TEW2020 Discussion Thread

[lavelleuk]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Peter.1986" data-cite="Peter.1986" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Today’s entry is great with one issue<p> </p><p> First of all the way Adam has explained it sounds much more realistic. This is a massive change in the game and sounds like it’s for the better.</p><p> </p><p> The only issue I have (there maybe something added that solves this) is that pushes being assigned actually helped me so much in terms of booking, knowing who was where on the roster and sorting my roster out. If I have a roster of just 20 major stars, I haven’t got 20 main eventers. Even thought the fans would buy it, the roster would still be structured to have openers etc. </p><p> </p><p> Like I said there maybe another way to do it, but is there the possibility the old way of sorting your roster (and autopushes) could benthere, purely for arranging the roster? It wouldn’t be ‘visible’ to the world eg fans/workers.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Wouldn't that be up to you though? So if you had a roster of all major stars you would just choose who you felt were the priority to book who who you want to book? Or am I misunderstanding? I mean if you have just 20 major stars (which I'm assuming was an extreme example) isn't putting one of them as "opener" just the same as treating him like one anyway?</p>

[SirMichaelJordan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Peter.1986" data-cite="Peter.1986" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Today’s entry is great with one issue<p> </p><p> First of all the way Adam has explained it sounds much more realistic. This is a massive change in the game and sounds like it’s for the better.</p><p> </p><p> The only issue I have (there maybe something added that solves this) is that pushes being assigned actually helped me so much in terms of booking, knowing who was where on the roster and sorting my roster out. If I have a roster of just 20 major stars, I haven’t got 20 main eventers. Even thought the fans would buy it, the roster would still be structured to have openers etc. </p><p> </p><p> Like I said there maybe another way to do it, but is there the possibility the old way of sorting your roster (and autopushes) could benthere, purely for arranging the roster? It wouldn’t be ‘visible’ to the world eg fans/workers.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Good point but we always can tag a worker into a category and separate like that. I feel like the need for staff feedback is even more of a hot commodity now. I can see myself going through a creative block on who to push and who to put on the mid card. Maybe there will be other elements to making such decisions...Will a roster full of major stars mean I have a roster full of main eventers?</p>

[Peter.1986]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lavelleuk" data-cite="lavelleuk" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Wouldn't that be up to you though? So if you had a roster of all major stars you would just choose who you felt were the priority to book who who you want to book? Or am I misunderstanding? I mean if you have just 20 major stars (which I'm assuming was an extreme example) isn't putting one of them as "opener" just the same as treating him like one anyway?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yes that’s correct. </p><p> </p><p> But it was just so helpful to have the roster set out in that way. When planning, booking, deciding who to sign, and many other things. Even more so going back to a save after a few weeks or longer. </p><p> </p><p> The auto push was very helpful in arranging this and helping me decide what storylines, who I would push etc. </p><p> </p><p> Also using auto push after every PPV show to help see changes.</p>

[Historian]

For one, I am incredibly happy about this development. As someone who historically plays as smaller companies that are rising in size, I find this to be very beneficial. If I had a dollar for every time I grew inside and auto-pushed and found someone who had been a main event that's now an upper midcarder. This feature will be welcomed by me as I know longer have to worry about the push but more properly how someone is viewed by the audience. It also answers the Women's Division dilemma that so many had [including myself] which is a breath of fresh air. It will make the roster feel more fluid, feel more alive, and feel like my booking decisions and how I present people matters.

[EBEZA]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="smw88" data-cite="smw88" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>But would that not be a case of a worker getting over with the fans despite their push/usage. Given Ryder really got over on the internet rather than on screen I would argue it isn't replicated now anyway. You would need an equivalent to movies/mma for social media to drive his pop up. - possibly a tag/attribute in 2020<p> </p><p> On jinder that's an example of a company pushing someone who got popular in certain markets although arguably not in the home market as they intended. From what I saw in the Asian markets he mostly got over especially in India which arguably was the whole point of the exercise :-)</p><p> </p><p> Personally I am really looking forward to seeing what all these changes bring to the game when it comes together. It is sounding really interesting and more engaging at the moment. I suspect there are lots of nuances not apparent in these changes until we get hands on and see how they work out. I would also expect some to radically change as the game develops and something's dont work as anticipated requiring a change.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm thinking more that Zack Ryder would be fairly high up this new system, but would have a low push, and Jinder the opposite. I don't think either system is perfect, that's why I think combining the two might make an even better system. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[Peter.1986]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="SirMichaelJordan" data-cite="SirMichaelJordan" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Good point but we always can tag a worker into a category and separate like that. I feel like the need for staff feedback is even more of a hot commodity now. I can see myself going through a creative block on who to push and who to put on the mid card. Maybe there will be other elements to making such decisions...Will a roster full of major stars mean I have a roster full of main eventers?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I should imagine there will be something to help. This is a major change for the good, but I’ve seen before in games sometimes features taken out that were helpful. </p><p> </p><p> As you say staff feedback is something the game would really benefit from, and although the old way of ‘pushes’ had more linked to, for me it was one of the only things ‘staff’ helped with. I can see why it’s been taken out as the new way sounds much better, I just want us to be able to use the old way of sorting our roster and auto push (to be classed as a staff suggestion) </p><p> </p><p> If you have a roster of only 20 major stars, you do have 20 main eventers in terms of the fans would accept you booking any of them as main eventers, but you wouldn’t book them all as main eventers.</p>

[Teh_Showtime]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Peter.1986" data-cite="Peter.1986" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Today’s entry is great with one issue<p> </p><p> First of all the way Adam has explained it sounds much more realistic. This is a massive change in the game and sounds like it’s for the better.</p><p> </p><p> The only issue I have (there maybe something added that solves this) is that pushes being assigned actually helped me so much in terms of booking, knowing who was where on the roster and sorting my roster out. If I have a roster of just 20 major stars, I haven’t got 20 main eventers. Even thought the fans would buy it, the roster would still be structured to have openers etc. </p><p> </p><p> Like I said there maybe another way to do it, but is there the possibility the old way of sorting your roster (and autopushes) could benthere, purely for arranging the roster? It wouldn’t be ‘visible’ to the world eg fans/workers.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If the previous games are anything to go by, you can still filter by popularity and the like to make sure your most popular Major Star is the one headlining everything.</p>

[Jalberico]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="EBEZA" data-cite="EBEZA" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'd actually like to see a combination of this new system and the existing "assigned push" system. The one flaw I see with this new system is that I can't see "Zack Ryder situations" or, conversely, "Jinder Mahal situations" surfacing in-game.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Adam literally said that unexpected situations can occur ... that crowds might latch onto someone you yourself weren't meaning to push. That sounds like Zack Ryder to me.</p><p> Jinder wasn't a crowd induced push ... it was forced by the WWE brass, so this new system doesn't really affect that. That's up to the player to force feed a worker onto fans.</p>

[Jalberico]

<p>My question about the new push feature is this ...</p><p> </p><p>

If you do in fact end up with a roster only made up of major stars, are those workers going to complain if they're not used in the main event?</p><p> </p><p>

I mean, if we look at today's WWE, main-event level guys are used in the opening match of TV shows every week.</p><p> </p><p>

But if you've got Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, Cena, Lesnar, Strowman, Lashley, Ziggler, McIntyre, Owens, Bryan, Styles, Orton, Samoa Joe, Nakamura, Sheamus, Wyatt, Rusev, Jeff Hardy, etc., all of which could reasonably be pushed in the main event, will there be issues that surface if I'm not using all of those guys in the last match/angle of the show every week?</p><p> </p><p>

Just want some clarification here, because if you do end up with too many major stars, someone's either going to have to slide down the card by default or risk "creative has nothing for you."</p>

[Peter.1986]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Teh_Showtime" data-cite="Teh_Showtime" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>If the previous games are anything to go by, you can still filter by popularity and the like to make sure your most popular Major Star is the one headlining everything.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yes you can, but the current ‘push’ and ‘autopush’ Is something that just has it all set out on your main roster screen without having to click, filter, sort etc. Might be a little thing but it is a big in terms of having to go through extra clicks and things.</p><p> </p><p> As I say, I’m sure Adam will have an alternative.... if not I hope he considers something because such a great sounding big change to the game could also remove something that streamlined a lot of things such as what I and others have mentioned. </p><p> </p><p> I suppose if you don’t use the current push system that way, then it’s hard to see how reliant some of us are on it</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jalberico" data-cite="Jalberico" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>My question about the new push feature is this ...<p> </p><p> If you do in fact end up with a roster only made up of major stars, are those workers going to complain if they're not used in the main event?</p><p> </p><p> I mean, if we look at today's WWE, main-event level guys are used in the opening match of TV shows every week.</p><p> </p><p> But if you've got Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, Cena, Lesnar, Strowman, Lashley, Ziggler, McIntyre, Owens, Bryan, Styles, Orton, Samoa Joe, Nakamura, Sheamus, Wyatt, Rusev, Jeff Hardy, etc., all of which could reasonably be pushed in the main event, will there be issues that surface if I'm not using all of those guys in the last match/angle of the show every week?</p><p> </p><p> Just want some clarification here, because if you do end up with too many major stars, someone's either going to have to slide down the card by default or risk "creative has nothing for you."</p></div></blockquote><p> Main eventers don't care about their actual placement on the card in TEW 2016. They only care about being used on the card. It can be anything from main event to opening match to referee to color commentator to 1 minute backstage skit.</p>

[kanegan]

<p>Ok i am back to this forums after a long time. Basically i almost got burned out playing TEW 16 and WMMA 5 so took a long hiatus but the announcement of new TEW has me salivating only. </p><p> </p><p>

My best features are:</p><p>

1. India as a new territory. Being an Indian, this is a dream come true.</p><p>

2. The new push system</p><p>

3. Ability to convert save game to database.</p>

[Historian]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Peter.1986" data-cite="Peter.1986" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yes you can, but the current ‘push’ and ‘autopush’ Is something that just has it all set out on your main roster screen without having to click, filter, sort etc. Might be a little thing but it is a big in terms of having to go through extra clicks and things.<p> </p><p> As I say, I’m sure Adam will have an alternative.... if not I hope he considers something because such a great sounding big change to the game could also remove something that streamlined a lot of things such as what I and others have mentioned. </p><p> </p><p> I suppose if you don’t use the current push system that way, then it’s hard to see how reliant some of us are on it</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I don't think this introduces extra clicks, it just automatically does it for you. So instead of seeing 'main eventer' and being able to change that, guys will be assigned to 'unknown' etc... based off all of the factors.</p><p> </p><p> I am assuming you will still be able to filter by the designations (so if you want to see all of your major stars) so those of us who use the 'show me everyone lower than upper midcarder' when booking will still be able to use that, it will just take some time to learn the new system.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TeemuFoundation" data-cite="TeemuFoundation" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> Main eventers don't care about their actual placement on the card in TEW 2016. They only care about being used on the card. It can be anything from main event to opening match to referee to color commentator to 1 minute backstage skit. </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You beat me to it, but exactly. Guys don't care about where they are used on the card. I regularly have main eventers open the show, especially if they are working against non main event talent or I have a storyline reason.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Peter.1986" data-cite="Peter.1986" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yes that’s correct. <p> </p><p> But it was just so helpful to have the roster set out in that way. When planning, booking, deciding who to sign, and many other things. Even more so going back to a save after a few weeks or longer. </p><p> </p><p> The auto push was very helpful in arranging this and helping me decide what storylines, who I would push etc. </p><p> </p><p> Also using auto push after every PPV show to help see changes. </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> From the way I read it, this will work better. You won't *need* to autopush. You can still do all of your filters. You can still see who your top stars are, your major players, etc... But it auto updates anyway, so after each show you can go in and just look through your list to see who is under what category. It will take some getting used to, I'm sure, but I think it will become much more useful than the current push system.</p>

[Historian]

I'm really curious about how many levels there are and what all of them are. I think it will be a very useful system [as I already said] but the question of how many levels there are just popped into my head.

[Sudo_Nym]

So you're saying that if I try to Erik Watts the promoter's son, the fans might disagree with me? Interesting.

[James Casey]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Sudo_Nym" data-cite="Sudo_Nym" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>So you're saying that if I try to Erik Watts the promoter's son, the fans might disagree with me? Interesting.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Hopefully!</p><p> </p><p> *</p><p> </p><p> I’m curious whether the worker status is going to reflect company size - using Adam’s example, someone with 40 popularity in a Small fed will be a mich bigger deal than someone with 10, but would they still both show up as low on the scale, or is 40 enough for a Major Star at local level?</p>

[SirMichaelJordan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="EBEZA" data-cite="EBEZA" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm thinking more that Zack Ryder would be fairly high up this new system, but would have a low push, and Jinder the opposite. I don't think either system is perfect, that's why I think combining the two might make an even better system. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Considering it’s affect by booking decisions, Ryder would be replicated by gaining popularity by himself but still not viewed as a serious player on the roster.</p>

[SirMichaelJordan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TeemuFoundation" data-cite="TeemuFoundation" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Main eventers don't care about their actual placement on the card in TEW 2016. They only care about being used on the card. It can be anything from main event to opening match to referee to color commentator to 1 minute backstage skit.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I would like to see certain major stars (egos) complaint about not closing the show at a top PPV.</p>

[WCGreyghost]

I'm reserving judgment on the whole perception thing. I can see some potential there, but it seems more like a solution searching for a problem that doesn't exist.

[shawn michaels]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="WCGreyghost" data-cite="WCGreyghost" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm reserving judgment on the whole perception thing. I can see some potential there, but it seems more like a solution searching for a problem that doesn't exist.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The problem existed, the announcement was intriguing and with some advantages, but the whole thing feels meh for some reason. More information might be needed. While this certainly creates the chance to replicate organic stuff and include everyone in the same system, parts of the old system should have been kept. Especially to do promises on contract negotiations as regarding to push.</p><p> </p><p> But overall I love the concept. If it is well implemented it has potential. We were in need of a good entry like this one seems to be, or has the potential to be. I know things are vague now in most entries, but that is normal considering the stage at where the game is. Looking forward to see how this works.</p>

[Jaysin]

This is a feature I need to see in action. As it stands right now, I prefer the old style, but can't really judge the new system until I play around with it.

[SirMichaelJordan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="shawn michaels" data-cite="shawn michaels" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The problem existed, the announcement was intriguing and with some advantages, but the whole thing feels meh for some reason. More information might be needed. While this certainly creates the chance to replicate organic stuff and include everyone in the same system, parts of the old system should have been kept. Especially to do promises on contract negotiations as regarding to push.<p> </p><p> But overall I love the concept. If it is well implemented it has potential. We were in need of a good entry like this one seems to be, or has the potential to be. I know things are vague now in most entries, but that is normal considering the stage at where the game is. Looking forward to see how this works.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I agree parts of the old syste should stay in some form.. I would hope or suggest that we can promise push level or workers can ask or demand to be pushed to a level. Like a unknown asking to be placed in the mid card scene or better yet a staff member suggests it. Or signing a big name FA and promising him nothing less than a main eventing no matter what the crowd perceive what he is.</p><p> </p><p> From the little info we have, it seem like the crowd is running the show. Which is not a bad thing but it’s also one half of a puzzle. As we all know from watching WWE, being over with the crowd doesn’t necessarily mean you are main eventing.</p>

[Irishwhiskey119]

I disagree with the criticisms i think this is much much better and a welcomed addition. Remains to be seen what type of flaws will show itself from it but on face value it sounds much better.

[Kingster]

<p>Love today's journal entry. I have a feeling this game will be so much different from TEW 2016 and may need some getting used to, but I don't mind it if it's for the better.</p><p> I can already see complains though from people who don't like change, but I hope the development team don't let themselves be swayed by this.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="SirMichaelJordan" data-cite="SirMichaelJordan" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>From the little info we have, it seem like the crowd is running the show. Which is not a bad thing but it’s also one half of a puzzle. As we all know from watching WWE, being over with the crowd doesn’t necessarily mean you are main eventing.</div></blockquote><p> Yes, it seems like the crowd is running the show because it's realistic. Of course the fans decide who is over (by definition) and that's how it's been in the previous games, too. </p><p> I'm not watching WWE but if the WWE isn't putting their most over wrestlers in their main events, they're just being stupid. The most over guys belong in the main event because they are the guys people come to see or tune in to watch. </p><p> The game should simulate how all pro wrestling works, and not just centre around how WWE is operating.</p>

[SirMichaelJordan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Kingster" data-cite="Kingster" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Love today's journal entry. I have a feeling this game will be so much different from TEW 2016 and may need some getting used to, but I don't mind it if it's for the better.<p> I can already see complains though from people who don't like change, but I hope the development team don't let themselves be swayed by this.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Yes, it seems like the crowd is running the show because it's realistic. Of course the fans decide who is over (by definition) and that's how it's been in the previous games, too. </p><p> I'm not watching WWE but if the WWE isn't putting their most over wrestlers in their main events, they're just being stupid. The most over guys belong in the main event because they are the guys people come to see or tune in to watch. </p><p> The game should simulate how all pro wrestling works, and not just centre around how WWE is operating.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Let’s not act the wrestling don’t have a history of politics and certain people getting to be chosen to reside on the top of the mountain...WWE was an example but we can take a history lesson on the entire business.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> I don’t remember reading anyone saying that they dislike the change.</p>