TEW2020 Discussion Thread

[shawn michaels]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TLCJR4LIFE" data-cite="TLCJR4LIFE" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>No they didn’t, they settled years later after using the gimmick for years. They settled because it made sense time and money wise to do so, same as any other reason. </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> No they didn't. They immediately tweaked the gimmick but WWE said that with what had been done and the implications they worked for WWE, the damage had already been done. It's in the lawsuit.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TLCJR4LIFE" data-cite="TLCJR4LIFE" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Lawsuits are expensive and time consuming, there is no actual legal precedent for the trademark of a gimmick. <p> The idea and concept as a whole is asinine, would be the equivalent of Dc suing everyone who made a character with Super Speed because it’s too similar to the Flash.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Pro wrestling companies own ring names, that’s basically it, and even that can be skirted around legally. See Warrior.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Clearly they do not own just ring names, they own characters. (which is pretty much what a gimmick is most of the time.) See TNA and Broken Matt as an example. WWE went with the woken version, but they did reach an agreement with TNA to buy the gimmick. Cause if they hadn't owned the gimmick, Vinnie Mac wouldn't even go near it. The fact that they later even got TNA footage handed to them is just another sign that it was probably a good deal for TNA as well.</p>

[Derek B]

Keep it civil in here guys, you're moving away from the point and getting into insult territory. Either take it to PM or stop.

[LoganRodzen]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DarK_RaideR" data-cite="DarK_RaideR" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I know this is meant as a joke, but as a fan of diaries and a diary writer myself... <img alt=":(" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/frown.png.e6b571745a30fe6a6f2e918994141a47.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I check the forum daily and I’m always lurking around the different sections. I didn’t mean that to insult you or anyone else, bud. Just using my dry humor. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I’m always reading different threads whether I’m posting or not. Would be hard to stay off a site I’ve made a habit of for 15 years. <img alt=":eek:" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/eek.png.0e09df00fa222c85760b9bc1700b5405.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="LoganRodzen" data-cite="LoganRodzen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I check the forum daily and I’m always lurking around the different sections. I didn’t mean that to insult you or anyone else, bud. Just using my dry humor. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I’m always reading different threads whether I’m posting or not. Would be hard to stay off a site I’ve made a habit of for 15 years. <img alt=":eek:" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/eek.png.0e09df00fa222c85760b9bc1700b5405.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote><p> Sheeshus, man. Your post made me realize I've been here for 14 years, as well. How? Like, actually how? There's no way I'm that old. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[EBEZA]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Henderson" data-cite="Henderson" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Hopefully it's more of a hidden rating for neutral chemistry. I don't see why it would need to be displayed on who has neutral chemistry, rather, just keep it displayed on who has bad, good, or great chemistry.<p> </p><p> Just as it is now, any workers you put up against each other, if they don't have one of the good, great, or bad chemistry notes, they would just be considered to have neutral chemistry.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Got to disagree here, I want neutral chemistry noted, although I accept the list format would need changing to incorporate this. My reason is that neutral chemistry and unknown chemistry are vastly different. If you build a feud for a year to a huge main event on your biggest show of the year and discover they have awful chemistry, it's a kick in the teeth. This can happen with unknown chemistry.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DarK_RaideR" data-cite="DarK_RaideR" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm a bit worried that storing neutral chemistry can end up clogging the chemistry windows. Oh well, those still have filters.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah, as I've said above, the format would need changing to include all the neutral chemistry discovered. On my spreadsheet, I have a Vs Chemistry tab, a Tag Chemistry tab and a Manager Chemistry tab. Each has all of my roster members across the top and down the side, and the box(es) where both meet tells me their chemistry.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Matt_Black" data-cite="Matt_Black" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>On the other hand, seeing who has neutral chemistry is a quick way to know what combinations you've already tried. And going through the match history can be a slog.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This is why I like the feature, and I why I've previously always kept a spreadsheet.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="kito333" data-cite="kito333" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I play late 90’s mods a lot and at the time WWF had a soft enforcement of heel/face.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="kito333" data-cite="kito333" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think this also allows for swerve turns that the WWF did a lot back then. We can have a face act like a heel or viceversa and not be forced to turn them to make it realistic.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> My mrs is currently rewatching the Attitude Era on the Network, started in January '99 and now is up to November 2000. Triple H has recently been a great example of this, where he randomly became a "face" for a couple of months (to the point where we were constantly debating if he had turned and when <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />) only to "turn" back heel (if he was ever actually face) on the reveal he was the mastermind behind running down Stone Cold.</p><p> </p><p> In TEW 2016, one would get punished for too frequent turns, but in 2020 it sounds like we'll just be able to turn down the strictness of the divide, keep HHH heel and just have him fight heels for a bit, if we wanted to replicate this.</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>Interesting. I had never heard that part before, or at least not that I remember. So they didn't even bother to dig into something he did there initially in some way or form? <strong>Damn, WCW was destined for failure.</strong> <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> This is the entirety of both the 83 Weeks podcast and What Happened When Monday in a couple of sentences, especially the one I bolded!</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I play late 90’s mods a lot and at the time WWF had a soft enforcement of heel/face.</div></blockquote><p> I feel like this is a myth. Watching late 90s WWF, you can absolutely tell who are the babyfaces and who are the heels. WWF at the time would have liked to tell you it was shades of grey, but in reality, it was black and white, clear as day. And in the WWF, it always has been. And probably forever will be.</p>

[Paul_Heyman_Guy]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hive" data-cite="Hive" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Wow, you simply can't accept being wrong. Are you by any chance a flat-earther?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That’s awfully arrogant for somebody who got something so factually wrong, despite being very well known and easy to research, in their last post.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hive" data-cite="Hive" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Nah that's not why McMahon could buy it. McMahon could buy it pure and simple because Fusion Media, whom together with Bischoff was poised to buy it, withdrew their offer. McMahon was then the only interested party left. He first bought the trademark and logo and afterwards the TV library, in two separate deals.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Everybody involved has openly discussed that aspect of the settlement multiple times. The fact that it gave Titan/WWF/WWE/Vince the right to match any bid on WCW if they were ever liquidated. Even if Fusion Media hadn’t withdrawn their offer, Vince could have(and would have) matched the offer and owned everything related to WCW. This is like responding to “the Earth orbits the sun” with “nah, that’s not it, the Earth goes in a big circle and the sun just so happens to be in the middle of it.”</p><p> </p><p> (Side note: that term of the settlement isn’t nearly as prescient as it may sound. While the lawsuit was filed in 1996, and WCW filed their own suit in 1998 that was also part of the settlement, it wasn’t settled until 2000, just a few months before they in fact went out of business. It wasn’t hard to see it coming as a possibility by that point.)</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>No they didn't. They immediately tweaked the gimmick but WWE said that with what had been done and <strong>the implications they worked for WWE,</strong> the damage had already been done. It's in the lawsuit.<p> </p><p> Clearly they do not own just ring names, they own characters. (which is wrestling is pretty much what a gimmick is most of the time.) See TNA and Broken Matt as an example. WWE went with the woken version, but they did reach an agreement with TNA to buy the gimmick. Cause if they hadn't owned the gimmick, Vinnie Mac wouldn't even go near it. The fact that they later even got TNA footage handed to them is just another sign that it was probably a good deal for TNA as well.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> In the first paragraph, that was by far the most important part of the lawsuit. And the reason WCW had to pay WWE as part of the settlement. The gimmick stuff was secondary and likely didn’t play a huge role in the end result.</p><p> </p><p> As far as the Matt Hardy situation goes, that’s not my understanding of what happened. The agreement was between Impact and Matt Hardy, not the WWE. Matt himself became owner of all the Broken Matt Hardy and related trademarks, and in fact Impact immediately announced that they would give every current and former performer the right to use their Impact persona elsewhere after they leave. WWE paying to use Impact footage on select episodes of certain shows on their network is completely unrelated.</p>

[Self]

<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>I feel like this is a myth. Watching late 90s WWF, you can absolutely tell who are the babyfaces and who are the heels. WWF at the time would have liked to tell you it was shades of grey, but in reality, it was black and white, clear as day. And in the WWF, it always has been. And probably forever will be.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> What <em>made</em> a babyface/heel certainly changed at that time, with more rebellions babyfaces running amok. So you could describe that as 'softer', but I agree that in the context that this feature seems to be about (who fights who) it was as black & white as always.</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Self" data-cite="Self" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>What <em>made</em> a babyface/heel certainly changed at that time, with more rebellions babyfaces running amok. So you could describe that as 'softer', but I agree that in the context that this feature seems to be about (who fights who) it was as black & white as always.</div></blockquote><p> Good point.</p>

[Guest Asaemon]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Burner account!</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Where are Pierluigi Collina, Roy Bean or Charlie Brown when you need them?</p>

[EBEZA]

<p>The way <strong>Reign Length</strong> is now measured in days... does that suggest that the calendar system is now overhauled to be a real calendar, rather than "Monday, Week 4, January 2016"?</p><p> </p><p>

Think about it, if I started a title reign on the fourth Monday of January 2016 and reigned until the first Monday of March 2017, IRL that would be 406 days, but by TEW 2016's calendar system, it'd be 371. Quite a big difference in reign lengths, equivalent to losing 5 weeks with the belt!</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<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>The way <strong>Reign Length</strong> is now measured in days... does that suggest that the calendar system is now overhauled to be a real calendar, rather than "Monday, Week 4, January 2016"?<p> </p><p> Think about it, if I started a title reign on the fourth Monday of January 2016 and reigned until the first Monday of March 2017, IRL that would be 406 days, but by TEW 2016's calendar system, it'd be 371. Quite a big difference in reign lengths, equivalent to losing 5 weeks with the belt!</p></div></blockquote><p> Hmm, I'm not exactly sure why this matters. The number of days is the number of days within the context of TEW 2020, and its calendar.</p>

[nerodragomir1]

I'm certainly not as passionate as some people are about having a RL accurate calendar. I will however say when trying to do mirror booking with New Japan. It's hard to squeeze all of their tour dates into 28 days sometimes. Like some tours they do go into 29,30 & 31st of some months. So I either have to squeeze three extra shows into a month. Or I have to add them to the start of the next month, which throws off the following month. Having a working calendar would be a neat addition, if that were to happen. Although, I won't lose any sleep over it, If it doesn't happen. But the news about title reigns having a date counter, would insinuate that he's working on the calendar.

[LloydCross]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><strong>PM Event Rename</strong>: The user can now rename events while in PM mode. This is useful if you want to reference the main event's name but don't know exactly what that will be until you've finished booking.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This sounds like removing an unnecessary restriction, so I'm all for it. </p><p> </p><p> That said, I'm struggling to think of a reason why I would need to do this. What are some things people are looking forward to doing that are facilitated by this change?</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<p>It's stated in the very Journal post:</p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>This is useful if you want to reference the main event's name but don't know exactly what that will be until you've finished booking.</div></blockquote>

[JaySticLe of YouTube]

Always keep this in mind— if Adam doesn’t mention that something has been changed or removed, it’s probably safe to assume it hasn’t been changed or removed until Adam says something. <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

[LloydCross]

<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>It's stated in the very Journal post:</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I saw that. I'm saying I don't see when that would be a helpful thing (and maybe don't understand what that means). Is it for when you have multiple events in one day?</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="LloydCross" data-cite="LloydCross" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I saw that. I'm saying I don't see when that would be a helpful thing (and maybe don't understand what that means). Is it for when you have multiple events in one day?</div></blockquote><p> I can definitely see it. I'm booking an event. Struggling to come up with a name. I book the matches, do the main event, and the main event gives me an inspiration for a name.</p>

[Adam Ryland]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="LloydCross" data-cite="LloydCross" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I saw that. I'm saying I don't see when that would be a helpful thing (and maybe don't understand what that means). Is it for when you have multiple events in one day?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> People might be using event names in the style of "UFC: A vs B". If you don't know what your main event is until you book it, or you have to change it on the fly, this allows you to change the name accordingly.</p>

[lavelleuk]

<p>The event name change is a great feature, hadn't thought of that but very helpful with small companies </p><p> </p><p>

The narrative randomness I love, can you change it to happen randomly too? Or between certain dates? Not got the game in front of me to check but that would be a great thing to add if it's not in already</p>

[Zero]

<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>I can definitely see it. I'm booking an event. Struggling to come up with a name. I book the matches, do the main event, and the main event gives me an inspiration for a name.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Exactly. A lot of my PPV matches are the marquee matches "Brody vs. Vader III" or WWF IYH: Brody vs. Vader IV</p>

[LloydCross]

<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>I can definitely see it. I'm booking an event. Struggling to come up with a name. I book the matches, do the main event, and the main event gives me an inspiration for a name.</div></blockquote><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Adam Ryland" data-cite="Adam Ryland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>People might be using event names in the style of "UFC: A vs B". If you don't know what your main event is until you book it, or you have to change it on the fly, this allows you to change the name accordingly.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That makes sense. I'd never thought about using really pointed event names. I guess another similar example would be some of those WWF In Your House shows where they were sometimes named directly after people.</p><p> </p><p> How would that work with an annual event? Could you change the name of just the single iteration?</p>

[DatIsraeliGuy]

<p>Hey Adam, care to answer in regards to the calendar?</p><p>

I'm only directing it towards you as you clearly visit this thread and answer stuff</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DatIsraeliGuy" data-cite="DatIsraeliGuy" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Hey Adam, care to answer in regards to the calendar?<p> I'm only directing it towards you as you clearly visit this thread and answer stuff</p></div></blockquote><p> Any changes to the calendar would be covered in a Journal entry, I'm sure.</p>

[Historian]

Hey Adam, care to answer in regards to the calendar?

I'm only directing it towards you as you clearly visit this thread and answer stuff

 

I'm pretty sure Adam previously said that the calendar would not be changing to a date based calendar, because of how it would effect the scheduling of events as annual events/etc...