redgiant Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I have been watching SWF,TCW and USPW battling it out. USPW has now become the dominant force in the US and never lost a battle while the other two stay hovering between national and cult. And I don't see USPW being overtaken for several years because they can steal whoever they want. They've never lost in bidding wars. The new system seems less competitive than the old one which based the ranking on match results. In 2013, the second or third company could occasionally win a battle to hang on longer at national level. The new system will probably guarantee the top one always wins because the star quality will hardly change in at least 4-5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nickman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I haven't really been involved in too many National battles yet, however I am about to make the jump from Cult to National in my WCW 2001 game, and WWF has ALL the star power. I thought if I just put on much better shows this would counteract that. Is this not the case anymore?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redgiant Posted May 17, 2016 Author Share Posted May 17, 2016 Star quality seems to have a play in it. In my save, SWF, TCW and USPW are consistently getting B to B+ shows but TCW and SWF always lose to USPW probably due to star quality. The former never stay at national level for more than 2 months. In fact I'm surprised that with all the star power (Rock Golden, Remo,Rich Money,Sammy Bach,Wolf Hawkins - a total of 4274 star power), USPW isn't doing any better than the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nickman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Hmmmm, I may need to rethink my jump to National then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Avatar Fan Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 In my PGHW save (I actually have to use a roster split since I have too much talent. This is a good problem to have) I signed an aging Kikkawa (92 pop) just so that I have an extra bit of starpower if Burning Hammer gets back to National anytime soon. I currently have 3,898 with him, so I should be safe. I think that I might sacrifice him (no creative control) to get Wolf Hawkins over and into the main event for good. My main problem is that after buying out 21CW and getting on Arcadia and a big Euro sports channel, I have no chance to defeat SOTBPW when I get into national in the U.S. Really, it shouldn't be a big deal, since I'm a B- in Europe and I have plans to buy out UEW when they fail so that I can grab Koller, who returned after I didn't pick up his contract from 21CW. I'm an alliance with NOTBPW and TCW where we share prestige and momentum, so I try to help them in national battles by loaning out guys like Gilmore, Hawkins and Joshua Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakesonaplane Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I think it is a good reflection of the mechanics of the Monday Night War environment in the US, but not really sure it makes any sense in say Japan for example. 'Star Quality' (a critical part of national battles) in the TEW sense is less important in Japan, and although the biggest stars in puroresu usually have good 'Star Quality' it's not as important as the US as defining the struggle between the 'big two.' Take the mid-late 1990s for example, you had two companies at fairly similar levels, AJPW and NJPW, they were competing, but I feel probably that the old system based on show quality would make more sense in terms of determining who wins a 'national battle' there, rather than say NJPW had bigger stars (which they did) so they 'win'. This is further supported by the fact that in Japan it's virtually impossible for two companies at war to pillage each others roster (in game) for each others high 'Star Quality' guys, because workers have company loyalty set, and besides IRL jumping ship between the big two was extremely rare for the same reason (unlike in the US). Company loyalty in Japan basically undercuts the mechanics of the national battle in TEW 16 by making it very hard to take the stars of your competitor (except for contract expiry). What this means is that whoever starts behind in the national battle will (in theory anyway) find it very difficult to overcome their rival. TL-DR I think the feature is good but seems mostly geared to simulating how things worked in the US during the monday night wars rather than the wrestling industry as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nickman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 But DOES it reflect the Monday night wars?? WCW had ALL the star power, WWF just blew them away by creating their own characters and having far superior shows and storylines. There's no way WWF had the better star-power leading into 1998. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lr10540 Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I enjoy it. I think it's more realistic. Casual viewers are what companies strive for and they're attracted to star power. As far as the Monday Night Wars, WCW had an aging roster and star power dies with age. WWF was creating new, hot stars that I know I gravitated towards in my early youth. The mechanics may have been a bit different as SCSA doesn't scream star when you look at him but he was and still is the biggest star of the last 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nickman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Oh, don't get me wrong, Austin was the greatest star in the history of wrestling, and probably still is. But they didn't the Monday Night Wars on starpower. Quite the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redgiant Posted May 17, 2016 Author Share Posted May 17, 2016 The WCW invasion storyline was the best back then! I agree that the companies who started behind will probably find it difficult to stay relevant against the top rival. I hope someone who has been running a watcher game gives us how the national stage plays out in the long term with the new system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remianen Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I thought if I just put on much better shows this would counteract that. Is this not the case anymore?? No, it is not. You win National Battles based on the star quality x the average popularity of your top 5 main eventers. It's meant to indicate how much of a draw your company is. The ? window even says that what redgiant pointed out is exactly as intended: National battles are far less volatile than Regional battles due to the way the scores are calculated. As a result, more often than not, a single company will win for many months in a row before a rival can assemble a good enough main event roster to takeover. snakesonaplane, I completely disagree with you. You're completely discounting the impact that people like Giant Baba, Inoki, Misawa, et al had on the business. Star quality is important in every region of the wrestling world. All of the puro greats had buckets of it, it was just defined differently than in the West. In Japan, it was more like "he looks like he could kick some ass" whereas in the West, it was "he looks like a star" (whatever that means. Hi Luger!). At their heights, Burning Hammer and PGHW (and GCG to a far lesser extent) went head to head based on the stars they developed. Look at the SQ of those workers (even in or nearing their twilight). Also, one of the hallmarks of puro is promoting from within. It's all about developing your own stars. If you can do that, you don't need to poach. That's where the cultural differences come in (though that wouldn't be reflected by TEW given how random dojo graduates seem to be. Rare too, even on 'extremely high'). Ideally, poaching would be the way the West does business whereas Japanese promotions would develop their own talent internally. And every now and then, you get a convergence (NJPW's three Musketeers, PGHW's golden generation, etc) which is essentially a promotion's winning lottery ticket. With all the pitfalls that come with that notion. Now, winning National battles requires you to play the long game. Snatch up stars whenever (and wherever) they become available and develop those stars (especially the foreign ones) to stand a chance of winning. If you don't know how to develop talent without cannibalizing, you'll get your teeth kicked in repeatedly. I'm going to get my teeth kicked in repeatedly once I get to National because, generally speaking, the C-Verse women are lacking in star quality. But of the top 5 women in SQ, the only one I don't have yet is J.Ro (due to a bug), one is in development (Higa), one is my user character, one is in the midcard (Alina America), and one is shared (Yuma Maruya). Meanwhile, I'm watching SOTBPW basically stockpiling pieces (Rich Money, Tyson Baine, seemingly any big name that has become available so far). Money is proving to be just that, pulling 80 rated matches out of ENHANCEMENT TALENTS (Rich Money d. California Kid, 80). It seems like the new paradigm requires players to shortlist all the people with great or excellent star quality and snatch them up as soon as they become available, if only to keep them away from the competition. Also, keep an eye on those young talents (under 30) with just 'good' star quality because they could blow up. I'm considering a raid on 5 Star because they have a handful of workers who have picked up 2-4 points of star quality in six months. Heck, Shiori Jippensha is 29 and has gained 2 points. I like the new system, even if I am going to get my ass kicked. Well, assuming the other companies can stay at National size (which is not a given). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nickman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 No, it is not. You win National Battles based on the star quality x the average popularity of your top 5 main eventers. It's meant to indicate how much of a draw your company is. The ? window even says that what redgiant pointed out is exactly as intended: So in my scenario where I'm playing as WCW in 2001 are you saying it's impossible for me to go up to National and not get bumped straight back down to Cult?? I was sure putting on good shows would be enough to keep me up there. What else can I do?? There's no way I can just buy the Rock and Austin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain2 Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 So in my scenario where I'm playing as WCW in 2001 are you saying it's impossible for me to go up to National and not get bumped straight back down to Cult?? I was sure putting on good shows would be enough to keep me up there. What else can I do?? There's no way I can just buy the Rock and Austin! Try to build up the stars you have. WCWs roster isn't exactly indie quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakesonaplane Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 snakesonaplane, I completely disagree with you. You're completely discounting the impact that people like Giant Baba, Inoki, Misawa, et al had on the business. Star quality is important in every region of the wrestling world. All of the puro greats had buckets of it, it was just defined differently than in the West. In Japan, it was more like "he looks like he could kick some ass" whereas in the West, it was "he looks like a star" (whatever that means. Hi Luger!). Not sure how that is disagreeing with what I said? I never said SQ wasn't important in Japan, indeed I stated specifically that all the big stars had it, but its just defined differently in puro, which you have then just repeated like its somehow a different point than what I made... On the idea of developing talent internally, yes that will be a solution in game, but with historical mods the true borns are limited and so is their SQ. Especially in Japan there has been a major drop off in new high level talents since the late 90s, this makes it hard to catch up if you already behind, such as AJPW in a historical scenario. In real life they tried to use foreigners to do this but those talents were so broken down it only worked for a short time. As talent pillaging is hard in Japan, I'm not really sure how AJPW would out star power a NJPW in a way that isn't realistic, all other things being equal. As I said before I'm just not sure the system really suits Japan as much as the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redgiant Posted May 17, 2016 Author Share Posted May 17, 2016 Meanwhile, I'm watching SOTBPW basically stockpiling pieces (Rich Money, Tyson Baine, seemingly any big name that has become available so far). Money is proving to be just that, pulling 80 rated matches out of ENHANCEMENT TALENTS (Rich Money d. California Kid, 80). Same in my save. USPW keeps stockpiling whoever they want. They are effectively merging with TCW and SFW into one big monster. They've never lost a bidding war from what I've seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 People indeed have to realize that it works a lot more like real life now. No matter how bad your product is, people will tune in to see the stars do... no matter what, basically. If I had to tune in to watch the Rock fart in someone's face, I still would've marked out for it and bore through an hour of RAW to see it. People are also looking at it too much from a gameplay-perspective. Yes, it's sometimes extremely hard to "catch up". But that's true in real life. TNA for instance really did their best the first years to get a stable and different product, but they didn't step much closer to the E. Not at all. Complaints about the poaching are logical, but you might complain directly to WWE. The game just tries to represent that. The only reason people stop complaining about the poaching is that WWE now lets them do relevant things instead of just letting the workers waste away. And "Star Power" is the it-factor: It depends somewhat on people's perceptions. While it's true that the game doesn't take the 'cultural' factor into account, you can hardly deny that Nakamura bring his "it-factor" to WWE as well. Workers adjust as well. It's more than just "looking badass". Mods will have to be carefully designed as a result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remianen Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Not sure how that is disagreeing with what I said? I never said SQ wasn't important in Japan, indeed I stated specifically that all the big stars had it, but its just defined differently in puro, which you have then just repeated like its somehow a different point than what I made... The fact that you said it wasn't as important for Japan as it is in the West. That's flat-out not true. It's extremely important all over the world, even if it's defined differently. All of the greats had it in spades and if not for their bodies breaking down, could still be headlining to this day because of it. The big problem is that in the West, star quality is usually judged along with look (which is why so many people who are said to have lots of star quality typically have very similar physiques) whereas in Japan, look doesn't factor in as much. Nakamura is a perfect example of that. Star quality and popularity is what gets people to put their money down to see a show. I don't care how good your shows are, if there are only 500 people watching it but your competition (who puts on a worse show) is pulling 5000, you lose. That's the long and short of it. You can put on 5-star matches on every single show but if you can't draw, you can't win. National battles in TEW16 are about drawing, not how good your show is overall. EVOLVE and Ring of Honor put on better shows than WWE. What exactly does that get them? A participation ribbon, maybe? Perhaps the most obvious example: ECW on several occasions put on better shows than WWF or WCW. What did that get them? People indeed have to realize that it works a lot more like real life now. No matter how bad your product is, people will tune in to see the stars do... no matter what, basically. If I had to tune in to watch the Rock fart in someone's face, I still would've marked out for it and bore through an hour of RAW to see it. People are also looking at it too much from a gameplay-perspective. Yes, it's sometimes extremely hard to "catch up". But that's true in real life. TNA for instance really did their best the first years to get a stable and different product, but they didn't step much closer to the E. Not at all. Complaints about the poaching are logical, but you might complain directly to WWE. The game just tries to represent that. The only reason people stop complaining about the poaching is that WWE now lets them do relevant things instead of just letting the workers waste away. Exactly! It also affects the player's booking, if you really go in-depth. If you lack star quality among your top 5, you have to try to make that up with popularity. So you could potentially have five main eventers who aren't allowed to lose because doing so would subtract from their draw value (by reducing their draw ability). Also, think about how scandals could completely shift the balance of power in the world. In my current game, there are a handful of workers with 100 star quality (Champagne Lover, El Fuerza, Rocky, Magnum Kobe). If one of them becomes scandalized, not only does it deeply impact their promotion (firing them) but it also starts a countdown timer to when other promotions can benefit from that event (by signing that worker). Also, when Remo or Sammy Bach's contracts come due, their 98 star quality is going to cause a feeding frenzy. I like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan93 Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Exactly! It also affects the player's booking, if you really go in-depth. If you lack star quality among your top 5, you have to try to make that up with popularity. So you could potentially have five main eventers who aren't allowed to lose because doing so would subtract from their draw value (by reducing their draw ability). Also, think about how scandals could completely shift the balance of power in the world. In my current game, there are a handful of workers with 100 star quality (Champagne Lover, El Fuerza, Rocky, Magnum Kobe). If one of them becomes scandalized, not only does it deeply impact their promotion (firing them) but it also starts a countdown timer to when other promotions can benefit from that event (by signing that worker). Also, when Remo or Sammy Bach's contracts come due, their 98 star quality is going to cause a feeding frenzy. I like that. Quick question about that. Let's say Hogan gets himself caught saying racial remarks (not even on a sex tape! well, progress for one person...) and takes a 20 point hit to his SQ, fired from WWF, popularity drop, etc. Can I sign him and send him on a vacation while he recovers, or would I get penalized? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Quick question about that. Let's say Hogan gets himself caught saying racial remarks (not even on a sex tape! well, progress for one person...) and takes a 20 point hit to his SQ, fired from WWF, popularity drop, etc. Can I sign him and send him on a vacation while he recovers, or would I get penalized? penalized....just having him on your roster kills your attendance. I asked that same question a while back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 You might also criticize the system for favoring mainstream promotions, but honestly it's all the same in the end. Nobody wants to watch a pure company full of Ron Greenhorns or Merle O'Curle's, no matter how good they are. You gotta have some stars there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remianen Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Quick question about that. Let's say Hogan gets himself caught saying racial remarks (not even on a sex tape! well, progress for one person...) and takes a 20 point hit to his SQ, fired from WWF, popularity drop, etc. Can I sign him and send him on a vacation while he recovers, or would I get penalized? penalized....just having him on your roster kills your attendance. I asked that same question a while back. Yeah and their toxicity lasts 20-24 months. So you might be able to get the jump on the competition by signing Hogan at month 20 but you might have to deal with four months of consequences as a result. Might still be worth it to lock up a worker of that quality though. See the added strategy? But does a person take a hit to star quality as a result of being scandalized? That seems a bit harsh since SQ does not "regenerate" like popularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rock Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 <p>I absolutely love the new system, simply because it is indeed closer to reality and the Monday Night War is the best example for this.</p><p> </p><p> When Austin was at the height of his popularity (WM 14 and ongoing), the WWE took the lead with WCW being a close second - but once The Rock became The People´s Champion they lead by a wide margin and never looked back.</p><p> Austin AND The Rock at the same time - WCW never had a chance.</p><p> </p><p> So yeah, I do like the new system.</p><p> But I don´t think it´s perfect because their should be some exceptions to the "Star Quality x Popularity" Rule, like Mick Foley.</p><p> </p><p> I mean, Mick Foley was the reason 500.000 people switch from Nitro to Raw to see him win the big one - in TEW 2016 he would never be that big of a factor because in a good Mod his SQ should be somewhere in the 40´s to 50´s.</p><p> </p><p> And also it shouldn´t be limited to Wrestlers only.</p><p> Vince McMahon and Iron Mike wouldn´t even count because they are Personalitys and not Wrestlers, but both were HUGE for the WWE during the Monday Night War.</p><p> Vince was the MEGA-Heel everybody loves to hate and one of the reasons Austin became SO big.</p><p> Tyson brought the WWF so much attention from the media - hell, here in Germany nobody cared for the WWE in 1998 and they showed his confrontation with Austin during the News, in Magazines and so on - it was everywhere and in the USA of course it was HUGE publicity for the WWE.</p><p> </p><p> So the new system was a big step in the right direction, but I think Adam will somehow make it even better for TEW 2020 <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...
Blackman Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="The Rock" data-cite="The Rock" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="41646" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I mean, Mick Foley was the reason 500.000 people switch from Nitro to Raw to see him win the big one - in TEW 2016 he would never be that big of a factor because in a good Mod his SQ should be somewhere in the 40´s to 50´s.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> To be fair: the fact the title change got spoiled and commented on was the reason people switched. The numbers also seemed a little exaggerated for the purpose of (good, mind you) storytelling.</p><p> </p><p> Exceptions like this could be simulated in the future by narratives. It was a WCW blunder.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d12345 Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 <p>I'm in month 2 in my TCW game and have actually seen USPW lose multiple bidding wars. The rankings after January were 1. SWF 2. TCW 3. USPW.</p><p> </p><p> In month 2 Rogue, [EDIT** meant to write Remo here], and someone else I forget all became available from SWF and a bidding war between TCW (me), SWF, USPW, and NOTBPW started.</p><p> </p><p> Even though USPW offered **Remo 41k per month over 4 years they lost out to SWF who offered 35k per month over 5 years. Same deal with Rogue.</p><p> </p><p> In both instances the offers from USPW wasn't even being seriously considered. This leads me to believe offering the most money doesn't just get you anyone.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan93 Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Typically workers want longer contracts. It's always been like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.