Most stables disbanding in first week?

[gazwefc83]

Im playing a mod and most stables disbanding in first week. I havent played the default data, is this something that is happening in the CV as well?

 

Anybody know why this is happening and how to avoid it?

[Supermercado]

I noticed this and put it down to there being more in the mod than the game wanted so it cut them - then I realised the AI was creating and disbanding stables within a couple of weeks.

[gazwefc83]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Supermercado" data-cite="Supermercado" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48821" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I noticed this and put it down to there being more in the mod than the game wanted so it cut them - then I realised the AI was creating and disbanding stables within a couple of weeks.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Is this with a mod or the default data?</p>

[FlightlessGypsy]

I've noticed it with default. Haven't used mods yet.

[1PWfan]

Apparently in the C-Verse a lot of the stables break up as part of correcting the face/heel balance on rosters, so it could be a similar thing in mods. It also has a tendency to form stables specifically to split them up in turns (I've seen two separate games where a stable was formed and then split two weeks later at a big event when one of the members turned on another).

[Lionhart]

<p>I also see a lot of turnover in stables. </p><p> </p><p>

I assume stables are one of those gameplay element that change a lot in the beginning of the game, thanks to face/heel balance and CPU stats calculations, but are more steady as in game time passes.</p>

[Donners]

<p>It happens with both the default data and mods. It's part of the AI's initial restructuring of its roster, and it doesn't sound like it will be changed.</p><p> </p><p>

Will be quite annoying for historical mods.</p>

[TheChef]

I've seen this too and read that it's restructuring and will settle down with time. Ok, but why should a properly set up default database need restructuring at all? Surely it should be ready to play and properly balanced already. Another small disappointment. Despite some good patches, the game still feels like it's been rushed out.

[KD637]

I think Adam has addressed this. Im sure he said at the game start (which is what we are all playing to death) the new signings / face heel balance is taking effect which sees a lot of stables expand, disband or appear.

[Lionhart]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TheChef" data-cite="TheChef" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48821" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I've seen this too and read that it's restructuring and will settle down with time. <strong>Ok, but why should a properly set up default database need restructuring at all? Surely it should be ready to play and properly balanced already.</strong> Another small disappointment. Despite some good patches, the game still feels like it's been rushed out.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> True. But it's not like it wasn't the same thing in previous iterations. Companies on firing/hiring rampages, with 5+ turns at their first show etc...</p><p> </p><p> IMO the problem is that the default database is too much "stable focused" for how the system works.</p>

[aaroncc21]

I've seen this too and read that it's restructuring and will settle down with time. Ok, but why should a properly set up default database need restructuring at all? Surely it should be ready to play and properly balanced already. Another small disappointment. Despite some good patches, the game still feels like it's been rushed out.

 

It's still in beta, this should be expected.

[codey_v2]

I don't think it's a problem that rosters are imbalanced. They're supposed to be, so when you start a new game you have to look at your roster and figure out you can do to fix it or optimize it. It's no different than starting a TCW save and realizing that most of the guys the crowd actually recognizes are broken down and in decline.

 

The computer is fixing their roster just like you would, albeit in a way less creative and original way. The only problem I see with it is breaking up the stables and tag teams. Maybe set it so the AI is less likely to have stable members turn and leave. But that opens up more problems in that you would likely have to add a new stat to bookers or promotions that would control how "stable" their stables are. NJPW has had the same stables for about a decade, while WWE stables generally burn bright and then crash to earth within months.

[gazwefc83]

I think Adam has addressed this. Im sure he said at the game start (which is what we are all playing to death) the new signings / face heel balance is taking effect which sees a lot of stables expand, disband or appear.

 

It just seems pointless taking hours upon hours to set stables up accurately for the AI to dismantle them in two clicks of the game world

[ZMAN]

All I see is a new mod scenario: X-Pac buries DX!

[TOTKingNothing]

Adam has stated in the tech-support forum that this is common as the AI goes through and balances out its heel/face divide at the start of games, and since factions can't have a mix of both heels and faces unless they're player controlled, this leads to a lot of spontaneity at the start of most saves. It's working as intended.

[crownsy]

Adam has stated in the tech-support forum that this is common as the AI goes through and balances out its heel/face divide at the start of games, and since factions can't have a mix of both heels and faces unless they're player controlled, this leads to a lot of spontaneity at the start of most saves. It's working as intended.

 

I mean I guess.

 

My issue has more been with the default setting up new stables, then nuking them in a week or 2. Not sure why that stable ever needed to exist in the AI's mind, unless somewhere it's coded that a Stable breaking up is the best way for the AI to do a Heel or Face turn and get it momentum. However, overall for me as a Cverse player it's just more of a game quirk since most of the time the Cverse Stables don't have as much impact as historical stables

 

I don't play mods that often, but I can imagine this is pretty awful if it's "working as intended" for the Mod Community. I doubt many creators want to see the Horseman/NWO/Bullet Club ect nuked a week into the game because the AI decides it's time for Ric to be a baby face, you know?

 

Minor issue over all for me in the Cverse, since I control my own factions and I don't even keep track of other promotions Stables that much, but can see how it would be annoying as heck for RW mods.

[SirMichaelJordan]

The editor should let us know how balance the roster is so that the AI will not have to do much balancing undoing all the work that you just created. The editor already have this idea of helping the moder balance a roster so why not include Face/Heel divide?

 

Is it also confirmed that this is what the AI is doing? Will they still “shake” up the roster if the company didn’t have a divide?

[FlightlessGypsy]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="crownsy" data-cite="crownsy" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48821" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I mean I guess. <p> </p><p> My issue has more been with the default setting up new stables, then nuking them in a week or 2. Not sure why that stable ever needed to exist in the AI's mind, unless somewhere it's coded that a Stable breaking up is the best way for the AI to do a Heel or Face turn and get it momentum. However, overall for me as a Cverse player it's just more of a game quirk since most of the time the Cverse Stables don't have as much impact as historical stables</p><p> </p><p> I don't play mods that often, but I can imagine this is pretty awful if it's "working as intended" for the Mod Community. I doubt many creators want to see the Horseman/NWO/Bullet Club ect nuked a week into the game because the AI decides it's time for Ric to be a baby face, you know?</p><p> </p><p> Minor issue over all for me in the Cverse, since I control my own factions and I don't even keep track of other promotions Stables that much, but can see how it would be annoying as heck for RW mods.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Not to mention those sparkly new C-Verse stable graphics are for nothing if the factions are lasting under a month per game as well <img alt=":confused:" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/confused.png.d4a8e6b6eab0c67698b911fb041c0ed1.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> would've rather them just been free unused logos for uncreative players.</p>

[Texasrangers13]

<p>Biggest thing I noticed with my RW mod conversion was the rebalancing of stables for the first two weeks or so. As the game rebalances the rosters then certain guys are going to be evicted.</p><p> </p><p>

For example: AEW evicted Evil Uno and Stu Grayson from The Dark Order right away because they turned them face... </p><p> </p><p>

While maybe frustrating, that is realistic, if they turned face (which the game decided to do) they would leave... </p><p> </p><p>

I did have one guy (Averno) in AAA take the lead of two stables at once, which was weird.</p><p> </p><p>

Would it be great to lock stables / face-heel alignment for mod-makers, ya, sure. Is it necessary, not really.</p>

[FlightlessGypsy]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Texasrangers13" data-cite="Texasrangers13" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48821" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Biggest thing I noticed with my RW mod conversion was the rebalancing of stables for the first two weeks or so. As the game rebalances the rosters then certain guys are going to be evicted.<p> </p><p> For example: AEW evicted Evil Uno and Stu Grayson from The Dark Order right away because they turned them face... </p><p> </p><p> While maybe frustrating, that is realistic, if they turned face (which the game decided to do) they would leave... </p><p> </p><p> I did have one guy (Averno) in AAA take the lead of two stables at once, which was weird.</p><p> </p><p> Would it be great to lock stables / face-heel alignment for mod-makers, ya, sure. Is it necessary, not really.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Are Evil Uno and Stu Grayson set to be able to play faces and heels equally as well or are the turns making no sense either?</p>

[gazwefc83]

Iv done alot of testing on this and it makes no sense. An example would be:

 

Stardom is set so that Stables are 'Integral'. All members of the stables are set to the correct heel/face disposition. The 'Faction' doesn't require a certain worker and is set to 'important'.

 

Yet in day 3 the AI has disbanded STARS, Queens Quest and Oedo Tai.

 

If the case was that the members changed from face to heel or vise versa, i would just expect them to leave the faction. As there is no required member there is no reason to actually disband the faction.

[ZMAN]

It's like if Mongo McMichael booted Flair

[gazwefc83]

Sorry i think its safe to say that there will be no fix for this as this was Adams reply

 

There's generally quite a lot of shake-up at the start of the game if the face / heel divides begin lopsided. The AI tries not to remove people from stables if it can, but sometimes there's no way for it to balance the dispositions without killing off a stable.

 

Whilst i understand why its happening, its very disappointing and i dont understand why the new stable features where added if they dont work as intended.

[Texasrangers13]

Are Evil Uno and Stu Grayson set to be able to play faces and heels equally as well or are the turns making no sense either?

 

Good call on that, I went back in and changed Evil Uno to be 100% heel and plays heel well. Curious if that will help, since he and Grayson are a tag-team they should stick together pretty well.

 

While I understand the frustration, it's definitely not a game-breaker to me. I can always reform the stables that I want.

[Donners]

It's still in beta, this should be expected.

 

I got the impression from the response in the Tech Support forum that it is not something which will be changed.