PSA: It's OK to get penalised for things in segments!

[Eastshire]

It would be nice if there was a way to add bonuses to a specific match by running angles building to it. The Ironman matches weren’t a surprise. They were hyped and built to. Same with the Rumble. If angles could bank “anticipation” points that helped with match ratings, then it would offset the penalty.

[Mattywood]

It would be nice if there was a way to add bonuses to a specific match by running angles building to it. The Ironman matches weren’t a surprise. They were hyped and built to. Same with the Rumble. If angles could bank “anticipation” points that helped with match ratings, then it would offset the penalty.

 

Maybe add a function where pre-booking those matches with pre-booking bonuses turned on could address that?

[Self]

It's a matter of presentation as much as anything. All stat-based games are constantly giving you +1 for this, -2 for that. There's no other way for it to work. TEW has always seemed to be quick to point out penalties, and reluctant to show you bonuses.

 

It presents you red text for babyface vs babyface, but not presenting you with green text for babyface vs heel. I trust Adam's math. I just think tweaks to presentation could solve a lot of people's perception of the system.

[ChrisPMWBenoit]

It would be nice if there was a way to add bonuses to a specific match by running angles building to it. The Ironman matches weren’t a surprise. They were hyped and built to. Same with the Rumble. If angles could bank “anticipation” points that helped with match ratings, then it would offset the penalty.

 

Hmm I’m unsure. The Ironman matches should get a penalty for being too long for the average WWE fan. Otherwise, the WWE would do them all the time. I love longer matches but I love them more than the average WWE fan. It’s the quality of the matches which drags the overall rating up (or down if you lack psychology/stamina).

 

As for Rumbles, that’s a hard one. The prestige of winning the event drags the overall rating up as does the star power and all the different angles involved. However, it’s still an hour-ish long so it should be penalised as it’s longer than the average fan is used to. For instance, imagine a battle royal going an hour with nothing on the line. Too long. However, the Royal Rumble gets away with it because of the prestige of winning it.

 

You need to balance the positives with the negatives.

 

Sometimes it’s actually beneficial to get a negative. I bring to you Steiner vs HHH, Royal Rumble 2003. At 18 mins it went the going rate for a WWE main event match. However, this showed up Steiner’s lack of stamina. Thus, a 5-10 minute match would have been better, although it would have been perceived to have been too short.

 

Like self says, maybe the positives need to be shown a little bit more to balance the negatives.

[JBird991]

My problem with the game is I'm struggling to replicate the ratings I expected from 16.

 

Example. I have a RW convert my main even of raw is grey vs randy Orton. A match I would expect to score at LEAST a 70. It got a 52.

 

A segment with the rock. Mic skills of 100. Rated on microphone. Scored a 66.

 

I lose my network deals within the first month because of this. I just cant enjoy it. To the point I'm thinking of sticking with 16

[tormyb]

It presents you red text for babyface vs babyface, but not presenting you with green text for babyface vs heel. I trust Adam's math. I just think tweaks to presentation could solve a lot of people's perception of the system.

 

Hey, hey, hey! Wait a minute. Are you telling me that the good ratings I get are the result of the game giving me points, not my innate brilliance? I thought that the evil game was punishing me unfairly with penalties, and then I (the masterful booker) was overcoming this adversity through sheer force of will, without any bonuses.

 

Hmm I’m unsure. The Ironman matches should get a penalty for being too long for the average WWE fan. Otherwise, the WWE would do them all the time.

 

I'm not certain whether I agree with this. Do you not think that there is a degree of novelty, which makes fans more tolerant of things that they might otherwise reject? Matches regularly being an hour long and this turning away fans, is a very different thing to one match of that length in a year.

 

I'm probably as far towards the casual end of the fan spectrum as it's possible to be while also posting on a forum about a wrestling booking simulator. I generally get pretty bored/restless by longer matches, but every now and again - whether it is quality or novelty - I really enjoy one. Not that my occasional inconsistencies are necessarily representative of a wider fanbase, but I do wonder if there is a less absolute way of doing penalties, which acknowledges rarity as a virtue.

 

Anyway, I'm just throwing ideas out there about tweaks. I am pretty sold on the overall concept of the penalties.

[ChrisPMWBenoit]

Re: Iron Man Match

 

Gimmick match positive bump which would negate the longer than usual match (until you overuse the gimmick match)?

[cwamaniac]

I bring back a previous suggestion I had in a different post

 

Perhaps we can have the occasional outlier on matches to an extent, say I book USPW which has an over 10 minute penalty, which severely limits my booking on shows, if I however say wish to book a Royal Rumble Match for them, then expect a heavy penalty to the point it kills my show as a whole,

 

But what if using the rumble was ok btw of a new road agent note “special attraction”, depending on your product this could have a longer cooldown period or a shorter one, USPW for example is a family friendly promotion so their Special Attraction note would have a 2 month cool down period to represent that they rarely go out of their comfort zone. Using this note you see would disable match time and match type penalties (but wouldn’t disable severe match type penalties )

 

These Cooldowns can stack until they hit one year in which case any used will endure an extreme penalty to any match it’s used for, this could also possibly skew the other direction if the booker doesn’t book any “special attraction” matches thus resulting in the next year having twice the normal amount to potentially book, I’d imagine it’ll likely have a limit if implemented say 5 years

 

Obviously the idea is just that an idea (even a rough one like this ), but I feel it could be potentially implemented and may solve one issue in the future

[jesseewiak]

One thing to remember is in reality, an Iron Man match does drive off some viewers, when the WWE does it. It's just the prestige of the match is worth the loss, and makes the match "better rated" in reality. I think people have to remember, that a negative message might be outweighed by a positive message.

[Eastshire]

I just ran a too long promo from Nicky Champion. With the penalty, it only scored a 94. I think I can live with some penalties now and then.

[SirMichaelJordan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Eastshire" data-cite="Eastshire" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48383" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I just ran a too long promo from Nicky Champion. With the penalty, it only scored a 94. I think I can live with some penalties now and then.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Lol see the sky isn’t falling after all!</p>