would be to see some of TCW's and NOTBPW's workers hit the decline, and no longer be able to meet those companies stricter in-ring demands. Either they were built mainly on that in-ring talent and sink down the card (or to the indies to pass on some knowledge in places like NYCW), or they have the charisma/look to keep their star shining a little longer, so long as they can go someplace where the fans aren't there to see high quality wrestling anyways.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Its really something that needs a good, long looking at, and I imagine it might see tweaks for some time as players delve deeper and deeper into their games. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna try and intentionally put Handsome Stranger in a decent match. Go go talent trades!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="eayragt" data-cite="eayragt" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The trouble is people will always instantly try and compare to the long lasters. 'Taker is the prime example, but there are plenty of other examples - Batista would probably be my best example. It's probably also a little harder for smaller promotions - someone might be well past their prime but actually still be the most talented worker on the roster, so even though they are definitely past their best it would be a little odd in that situation to be penalised.<p> </p><p> But the theory on how it works is sound. For everyone that there is going downhill at 36 there's probably someone else still going on strong at 44. It's easy to moan about the decliners while ignoring those still going strong!</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah, people always think to mention the Ric Flairs and the Terry Funks of the world while missing out on the hundreds of guys who retire before 35 or even 30. If there's one thing I'd like to see more of in TEW, it would be retirements+regens for low level guys who are going nowhere fast. But with improved generated workers, more indy shows and better hiring/firing practises already in place, the game has already done a lot of good work in terms of making people more valuable. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p><p> </p><p> Undertaker is an interesting example to use for this actually. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"> I think (I may be wrong) that he's about 50 now and I think it's fair to say that he didn't hit his decline in TEW terms until probably pretty close to 44. Since then he's only really made very rare appearances, so his popularity has had very few chances to erode by virtue of being on TV all the time and people noticing his decline. His limited appearances in the ring (meaning very few chances to lose popularity) coupled with the heavy use of angles to promote his matches ensures that his popularity remains very high (a good use of the feature for only having people work on PPVs <img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png">).... high popularity, good top row plus awesome psychology, combined with working against other wrestlers who have awesome skills makes an almost perfect way to book someone who is on the decline. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p><p> </p><p> Batista is an interesting example to given how late he came to pro wrestling. In TEW terms he missed out on a lot of early development BUT his great look got him hired by the WWE, which got him to development so that he had a chance to develop his skills. It took a while, but once on the main roster he was then working with some very high level talents that helped him reach a pretty good level of skill, though he's obviously not one of the greatest wrestlers the world has ever seen. I'm not sure where his peak would be placed, but it's probably already happened and if he were to regularly be in front of a live audience he'd probably be losing popularity fairly quickly simply because he wasn't that skilled to start with and he would be even more exposed by his time decline.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yeah, people always think to mention the Ric Flairs and the Terry Funks of the world while missing out on the hundreds of guys who retire before 35 or even 30. If there's one thing I'd like to see more of in TEW, it would be retirements+regens for low level guys who are going nowhere fast. But with improved generated workers, more indy shows and better hiring/firing practises already in place, the game has already done a lot of good work in terms of making people more valuable. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /><p> </p><p> Undertaker is an interesting example to use for this actually. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I think (I may be wrong) that he's about 50 now and I think it's fair to say that he didn't hit his decline in TEW terms until probably pretty close to 44. Since then he's only really made very rare appearances, so his popularity has had very few chances to erode by virtue of being on TV all the time and people noticing his decline. His limited appearances in the ring (meaning very few chances to lose popularity) coupled with the heavy use of angles to promote his matches ensures that his popularity remains very high (a good use of the feature for only having people work on PPVs <img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />).... high popularity, good top row plus awesome psychology, combined with working against other wrestlers who have awesome skills makes an almost perfect way to book someone who is on the decline. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> Batista is an interesting example to given how late he came to pro wrestling. In TEW terms he missed out on a lot of early development BUT his great look got him hired by the WWE, which got him to development so that he had a chance to develop his skills. It took a while, but once on the main roster he was then working with some very high level talents that helped him reach a pretty good level of skill, though he's obviously not one of the greatest wrestlers the world has ever seen. I'm not sure where his peak would be placed, but it's probably already happened and if he were to regularly be in front of a live audience he'd probably be losing popularity fairly quickly simply because he wasn't that skilled to start with and he would be even more exposed by his time decline.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well, blame Ryland for creating so many potentially awesome characters and letting us play God with them. We players tend to view our Steve DeColts and Bam Bam Johanssons AS our Ric Flairs and Undertakers.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Comradebot" data-cite="Comradebot" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>You are being helpful Derek, and I appreciate it.<p> </p><p> I'd argue, though, that part of the reason USPW has such an old roster is the nature of their product, and supports my viewpoint on this matter (which hopefully will be more accurately reflected with the new patch, which I'm patching in now). While they can be abused in angles there, they also have less fear of having the fans turning on them for being old, over the hill has-beens as USPW's fans don't give much of a frak about how good their wrestlers can actually wrestle.</p><p> </p><p> A natural progression would be to see some of TCW's and NOTBPW's workers hit the decline, and no longer be able to meet those companies stricter in-ring demands. Either they were built mainly on that in-ring talent and sink down the card (or to the indies to pass on some knowledge in places like NYCW), or they have the charisma/look to keep their star shining a little longer, so long as they can go someplace where the fans aren't there to see high quality wrestling anyways.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Its really something that needs a good, long looking at, and I imagine it might see tweaks for some time as players delve deeper and deeper into their games. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna try and intentionally put Handsome Stranger in a decent match. Go go talent trades!</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I know the perception of USPW is that they just want to see nostalgia acts doing their thing, but that isn't actually true. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"> USPW is about taking recognisable faces and putting them into the battle of good vs evil. It's just that the only available recognisable faces seem to be TCW/SWF rejects, a few people willing to follow the money and their handful of homegrown talents. Not an ideal recipe, not when there are other more entertaining and more talented companies around... I like USPW to being the show kids watch, SWF the show teens watch and TCW the show adults watch. Obviously they aren't really exclusive but in terms of the products I think of them like that. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p><p> </p><p> Anywho, the main point I wanted to make was on performance based companies. The wrestlers in the likes of BHOTWG, PGHW, NOTBPW and to a lesser extend TCW are going to have somewhat shorter careers than their SWF and USPW counterparts. Performance based companies will put more wear and tear on their workers and already have more chance of injury, which once coupled with lower resilience/toughness means people running out of gas at a younger age. This can work out fairly well for USPW in future, since wrestlers will end up released from the bigger companies like TCW/NOTBPW and could go for an easy job with USPW whlie they are still capable workers. Workers in entertainment based companies have a longer shelf life, so USPW should be able to do fairly well though I think they may end up stuck at cult for a long time in most people's games until they can build up another young star or two to battle with Nicky Champion.</p><p> </p><p> Anywho, I've got things to write. I'm sure people want to see BHOTWG and I wanna help them with that. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comradebot Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 <p>Cool, Handsome Stranger actually appeared to have gained a small amount of overness for putting on an excellent match (thanks CZCW for lending me Donnie J!).</p><p> </p><p> This feels more appropriate to how it should be working. <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Self Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Thread had me scrambling to my CGC game to make sure my Jack DeColt is okay. He's fine, but I may have to switch around some of my midcard feuds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losttrem Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Self" data-cite="Self" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="35099" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Thread had me scrambling to my CGC game to make sure my Jack DeColt is okay. He's fine, but I may have to switch around some of my midcard feuds.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The mechanic has been tweaked with the latest patch (thanks for that Adam). The penalties arent as harsh anymore.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.