General Gameplay Questions Thread

[awesomenessofme1]

Don't take me to court if I'm wrong, but I *think* a "major" match is defined as having at least two participants (on different sides) who are perceived as Stars or above. So a Major Star/team squashing a Recognisable guy/team isn't a major match IIRC, but a Major Star vs. a Major Star or Major Star vs. Star would be. Star vs. Star is where I honestly can't remember. I THINK Star vs. Star is considered a major match.

 

It's definitely due to the perception (previously the push) of the workers involved, though, nothing to do with where it is on the card.

 

This is something that's looking like it will be an annoyance for 0 pop companies. I booked one show and everyone on it is now considered a star, meaning I get dinged for not having 15 minute matches. Not a big deal, considering that a show with a rating of 20 will still gain me pop, but it's annoying.

[d12345]

 

You should definitely rate the interviewing on Microphone too. This is the scenario Rated On: Microphone (instead of just Entertainment) was invented for.

 

See this is what I was doing in 2016 BUT I read the manual this year (lol yes only this year) and saw that it says specifically wrestlers who are getting interviewed should be rated on Microphone.

 

It says entertainment is more for general reactions and interactions without necessarily speaking on the mic.

 

So if I understand correctly. Those segments in WCW with Buff Bagwell and Scott Steiner where Steiner rambles on the mic and Buff jumps around like a goof should be rated like this?:

 

Scott Steiner - Microphone

Buff Bagwell - Entertainment

 

Now if you add Mean Gene to that segment and have him interviewing Steiner it would be like this:

 

Scott Steiner - Microphone

Buff Bagwell - Entertainment

Mean Gene - Microphone

[stonecold285]

OK i'm feeling suuuuper stupid right now but, is there a way to change or choose your user's name when you start a game??? Player One looks way too generic for me:eek:

[Eastshire]

"

You should definitely rate the interviewing on Microphone too. This is the scenario Rated On: Microphone (instead of just Entertainment) was invented for.

 

I don't know: from the handbook Microphone is only 40% Talking (which is 80% Microphone and 20% Charisma adjusted by Star Quality) and 60% Popularity.

 

So you still are primarily rating them on popularity.

[D-Lyrium]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Eastshire" data-cite="Eastshire" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47568" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I don't know: from the handbook Microphone is only 40% Talking (which is 80% Microphone and 20% Charisma adjusted by Star Quality) and 60% Popularity.<p> </p><p> So you still are primarily rating them on popularity.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Fair points. I'd argue that people like Gene and Coach had their fair share of charisma and popularity too though (Michael Cole maybe less <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />). At the end of the day it's up to you what you do in your game, but I feel like interviewers are intended to be rated on Microphone. You can certainly have good interviewers who add to a segment (Gene, Coach, that other guy I'm forgetting the name of) and bad ones that ruin it (Cole, that guy with the glasses in the mid 00s who could barely speak). So IMO they need to be rated on something. Though to be honest I'd forgotten the calculation took star quality into account, which could be an issue if you want elite-level angles. The Cameo note might come in useful.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="d12345" data-cite="d12345" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47568" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>See this is what I was doing in 2016 BUT I read the manual this year (lol yes only this year) and saw that it says specifically wrestlers who are getting interviewed should be rated on Microphone.<p> </p><p> It says entertainment is more for general reactions and interactions without necessarily speaking on the mic.</p><p> </p><p> So if I understand correctly. Those segments in WCW with Buff Bagwell and Scott Steiner where Steiner rambles on the mic and Buff jumps around like a goof should be rated like this?:</p><p> </p><p> Scott Steiner - Microphone</p><p> Buff Bagwell - Entertainment</p><p> </p><p> Now if you add Mean Gene to that segment and have him interviewing Steiner it would be like this:</p><p> </p><p> Scott Steiner - Microphone</p><p> Buff Bagwell - Entertainment</p><p> Mean Gene - Microphone</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> To be fair, it never says "without necessarily speaking on the mic". Entertainment without speaking is Charisma.</p><p> </p><p> I'm not overly familiar with the exact promos you're referencing, but "bouncing around like a goof" sounds like he should be rated on Charisma. Kinda like the old Kaientai "indeeeeeed!" promos. Can't rate them on microphone, they didn't say anything! </p><p> </p><p> Think of the Okerlund/Flair or Okerlund/Dusty promos.</p><p> </p><p> Okerlund is rated on Microphone (IMO), as he's usually a straight hype man, asking questions, let the star take it from there, and then wrap everything up (he's not even physically on screen a lot of the time, often being comically crowded out by the sheer number of workers on screen and how close the camera is).</p><p> Flair/Dusty are DEFINITELY rated on Entertainment. Half the words they say are either unintelligible or don't make any sense (especially Dusty, bless him), but they're definitely entertaining while they do it. Steiner too, especially in the later days, was 70% mannerisms, 30% garbled words.</p><p> </p><p> That's why it's a mix of Charisma and Microphone with different ratios to get the best rating, because some guys are charismatic and entertaining despite not being the best pure talkers (sort of Flair, definitely Dusty, Hogan, Steiner), some have a way with words and a more muted, background kind of charisma (Raven, Jake Roberts, sort of Triple H?), some have both (Rock, Austin, Jericho), some have neither (not going to mention any names because it would be unfair on poor Brock Lesnar. Oops).</p>

[TOTKingNothing]

Has anyone tested how turning off Momentum affects the Perception system?

[gord]

When I played TEW 2005, I included backstage interviewers in segments, and since there wasn't a minimum length of a segment for a worker to gain popularity, the interviewer would eventually gain enough pop so they wouldn't tank a segment.

 

Now, if you're going to play realistically, where a backstage interview takes no more than 2 minutes, it doesn't make sense to me to include an interviewer. As such, I just have a worker (with any supplemental workers) rated on entertainment/microphone.

[hauugen]

Which kind of angles are rated on selling? The handbook says it's angles where someone is getting beat up (or has been) and are selling the injury. But angles like "Beatdown backstage" and "Beatdown in ring" both are rated on overness, even though someone is getting beaten. I tried to find angles rated on selling, but the editor didn't allow me to filter based on that.

 

And in in "Post match attack" the attacker is rated on Fighting. Why is the attacker rated on "Fighting" here but not in the two angles I listed above?

[Blake Trask]

Cheers D-Lyrium.

 

I'm making a teeny tiny scene for an area and I didn't think it made sense for the road agent to have high experience... but it would be kind of bad if they couldn't get better.

[Eastshire]

Which kind of angles are rated on selling? The handbook says it's angles where someone is getting beat up (or has been) and are selling the injury. But angles like "Beatdown backstage" and "Beatdown in ring" both are rated on overness, even though someone is getting beaten. I tried to find angles rated on selling, but the editor didn't allow me to filter based on that.

 

And in in "Post match attack" the attacker is rated on Fighting. Why is the attacker rated on "Fighting" here but not in the two angles I listed above?

 

I personally used the editor to change the beatdown angles to be fighting and selling.

[arranlester12]

Might be a silly Q.

 

If you have someone on a written , can another company come in and offer a exclusive? Or are you proteced by the fact its a binding contracted?

[TOTKingNothing]

Which kind of angles are rated on selling? The handbook says it's angles where someone is getting beat up (or has been) and are selling the injury. But angles like "Beatdown backstage" and "Beatdown in ring" both are rated on overness, even though someone is getting beaten. I tried to find angles rated on selling, but the editor didn't allow me to filter based on that.

 

And in in "Post match attack" the attacker is rated on Fighting. Why is the attacker rated on "Fighting" here but not in the two angles I listed above?

Selling is meant for short segments.

 

Fighting can go longer depending on who is fighting. If you have a couple of major stars/stars fighting, you can fight for ten minutes or so, but if it's only lesser roster members then you have to keep it short.

[Historian]

Might be a silly Q.

 

If you have someone on a written , can another company come in and offer a exclusive? Or are you proteced by the fact its a binding contracted?

 

If you have them on a non-exclusive written contract that has the ironclad clause, they can still be offered an exclusive deal but will still have to finish out their contracted time with you.

 

If it is NOT ironclad, they can leave you in 28 days.

[arranlester12]

If you have them on a non-exclusive written contract that has the ironclad clause, they can still be offered an exclusive deal but will still have to finish out their contracted time with you.

 

If it is NOT ironclad, they can leave you in 28 days.

 

Brill thank youm at least if one of my top talent gets stolen and i have em on a long term doesnt really matter as i have time to replace them

[esteel20]

So I'm not sure if this is a feature or a bug. Has anyone else noticed worker skills randomly changing after running a show? Specifically Basics? I noticed it with a few workers so I did a test. I set a worker's basics skill in the editor to 100 and then booked him on a show. I advanced to the next day and the basics skill was 77. Thoughts?

 

Bump. Worker I did the test on was Acid II, but I've noticed it with others.

[The Nickman]

Which kind of angles are rated on selling? The handbook says it's angles where someone is getting beat up (or has been) and are selling the injury. But angles like "Beatdown backstage" and "Beatdown in ring" both are rated on overness, even though someone is getting beaten. I tried to find angles rated on selling, but the editor didn't allow me to filter based on that.

 

And in in "Post match attack" the attacker is rated on Fighting. Why is the attacker rated on "Fighting" here but not in the two angles I listed above?

I think they should all be fighting now instead of overness, it's just the default angles haven't all been updated yet by the looks of things.

 

Even Monster Unleashed should probably be fighting now instead of menace, as the handbook says menace is for intimidating someone, not beating them to a bloody pulp. Still a bit undecided on that one though, could be convinced either way.

[Remianen]

Okay, I'm stumped. How do you give bonuses to the entire roster at once?

[pantaloons]

Okay, I'm stumped. How do you give bonuses to the entire roster at once?

 

Click on the name of one of your workers. Click the "Give Bonuses Or Time Off" button. Change the dropdown to Entire Roster

 

Took me a bit to find that myself.

[GiantChair]

Okay, I'm stumped. How do you give bonuses to the entire roster at once?

 

When your in the bonus screen theres an entire roster option still as shown in this attachment

[CPBHBK]

I'm updating a 1999 Database and WCW was preset to the Attitude Entertainment product which fits them. Except for the fact, there needs to be one eye candy match a show. So I needed advice on whether I should leave it as Attitude or change it to Classic Balanced?

 

Also, I feel like the Attitude Entertainment product should have the eye candy match taken out if anything make it be an angle cause even WWF didn't have one eye-candy match EVERY show.

[CPBHBK]

I think they should all be fighting now instead of overness, it's just the default angles haven't all been updated yet by the looks of things.

 

Even Monster Unleashed should probably be fighting now instead of menace, as the handbook says menace is for intimidating someone, not beating them to a bloody pulp. Still a bit undecided on that one though, could be convinced either way.

 

I'd argue for the Monster Unleashed to be menacing since the intimidation factor is for the fans. And watching someone utterly destroy someone would make me be intimidated by them.

[pantaloons]

I'm updating a 1999 Database and WCW was preset to the Attitude Entertainment product which fits them. Except for the fact, there needs to be one eye candy match a show. So I needed advice on whether I should leave it as Attitude or change it to Classic Balanced?

 

Also, I feel like the Attitude Entertainment product should have the eye candy match taken out if anything make it be an angle cause even WWF didn't have one eye-candy match EVERY show.

 

Maybe not in 1999, but in the "Divas Era" you could argue that ALL the women's matches were eye candy matches on WWF/E.

[The Nickman]

I'd argue for the Monster Unleashed to be menacing since the intimidation factor is for the fans. And watching someone utterly destroy someone would make me be intimidated by them.

Yeah, I guess that's probably a fair point... there's not really much "fighting" in a complete beatdown by a monster, is there?

[CPBHBK]

Maybe not in 1999, but in the "Divas Era" you could argue that ALL the women's matches were eye candy matches on WWF/E.

 

I can agree with that more but I feel like there needs to be a variation especially since it's called Attitude Entertainment which is named after the late 90's WWF.

 

Yeah, I guess that's probably a fair point... there's not really much "fighting" in a complete beatdown by a monster, is there?

 

Yeah, I wish it was done in the Default DB so we had examples of where to put it and not to put it. Though it won't be too hard to pick between that and overness.

[Rick Savant]

Hey! So, I'm working on a mod and I'm using the power 500 to get a rough idea how how the game views the workers we're making. One worker just isn't showing up on the list. In his achievements it shows him as winning Veteran Wrestler of the Year at game start, but no place in the 500.

 

I've tried changing his age, contracts, roles and business settings. What else could block a worker from appearing in the P500? His stats are quite high.

 

Thanks!