mbroadbent16 Posted November 28, 2015 Share Posted November 28, 2015 hi all, i'm just about to start a new game using fleish data. one thing i've never been too sure off is using b-shows. i'm going to play with TNA, and happy to edit a little, so of course i have impact and xplosion. just wondering what peoples opinions are on using them or whether people just stick to A shows? i know this is quite a open question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NarrZiss Posted November 28, 2015 Share Posted November 28, 2015 I try to experiment with my roster and the workers in b-shows. For example I try to figure out some tag team chemistries or give them an easy match for their experience. I prefer to book worker, which I don't use as often as them in my a show(s). In TNA you can also use a b show for one of your divisions. Maybe the X- or the Knockout-Division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan93 Posted November 28, 2015 Share Posted November 28, 2015 B shows are invaluable. Workers can improve their stats, gain (and lose, of course) popularity and momentum, and it doesn't affect your company in any way. No pop loss for your company for putting on a bad B show. Use your main guys on A shows, and prospects on B shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teh_Showtime Posted November 28, 2015 Share Posted November 28, 2015 It also allows you to do wacky things that would utterly bomb on the main shows, but you can test various match types, finishes, agent notes, etc to see how they get over with the crowd. It's also invaluable for building tag experience quickly or testing combinations in general Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbroadbent16 Posted November 29, 2015 Author Share Posted November 29, 2015 thanks for your replys guys, certainly a different outlook on them actually. thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.