Is self-owned Internet PPV too powerful?

[Blackman]

if you needed to grind for it for a year.

 

That word doesn't really sound appropriate as gameplay will still be as diverse as you'll make it. But you mean to say that you're going to have to wait it out, and that makes a lot of sense to me.

 

I've suggested before that companies (if they are all profitable anyway) should probably start with 0$ in the bank (or just a small amount, perhaps based on difficulty) so give you somewhat of an endgame in terms of financial management.

 

Right now, whatever medium-sized (or large) company I play, the business side of things is pretty much covered in these two months. There's almost nothing else to do on that side in the remaining hundreds of months in my game outside of - obviously - the booking, what this game is all about. In this respect, this game is a huge step backward from TEW16's management, where I was busy tweaking personal merchandising. That feature is here too, but why waste time on it? You've got buckets of money anyways...

 

As it stands, if you don't immediately replicate what OP did in day 1 of all your games, you're technically an idiot.

[Jaded]

The first bit is already bizarre to me. What I'm gathering from the pandemic is that very few companies have several months of running costs in available cash just laying around. Including the company I work for. I get there needs to be a buffer at the beginning of the game so you can operate at a loss before you figure out a strategy, but... $400k? How much is payroll per show? $3k?

 

That $50k deposit on iPPV would feel much more earned if you needed to grind for it for a year.

 

I mean, Gil Thomas's bio specifically says he's pumping money into the fed, so I'm less bothered about that. It's just bizarre that in a month I've made $1.4 million dollars in PPV revenue. (Yay constant schedule!)

[Self]

Agreed. Grind does have negative connotations. I should have said 'work for it'. Putting on successful shows, either cheap enough to make a profit, or awesome enough to draw new fans.

 

If GSW is a unique scenario with a strong backer, then that makes sense.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Yea I’m more concerned about the amount of money that’s being made rather than the starting money. Adam mentioned that they were trying to find a balance With financials during the journal. I wonder if this area still needs tweaking or is this outcome is what they are satisfied with. We are still in beta after all.

 

From playing it seems like there is a lot of income coming in with not much expenses. Things like running cost and even the investments of buying a broadcast seems cheap to me. 2 months isn’t much time to form an opinion but being able to return investment within a month seems OP.

 

There also should be a certain level of production quality obtained before even being eligible to start your own network.

[LloydCross]

The first bit is already bizarre to me. What I'm gathering from the pandemic is that very few companies have several months of running costs in available cash just laying around. Including the company I work for. I get there needs to be a buffer at the beginning of the game so you can operate at a loss before you figure out a strategy, but... $400k? How much is payroll per show? $3k?

 

That $50k deposit on iPPV would feel much more earned if you needed to grind for it for a year.

 

To some extent this is a concession that has to be made in the interest of having a game. For publicly traded companies, basically none of them have any spare money around. Money made in a quarter will often be used to increase stock prices through dividends or buybacks. Or used on a project to expand marketshare.

 

For the most part, running a surplus only ever makes sense for your personal finances because the goal is for you to retire at some point. In other situations, it's just money that sits around losing value instead of being used on something beneficial.

 

A privately owned company has more incentive to keep cash around.

[Lex Star]

I mean, Gil Thomas's bio specifically says he's pumping money into the fed, so I'm less bothered about that. It's just bizarre that in a month I've made $1.4 million dollars in PPV revenue. (Yay constant schedule!)

 

So you're running a bunch of PPV events per month and not seeing a decline in buys?

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought PPV buys tanked if you did too many in too short of a time in 2016?

[Jaded]

So you're running a bunch of PPV events per month and not seeing a decline in buys?

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought PPV buys tanked if you did too many in too short of a time in 2016?

 

I think they may have gone down slightly towards the end, but it went from maybe $120,000 a show to around $100,000. Certainly still an absolutely massive profit! That was with 3 a week for the month, I think. (I did go up in size during it.)

 

Edit: Looked at history. First couple had 30,000+ buys, next 2 around 24,000. Back up to 31,000 for show 5 (that was one I had on 2 networks, my small one and a newly created medium one) The last 8, all on my medium one, did between 18,000 and 21,000 buys. So definitely taking a hit compared to the start of the month but still making phenomenal money and shooting my popularity up.

[Teh_Showtime]

The fact that you were able to open 2 broadcasters in a month of game time is insane.

[danyp92]

I'm not really bothered by it, but i only like to focus on the booking. If it stays like this i'll be happy. Still i understand the point made in this thread, but i still think that it should be somewhat a healty move to do a PPV broadcaster because that is what it's role in the game is, make money.

 

For sure less, but if i (as a player ) don't get nothing from it, it becomes useless to do it unless your already big and at that point i don't need money probably or i can make it more easily using the broadcasters already in the game world.

 

It may not be realistic, but i don't really want to deal with too much economy.

[SirMichaelJordan]

I'm not really bothered by it, but i only like to focus on the booking. If it stays like this i'll be happy. Still i understand the point made in this thread, but i still think that it should be somewhat a healty move to do a PPV broadcaster because that is what it's role in the game is, make money.

 

For sure less, but if i (as a player ) don't get nothing from it, it becomes useless to do it unless your already big and at that point i don't need money probably or i can make it more easily using the broadcasters already in the game world.

 

It may not be realistic, but i don't really want to deal with too much economy.

 

Having too much money without effort kind of defeat the purpose of the game when it comes to competing with the AI especially since the human is already at an advantage. Unless of course the intend is to fantasy book and in that case there should be a user preference to disable financials.

[danyp92]

Having too much money without effort kind of defeat the purpose of the game when it comes to competing with the AI especially since the human is already at an advantage. Unless of course the intend is to fantasy book and in that case there should be a user preference to disable financials.

I agree, but there is really no need of that user preference option when i can go in the editor and give me all the money i want.

 

Still i think that if small companies must have the opportunity to own a network, there should be value in it. Being PPV focus on money, they should make the company money. Now is too powerfull (puting aside my preference here) and the way i can think for solving it are mainly 2:

 

1: Make the PPV network cost more than the other options (maybe making subscription the more cheapest).

 

2: Limiting the events on PPV that can be profitable on a determined period of time, maybe with only one event that will sell full potential and the second one only 50% and after that so low that it becomes not worthy.

 

No idea how any of this will affect the balance of the game.

[Blackman]

Maybe it IS up to the user, but the sheer fact that wrestler show up for 30$ while you're making a ton of profit just pissed me off.

 

Sure, you can give them a bonus. But I don't want to turn them into little egomaniac, narcissist schmucks.

 

One can also abuse this and basically keep their morale at max all the time to farm out the best performances. Imo it should be hard by default, and players can make it easier by simply giving themselves money. The argument that you want to "play by the rules of the game" is void here, as you can play a millionaire that starts working for a company and injects it with sweet, sweet cash.

 

As for the user having an advantage: it seems like the AI has a slight advantage for booking. This seems correct, but I have trouble replicating what they are doing on day1 when I'm playing them, and it's not exactly that I did something "wrong". So it must somehow be inflated a bit.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Even in TEW 2016 some things didn’t apply to the AI. I don’t think the AI is getting a boost in shows (i see them grade low matches and even bomb main event) I think it’s moreso people are adjusting to the game. Some people still book with a TEW 2016 mindset and would do long angles with people rated on overness.

[Teh_Showtime]

AI has always been immune from some penalties such as repetitive booking, which got so bad at one point Adam had to code it to avoid them running the same title match into the ground. It also looks like they get bonus/penalties to ratings based on booker skill. I let someone with 0 skills book SWF and they somehow had Rocky Golden in sub 70 rated matches consistently. I assume the opposite is true for good bookers.

[Blackman]

I don't really care that much if they get penalties for repetitive booking, but I'd really like for them to switch it up more. At the moment it's downright ridiculous sometimes and is annoying for immersion/watcher games.

 

If there is no other way except for the slow the game's loading down tremenously, I guess we'll have to accept it.

[Jaded]

<p>So I've mentioned to a few people about the game I did where I got to $200 million dollars with IPW using daily shows, which I think is pretty much definitive proof iPPV is broken, but to be fair daily shows are ridiculous and it's reasonable to point out that's not something anyone would expect to do.</p><p> </p><p>

So I thought I'd try another IPW game. Constant events, 3-way brand split with everyone except my champion, Aldous Blackfriar, only appearing on 1 out of 3 events. Got the biggest broadcaster I could and whenever I had enough for a new one I opened that one and switched deals.</p><p> </p><p>

It's Monday, April week 1, and I'm getting around $2.7 million dollars a show in PPV revenue. </p><p> </p><p>

<img alt="jefL0sQ.jpg" data-src="https://i.imgur.com/jefL0sQ.jpg" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>

This is what's happened to my size.</p><p> </p><p>

<img alt="z7sUmUO.jpg" data-src="https://i.imgur.com/z7sUmUO.jpg" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>

This is beyond easy mode and into "What's the point?" mode. It also raises the question if Gil Thomas is such a great businessman, why didn't he work this out himself?!</p><p> </p><p>

I would love to see something to limit buys for PPVs after the first every month - maybe 2nd one is something of a decline unless you have a brand split or if at least one of them is a historic/legendary show? (I know there have been years when WWE have done Wrestlemania and Backlash, for example, at opposite ends of a month) And anything after a second would be a very steep decline. (I know there are issues here with simulating the TNA weekly PPV model - I don't know if it's possible to have something programmed in where if you're doing weekly PPVs your events are assumed to be much cheaper, as there's were, but it would be cool if that was doable.)</p><p> </p><p>

(And yes, I know as a player you could just not use this many PPVs, but I'm poking about at the game trying to see how it can be made even better!)</p>

[Self]

Didn't the weekly TNA pay per views fail? Isnt that why they stopped doing them? Probably should be penalised in that case. If you're looking for a baseline, "what TNA did" shouldn't be it.

 

It all looks pretty broken to me, and explains why my TV only game is failing financially... I should have put it behind a paywall instead.

[RatedRKO16]

I would like to see it nerfed a bit. Smaller companies shouldn't be making anything off of this. Cult level and above seems reasonable for the point where you could really start to make advertisement/merchandise money.

 

It should be a feature that medium sized or above companies can only use.

 

At the very least, tone the amount of money these small companies are making. What happened in Jaded's game, my experience and others that I've seen posted around here shouldn't be happening.

[LloydCross]

It looks like there's a setting in eras to lower the PPV buy rate, which probably helps with this.

[FINisher]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48814" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>This is beyond easy mode and into "What's the point?" mode.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> 100% agreed. This makes the game unplayable at the moment. It's infuriating how this was not spotted before.</p>

[Blackman]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Self" data-cite="Self" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48814" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Didn't the weekly TNA pay per views fail? Isnt that why they stopped doing them? Probably should be penalised in that case. If you're looking for a baseline, "what TNA did" shouldn't be it. <p> </p><p> It all looks pretty broken to me, and explains why my TV only game is failing financially... I should have put it behind a paywall instead.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Their financial advisor blatently lied to the Jarrett's and told them they were doing well, while they weren't at all putting in the numbers as you indicate, and it actually forced them to sell to <em>youknowwho</em>, and the rest is history <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />. So I doubt daily shows would be better. Actually, no... I objectively know it would suck.</p><p> </p><p> The thing is that own networks were already broken. However: you could only make one very late in the game, so it doesn't really matter as at that point you were practically a billionaire. But iPPV seems accessible to everyone. Raising the initial cost wouldn't make sense, as it really doesn't cost that much to setup.</p>

[Teh_Showtime]

<p>I think the coverage levels are what needs tweaking </p><p> </p><p>

Anything above tiny should be much more expensive. Maybe nerf the popularity gains so that they don’t keep stacking on top of each other (more PPVs = more gains = even more buys). After all, it’s behind a paywall as a minor company. That’s a huge barrier to entry. It satisfies your existing fan base but not much else.</p><p> </p><p>

In general wouldn’t it be better for PPV shows if there was a requirement that they needed other shows to build to them less they suffer a penalty to their buys? That would give incentive to not make everything a PPV just for money.</p>

[Blackman]

<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="48814" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>After all, it’s behind a paywall as a minor company. That’s a huge barrier to entry. It satisfies your existing fan base but not much else.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Normally the series (especially WMMA) followed that logic, and pop gains are less in relation to "free ad-based"-alternatives.</p><p> </p><p> The "sub" option is the golden middle as people get access to the video database and are much more inclined to pay once for a truckload of content.</p>

[Teh_Showtime]

Sub is probably the most balanced in the game by a margin, because it’s linked directly to the company popularity. With PPV you don’t need an established base to buy PPVs, or even stars.

 

TNA failed with it and they had all kinds of names to start, you can eventually make profit on the backs of $30 rookies in game.

[Croquemitaine]

<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="48814" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>In general wouldn’t it be better for PPV shows if there was a requirement that they needed other shows to build to them less they suffer a penalty to their buys? That would give incentive to not make everything a PPV just for money.</div></blockquote><p> Wasn't that an actual mechanic in TEW2013? Like, if you had PPV but no TV, the PPV buys would be reduced.</p><p> </p><p> I'm not sure how buy-rates are calculated now, but it seems to me that while larger coverage should increase your buy-rate cap/ceiling, it shouldn't increase your actual numbers which need to work off your company pop. You can be on the largest provider in the world but if no one has heard of you, they aren't plopping down money to watch your show.*</p><p> </p><p> It's like selecting a venue. Nothing stops you from running your show in the Monster Dome, but that doesn't mean 75,000 people are just going to show up to see your tiny indy-fed.</p>