High Potential, Low Star Quality: What Do I Do?

[Luchador Canadiense]

So I've started a new OLLIE save, and I am loaded with Next Big Things. But the one worker showing the highest ceiling for popularity growth is Dragon Americano... he of the D+ Star Quality.

 

I'm intrigued by the potential, but how useful is he going to be in a popularity-driven product with Star Quality that low? I mean, I can risk it, ask him to drop a size and see if his Star Quality goes up, but even then... C-? Is that really going to make that much of a difference?

 

I'm curious how others have handled similar situations.

[Peria]

<p>Star quality determines your national battle standings and has an influence on their destiny roll.</p><p> </p><p>

If I remember correctly, nothing else. If they are on the NBT list they'll most likely break 80+ popularity. You might not use him to beat SOTBPW, but realistically you aren't going to be beating SOTBPW anytime soon.</p><p> </p><p>

My advice? Use him to his fullest. National is the only place where SQ matters. Unless Pop > Perf gives penalties that I'm unaware of.</p>

[bonnie]

Just means he won’t be a guy to win national battles with. Will still gain fantastic skills which means he could be an ME player who can carry less skilful but star quality heavy workers to good matches and feuds. Think someone like Owen Hart, fantastic wrestler, but was never gonna draw mainstream attention

[BigINMoldova]

<p>I really hope in the next game they either get rid of SQ or make it so only effects a certain type of popularity.</p><p> </p><p>

There needs to be two popularity scores because it's ridiculous comparing Actors and Athlete to actual Wrestlers. What's the point of that? </p><p> </p><p>

It doesn't even make sense because David Arquette was super famous in 2000 and his title reign was a disaster.</p>

[Sharkn20]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BigINMoldova" data-cite="BigINMoldova" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="45546" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I really hope in the next game they either get rid of SQ or make it so only effects a certain type of popularity.<p> </p><p> There needs to be two popularity scores because it's ridiculous comparing Actors and Athlete to actual Wrestlers. What's the point of that? </p><p> </p><p> It doesn't even make sense because David Arquette was super famous in 2000 and his title reign was a disaster.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I disagree with this. I really like the SQ feature and how that is implemented. You can always go to the editor for your save and put everyone in 100 or 0 SQ to "disable" the feature.</p>

[Hashasheen]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BigINMoldova" data-cite="BigINMoldova" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="45546" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I really hope in the next game they either get rid of SQ or make it so only effects a certain type of popularity.<p> </p><p> There needs to be two popularity scores because it's ridiculous comparing Actors and Athlete to actual Wrestlers. What's the point of that? </p><p> </p><p> It doesn't even make sense because David Arquette was super famous in 2000 and his title reign was a disaster.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah, because he had no in-ring skills, no performance skills and no physical skills worth speaking of.</p>

[Remianen]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BigINMoldova" data-cite="BigINMoldova" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="45546" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I really hope in the next game they either get rid of SQ or make it so only effects a certain type of popularity.<p> </p><p> There needs to be two popularity scores because it's ridiculous comparing Actors and Athlete to actual Wrestlers. What's the point of that? </p><p> </p><p> It doesn't even make sense because David Arquette was super famous in 2000 and his title reign was a disaster.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah, no, I completely disagree with this. If you're using David Arquette as an example of Star Quality, you don't understand what that stat means. David Arquette has never been an A-list actor. David Arquette has never been "super famous" (at least not in the US). His best day was when he married Courtney Cox but that was HER popularity "spilling over" onto him, like an overturned cup of tea. In 2000, Tom Cruise was "super famous" (two Mission Impossibles with Jerry Maguire sandwiched between them) and would you really put David Arquette in that category? </p><p> </p><p> Actors and athletes can cross over into wrestling (hi Ken Shamrock, Steve Blackman, Ernest "The Cat" Miller, Steve McMichael, Bill Goldberg, etc). Their popularity in that sphere can translate perfectly to wrestling (see: Rousey, Ronda). Admittedly, it's more likely to happen now than in past eras but it still happened. Heck, Vader played in a Super Bowl before he started wrestling. Regional, collegiate stars used to be able to parlay that popularity into decent to great pushes in their regional promotion(s). That's popularity transferring from one sphere to another.</p><p> </p><p> For the OP, as said, a high potential, low SQ worker can still be useful to you. You just shouldn't make him the company figurehead or anything like that. Think of someone like Lance Storm or in the C-Verse, Steve Flash.</p>

[Icecold]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Remianen" data-cite="Remianen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="45546" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yeah, no, I completely disagree with this. If you're using David Arquette as an example of Star Quality, you don't understand what that stat means. David Arquette has never been an A-list actor. David Arquette has never been "super famous" (at least not in the US). His best day was when he married Courtney Cox but that was HER popularity "spilling over" onto him, like an overturned cup of tea. In 2000, Tom Cruise was "super famous" (two Mission Impossibles with Jerry Maguire sandwiched between them) and would you really put David Arquette in that category? <p> </p><p> Actors and athletes can cross over into wrestling (hi Ken Shamrock, Steve Blackman, Ernest "The Cat" Miller, Steve McMichael, Bill Goldberg, etc). Their popularity in that sphere can translate perfectly to wrestling (see: Rousey, Ronda). Admittedly, it's more likely to happen now than in past eras but it still happened. Heck, Vader played in a Super Bowl before he started wrestling. Regional, collegiate stars used to be able to parlay that popularity into decent to great pushes in their regional promotion(s). That's popularity transferring from one sphere to another.</p><p> </p><p> For the OP, as said, a high potential, low SQ worker can still be useful to you. You just shouldn't make him the company figurehead or anything like that. Think of someone like Lance Storm or in the C-Verse, Steve Flash.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Or if you have 5 additional main eventers with high star quality, you're good.</p>