Mods By Fleisch

[PhenomenalPat]

Was requested in Cut Requests thread, figured I'd add here for anyone who wants it.

 

http://i.imgur.com/r23DbxN.jpg

[Fleisch]

Fleisch,

 

how are ya man. I'm back from the dead! Atleast it felt like that at times.

 

Just wanted to say I'm glad to see your still going strong, and that an all woman's Mod done by the likes of the great Fleisch, is the TEW equivalent of a wet dream for me.

Welcome back mate. Glad you're looking forward to the women's mod. Having a blast making it.

 

Yup. I'd put it January 2012 for simplicity's sake.

 

 

 

Also, I don't think he should be on the CHIKARA roster anymore. He's been working (as Cottonbelly) exclusively in CWFH/CWFA this year save a few events. Enough about Jervis though, when are you going to give Sasha Banks A* popularity?!?!!?!?!

 

I've made a decision that Sasha Banks will get her A* popularity in the Janury 2022 update

 

Thanks everyone for the updates/fixes. I shall have some time on 2nd January to get some work on this. For now though, the build up to Christmas starts!

 

For those who celebrate it, have a fantastic Christmas, and for those who don't, well, enjoy the holiday season.

[Dave_Scott]

Looking forward to next month's release, man! Just got rejuvenated into watching WWE again, and come next month's release, I'll be making videos on the save! <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I expect great things, dearest Fleisch! And I have full confidence you will deliver. Merry Christmas btw.

[TheElTaco]

I love that small potshot to the guy who suggested the women be a B, the guy who was nice when you said that was extreme, a guy who will see that. That's so funny, we should make fun of everyone who suggests something. Ha....ha.....ha

[Fleisch]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TheElTaco" data-cite="TheElTaco" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I love that small potshot to the guy who suggested the women be a B, the guy who was nice when you said that was extreme, a guy who will see that. That's so funny, we should make fun of everyone who suggests something. Ha....ha.....ha</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Don't be so sensitive. The joke was not aimed at anyone's suggestion but more the notion that there are people out there who genuinely believe Sasha and Charlotte are legit main event stars selling out arenas. A B is not the most ridiculous request I've had for the women believe me.</p>

[DomNWO]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Fleisch" data-cite="Fleisch" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Don't be so sensitive. The joke was not aimed at anyone's suggestion but more the notion that there are people out there who genuinely believe Sasha and Charlotte are legit main event stars selling out arenas. A B is not the most ridiculous request I've had for the women believe me.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I understand that B may be high, but at least put them at a level where they're capable of putting on good matches in WWE's pop. based environment. In the scheme of things the top women are at least midcarders for WWE, so their pop should reflect that.</p>

[Xmaspast]

<p>Another AJPW/Japan update:</p><p> </p><p>

Atsushi Onita broke his leg at an FMW show a couple nights ago, he'll be out a few months at least, probably more like 4-6 but I'll try to keep you posted.</p>

[joemurphy]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Xmaspast" data-cite="Xmaspast" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Another AJPW/Japan update:<p> </p><p> Atsushi Onita broke his leg at an FMW show a couple nights ago, he'll be out a few months at least, probably more like 4-6 but I'll try to keep you posted.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It was apparently reported wrong, he has a fractured pelvis however is still doing Apache Army's Christmas Day show because he's a bloody mad man. Whether he does the AJPW 1/2 show I'm guessing depends on how that show goes.</p>

[Xmaspast]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="joemurphy" data-cite="joemurphy" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>It was apparently reported wrong, he has a fractured pelvis however is still doing Apache Army's Christmas Day show because he's a bloody mad man. Whether he does the AJPW 1/2 show I'm guessing depends on how that show goes.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Dude is ****ing insane.</p>

[Big Mark Smark]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DomNWO" data-cite="DomNWO" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I understand that B may be high, but at least put them at a level where they're capable of putting on good matches in WWE's pop. based environment. In the scheme of things the top women are at least midcarders for WWE, so their pop should reflect that.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> How good a performance do you want from them? I don't have any real interest in booking WWE, but I threw together a RAW show on a fresh save and a ten minute Bayley vs. Dana Brooke match pulled a 68. (Bayley carried it with 72 to Dana's 58 and it got a short time limit). That looks like Upper Midcard vs. Lower Midcard numbers to me...</p>

[DomNWO]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>How good a performance do you want from them? I don't have any real interest in booking WWE, but I threw together a RAW show on a fresh save and a ten minute Bayley vs. Dana Brooke match pulled a 68. (Bayley carried it with 72 to Dana's 58 and it got a short time limit). That looks like Upper Midcard vs. Lower Midcard numbers to me...</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It would depend on the person. (All stats come down to personal opinion) Sasha/Charlotte (even though done 15 thousand times) can still put on great matches, and they should be able to get a higher rating than by default. A match like you suggested has a suitable rating, but from what I've seen, that's not the norm. Once again, none of this <em>has</em> to be implemented or anything, as people have different opinions on how good the women are. If you don't enjoy the women then why would you wanted rated high, right? I have them rated the way I prefer to be rated already. I've just been suggesting at least some form of popularity change for the next release.</p>

[Big Mark Smark]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DomNWO" data-cite="DomNWO" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>A match like you suggested has a suitable rating, but from what I've seen, that's not the norm.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The match notes had Dana off her game and more time would have gotten a better rating. I didn't use any superscience to jack up their match grade. They went on as the second match to a hot crowd. I'd tried to get the crowd buzzing but Neville & Kendrick's car crash wasn't spectacular enough. As noted, the match got dinged for a short time. Without knowing how you book, I can only guess at the differences, but perhaps it's that I used the Eye Candy match aim?</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I've just been suggesting at least some form of popularity change for the next release.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Understood. I'm just asking what sort of rating you think they should get and trying to work out whether it's the database or the booking that explains the gap between expectation and result.</p><p> </p><p> edit: Just took a look at Sasha/Charlotte. Perversely, it didn't rate as well as Bayley/Dana. Bayley/Charlotte wasn't as good, either. In both cases, the "better" matches were being brought down by lack of psychology. Matches between Emmalina and Bayley seem to be the best-rated women's matches on RAW, because both have good psychology. I leave it up to people more interested in WWE's product to decide whether that's how it should be or not, but if an adjustment needs to be made I recommend altering the performance skills rather than overness.</p>

[DomNWO]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> I can only guess at the differences, but perhaps it's that I used the Eye Candy match aim?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'd say it's unrealistic to use the eye candy to get a better match rating, as it isn't used as a thing in the real life product. A Bayley/Dana match got a D+ for me without that aim.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Understood. I'm just asking what sort of rating you think they should get and trying to work out whether it's the database or the booking that explains the gap between expectation and result.</div></blockquote><p> I figured the top women (4 Horsewomen) should be at around an upper midcarder level (so around a C-/C. I said B but I did not realize that was main event level in the mod, my bad), but that could be a bit high (even though that reflects their status in real life). Fleisch's 10 point pop suggesting seems fine. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>edit: Just took a look at Sasha/Charlotte. Perversely, it didn't rate as well as Bayley/Dana. Bayley/Charlotte wasn't as good, either. In both cases, the "better" matches were being brought down by lack of psychology. Matches between Emmalina and Bayley seem to be the best-rated women's matches on RAW, because both have good psychology. I leave it up to people more interested in WWE's product to decide whether that's how it should be or not, but if an adjustment needs to be made I recommend altering the performance skills rather than overness.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That would be fine too, probably. I'd tweak both to get realistic pop. ratings and performance skills but that's just me.</p><p> </p><p> Even if this stuff isn't implemented, thank you for working with me to help and try to fix this small issue:D</p>

[Big Mark Smark]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DomNWO" data-cite="DomNWO" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'd say it's unrealistic to use the eye candy to get a better match rating, as <strong>it isn't used as a thing in the real life product</strong>. A Bayley/Dana match got a D+ for me without that aim.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm not sure about that. The Diva match is Eye Candy with very low risk, so it's basically trading on beauty + performance skills rather than being a completely crass lingerie match. It's not as though WWE's female talent wear the kind of ring gear that women have in MMA!</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I figured the top women (4 Horsewomen) should be at around an upper midcarder level (so around a C-/C. I said B but I did not realize that was main event level in the mod, my bad), but that could be a bit high (even though that reflects their status in real life). Fleisch's 10 point pop suggesting seems fine. </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Have you looked at how much of a difference that makes to their match ratings? Just going off my vague understanding of the game mechanics, popularity>performance settings basically just change the ratio of overness:top row scores (or Sex Appeal if you're using Eye Candy) before psychology is factored in from 50:50 at pop=perf to 60:40. So if you add 10 points of overness to the women, they're getting maybe 6 points added to their contribution to the match and less than that if their psychology limits them.</p>

[Poputt]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DomNWO" data-cite="DomNWO" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I understand that B may be high, but at least put them at a level where they're capable of putting on good matches in WWE's pop. based environment. In the scheme of things the top women are at least midcarders for WWE, so their pop should reflect that.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Nah. You can push someone higher than recommended in TEW. That is what the WWE is doing with their women's division. They're artificially taking spots from male wrestlers who are more over. Would any WWE viewer say Charlotte or Sasha Banks if you asked them who they'd like to see in a HIAC match?</p><p> </p><p> I think AJ Lee is the only woman wrestler who naturally made it to that midcard+ level based on her popularity. Bayley might make it if she drops the Eugene gimmick.</p>

[DomNWO]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Poputt" data-cite="Poputt" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Nah. You can push someone higher than recommended in TEW. That is what the WWE is doing with their women's division. They're artificially taking spots from male wrestlers who are more over. Would any WWE viewer say Charlotte or Sasha Banks if you asked them who they'd like to see in a HIAC match?<p> </p><p> I think AJ Lee is the only woman wrestler who naturally made it to that midcard+ level based on her popularity. Bayley might make it if she drops the Eugene gimmick.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I mean, Charlotte is one of the only reasons I like Raw right now, and I doubt I'm the only person out there that likes the women more than most of the men. Like I said before, these stats are opinion based, and if Fleisch thinks the women shouldn't be rated high, it's his opinion. At this point, since it seems I'm the only one that wants it (at least to this extent) I'll just do it in future saves I do and let things be.</p>

[Big Mark Smark]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DomNWO" data-cite="DomNWO" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I mean, Charlotte is one of the only reasons I like Raw right now, and I doubt I'm the only person out there that likes the women more than most of the men. Like I said before, these stats are opinion based, and if Fleisch thinks the women shouldn't be rated high, it's his opinion.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> In terms of overness, there are metrics for setting the ballpark. We might not be able to get an objective measure of who should be 68 Overness in Mid-Atlantic and who should be 67, but working out who is in the "C"s across the US compared to who is in the "B"s is a lot easier. If you want to call for a change, it's better to appeal to data rather than just ask for your opinion to be represented. So, perhaps you could take a look at social media followers and google trends (making sure to use the search topics rather than search terms, otherwise edge and christian will demand over 9000 overness to this day <img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> ) and do some comparisons, remembering that heels will tend to be less followed than faces.</p><p> </p><p> This isn't my project so I'm not going to try proving your case, but I did take a glance at Twitter. It's notable that all of the Horsewomen have fewer followers than Mark Henry, Cesaro, Dolph Ziggler - or, for that matter, Paige and Natalia. That suggests that they're not as over, though Google Trends is more sensitive to recent changes and might paint a different picture.</p>

[Dave_Scott]

Hey Fleischy! Since all the major events are done for the month, could we get a special Christmas present?! (January release?) <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

[DomNWO]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Big Mark Smark" data-cite="Big Mark Smark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>In terms of overness, there are metrics for setting the ballpark. We might not be able to get an objective measure of who should be 68 Overness in Mid-Atlantic and who should be 67, but working out who is in the "C"s across the US compared to who is in the "B"s is a lot easier. If you want to call for a change, it's better to appeal to data rather than just ask for your opinion to be represented. So, perhaps you could take a look at social media followers and google trends (making sure to use the search topics rather than search terms, otherwise edge and christian will demand over 9000 overness to this day <img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> ) and do some comparisons, remembering that heels will tend to be less followed than faces.<p> </p><p> This isn't my project so I'm not going to try proving your case, but I did take a glance at Twitter. It's notable that all of the Horsewomen have fewer followers than Mark Henry, Cesaro, Dolph Ziggler - or, for that matter, Paige and Natalia. That suggests that they're not as over, though Google Trends is more sensitive to recent changes and might paint a different picture.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I didn't mean to come across as doing so, my bad. I just thought that the auto-push levels should reflect their place in the company along with their popularity. Popularity is weighed really heavily in TEW in general in regards to position in the company, so I just figured that their popularity should reflect that, in at least some way.</p>

[Poputt]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DomNWO" data-cite="DomNWO" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I didn't mean to come across as doing so, my bad. I just thought that the auto-push levels should reflect their place in the company along with their popularity. Popularity is weighed really heavily in TEW in general in regards to position in the company, so I just figured that their popularity should reflect that, in at least some way.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> More people would recognize Jericho (even with his douche goatee) then Seth Rollins, and he's undeniably a bigger draw at the moment. He's not higher than Seth on the card though, and loses matches more frequently. Just because someone's getting pushed hard doesn't mean the game would suggest they should get the spot they have in reality. People tend to just use the autopush feature and slowly build everyone because they're afraid of upsetting workers, but that's not how real booking/writing works. Rollins isn't more popular than Jericho but he's higher on the card because he's considered more important to the company and its future.</p>

[Fleisch]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Dave_Scott" data-cite="Dave_Scott" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Hey Fleischy! Since all the major events are done for the month, could we get a special Christmas present?! (January release?) <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Not possible I'm afraid. Still have a lot of work to do. Adding the UK workers into the game that WWE will be using for their tournament and Japan is still a bit of a mess. I'm back to work tomorrow until Friday so unfortunately TEW isn't even getting loaded up until 2nd January when I have some leave.</p>

[Dave_Scott]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Fleisch" data-cite="Fleisch" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not possible I'm afraid. Still have a lot of work to do. Adding the UK workers into the game that WWE will be using for their tournament and Japan is still a bit of a mess. I'm back to work tomorrow until Friday so unfortunately TEW isn't even getting loaded up until 2nd January when I have some leave.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> No worries! Can't blame me for trying though. <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[Fleisch]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DomNWO" data-cite="DomNWO" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I mean, Charlotte is one of the only reasons I like Raw right now, and I doubt I'm the only person out there that likes the women more than most of the men. Like I said before, these stats are opinion based, and if Fleisch thinks the women shouldn't be rated high, it's his opinion. At this point, since it seems I'm the only one that wants it (at least to this extent) I'll just do it in future saves I do and let things be.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Probably not the only, but definitely in the minority. I don't watch for Charlotte at all. I don't like her and think shes over rated. I'm not saying she is bad, but I don't really care about her matches, or her character. Usually I forward through anything involving Charlotte.</p><p> </p><p> What I need WWE fans to start realising here is I'm not making a WWE mod. I'm trying to balance a gaming world and putting the women in WWE up means if in game they were to get released, then they'd be the highest paid people on the indies (which just would not be the case). They are already more over than most male wrestlers outside of WWE and putting them even higher unbalances things. Obviously people can do what they please in terms of editing the mod to their own preferences but the way I see the women's "revolution" in WWE right now is a marketing scheme. They can put them in main events, gimmick matches, whatever but the women are no more than midcarders at best. For the record, I enjoy women's wrestling but no way are any of the women in WWE Upper Midcarders - no matter how much you want to believe it. </p><p> </p><p> I respect your opinion and suggestion, however felt the need to explain that C/C+ matches are what the women are putting on in game, (Bayley v. Emmalina got me a C-, Charlotte v. Sasha got me a C and Becky Lynch v Alexa Bliss got me a C) 1 Average match and 2 Above Average matches. There is no way I can agree that the women should be putting on match ratings better than a 70. If you're getting 60-70 for a women's match then your getting above average ratings.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Dave_Scott" data-cite="Dave_Scott" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>No worries! Can't blame me for trying though. <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Nope can't blame you for asking. Just spurs me on to get it finished.</p><p> </p><p> That being said, if on 2nd I manage to get Japan and the UK workers done (or at least in a playable state. Then I may release an unfinished (albeit playable) version in January but as I said, just depends on how it goes on 2nd.</p>

[Fleisch]

<p>Ringo Ryan</p><p>

Roy Johnson</p><p>

Saxon Huxley</p><p>

Tiger Ali</p><p>

Tucker</p><p> </p><p>

Got a small amount of time yesterday to do some work on RWC. Above are the guys in the UK tournament left to add to the data. A few new Japanese workers have been added. Lucha Underground have had a little work done to them too with a few new signings added and a few people removed.</p>

[ThatKrytenGuy]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Fleisch" data-cite="Fleisch" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41205" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Ringo Ryan<p> Roy Johnson</p><p> Saxon Huxley</p><p> Tiger Ali</p><p> Tucker</p><p> </p><p> Got a small amount of time yesterday to do some work on RWC. Above are the guys in the UK tournament left to add to the data. A few new Japanese workers have been added. Lucha Underground have had a little work done to them too with a few new signings added and a few people removed.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> <span style="font-size:14px;">Hey Fleisch I don't know if you've ever heard of him or have any plans to do so, but are you going to add Sammy Guevara? Dude is one of the top high fliers in the world right now and has been killing it all across America, If you want to PM me I can get you some stats for him that will place him fairly in the mod.</span></p>