Please make star quality be taken into account again for battles

[Kingster]

I'm not sure why it was changed from 2016, but I'd really like it to be changed to how it used to work.

If I understand it correctly, in TEW2020, if you have the way area or regional battles are calculated set to "on stars" it only takes into account the top five workers's average popularity.

 

This has two consequences:

#1 Star quality as a skill loses a lot of importance in the game. And yes, I know it has an effect on match and angle ratings as well as how far a worker can go as far as popularity.

#2 But no matter what kind of company you play as (perf>pop or pop>perf), there's no need to hire anyone but the best in-ring wrestlers. In TEW 2016, I liked the challenge of having to decide whether I want to push a relatively untalented wrestler with high star quality over a talented wrestler with less star quality in a performance-heavy promotion.

 

So, as it stands now, in order to win battles "on stars", you just hire the best in-ring guys, no matter if you're an entertainment-heavy or workrate-heavy promotion and push them to the moon. I'd really love to have star quality be brought back as a parameter for succes in area or regional battles.

[Jomosensual]

Is it not a factor anymore? Swear you could make it so that its either show based, star based, or a combo of both

[Teh_Showtime]

You can change it in user preferences, there’s also an option to have a mixed rating on shows and stars.

[Jaded]

You can change it in user preferences, there’s also an option to have a mixed rating on shows and stars.

 

As the OP says, though, it's now rated solely on popularity if you select stars - previously it was calculated by multiplying worker's pop by SQ (and then dividing by 100, I think?)

 

I agree with the OP; pushing big guys with high star quality at the expense of more talented in-ring competitors was more of an interesting dilemma last time around compared to now using the new method.

[Questlove]

Please no, that was one of the worst parts of 2016.

[The Rock]

I'm not sure why it was changed from 2016, but I'd really like it to be changed to how it used to work.

If I understand it correctly, in TEW2020, if you have the way area or regional battles are calculated set to "on stars" it only takes into account the top five workers's average popularity.

 

This has two consequences:

#1 Star quality as a skill loses a lot of importance in the game. And yes, I know it has an effect on match and angle ratings as well as how far a worker can go as far as popularity.

#2 But no matter what kind of company you play as (perf>pop or pop>perf), there's no need to hire anyone but the best in-ring wrestlers. In TEW 2016, I liked the challenge of having to decide whether I want to push a relatively untalented wrestler with high star quality over a talented wrestler with less star quality in a performance-heavy promotion.

 

So, as it stands now, in order to win battles "on stars", you just hire the best in-ring guys, no matter if you're an entertainment-heavy or workrate-heavy promotion and push them to the moon. I'd really love to have star quality be brought back as a parameter for succes in area or regional battles.

 

While I agree, that the 2016-system kind of "forced" you to play a different strategy, the current system is more realistic.

Take Mick Foley for example. He doesn´t really have Star Quality, but was extremely popular at one point, so popular, that 600.000 people changed to channel to see him win the World Title.

In TEW 2016 you would be punished by having him in your Top 5.

[WCGreyghost]

Please no, that was one of the worst parts of 2016.

 

It was pretty much first fed to sign the giant Russian dude...Marat? Something like that...anyway, first one to sign him wins all future battles.

[Kingster]

Please no, that was one of the worst parts of 2016.

You can always switch to "rated on best show" in the user preferences if you don't like it, so what's the problem?

 

And yes, in case I didn't make it clear enough: I know there's an option for battles being rated on stars, on the best show or a combination of the two. What I mean is: In 2016, being rated on stars meant that the wrestlers' average popularity was multiplied by their star quality. In 2020, for whatever reason the star quality part was removed. For me, it takes away a huge strategic and realistic part of playing as big+ promotion.

You could even make it a fourth option in user preferences so everyone would be satisfied.

[Kingster]

While I agree, that the 2016-system kind of "forced" you to play a different strategy, the current system is more realistic.

Take Mick Foley for example. He doesn´t really have Star Quality, but was extremely popular at one point, so popular, that 600.000 people changed to channel to see him win the World Title.

In TEW 2016 you would be punished by having him in your Top 5.

 

I don't really know enough about wrestling during that time period to have a strong argument against your point, but I would argue he wouldn't have been in the top 5 under the TEW 2016 national battle system. Hunter, Rocky, HBK, The Undertaker and Steve Austin were probably bigger draws than Foley at that point.

The fact that folks changed the channel was (in my opinion) due to WCW commentators mentioning it on Nitro and inadvertently hyping up that match plus the shock value of an underdog winning the WWF title on Raw, not so much Manking being a super-huge draw in the WWF at that point.

 

Edt: But I really don't want to argue about whether a certain wrestler in a scenario from >20 years ago was a number five or number six draw. My main point is that a strategic element was taken out of the game and I'd like Adam Ryland to consider bringing it back.

[Nachtfalter]

I don't really know enough about wrestling during that time period to have a strong argument against your point, but I would argue he wouldn't have been in the top 5 under the TEW 2016 national battle system. Hunter, Rocky, HBK, The Undertaker and Steve Austin were probably bigger draws than Foley at that point.

The fact that folks changed the channel was (in my opinion) due to WCW commentators mentioning it on Nitro and inadvertently hyping up that match plus the shock value of an underdog winning the WWF title on Raw, not so much Manking being a super-huge draw in the WWF at that point.

 

You're right. You don't really know enough about wrestling during that time period.

[Kingster]

It was pretty much first fed to sign the giant Russian dude...Marat? Something like that...anyway, first one to sign him wins all future battles.

That was an "issue" with the database, not with the system, though.

 

I'm confused, though. Honest question: Why are you guys dismissing a suggestion to improve a feature that is already an option in the game anyways, just turn it off if you hate it so much.

[Questlove]

I don't really know enough about wrestling during that time period to have a strong argument against your point, but I would argue he wouldn't have been in the top 5 under the TEW 2016 national battle system. Hunter, Rocky, HBK, The Undertaker and Steve Austin were probably bigger draws than Foley at that point.

The fact that folks changed the channel was (in my opinion) due to WCW commentators mentioning it on Nitro and inadvertently hyping up that match plus the shock value of an underdog winning the WWF title on Raw, not so much Manking being a super-huge draw in the WWF at that point.

 

Triple H? In 1999? This is also ignoring that WCW had WWF beat hands down in terms of star quality even after the rise of Rock and Austin. If SQ was what really won the Monday Night Wars, WWE wouldn't exist today.

 

As a fourth option though I've obviously got no problem with it.

[d12345]

While I agree, that the 2016-system kind of "forced" you to play a different strategy, the current system is more realistic.

Take Mick Foley for example. He doesn´t really have Star Quality, but was extremely popular at one point, so popular, that 600.000 people changed to channel to see him win the World Title.

In TEW 2016 you would be punished by having him in your Top 5.

 

WWF's top 5 in '98 - Stone Cold, The Rock, The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels (if healthy), and then Mankind.

vs

WCW's top 10 in '98

Hogan, Nash, Hall, Bret Hart, Ric Flair, Roddy Piper, Macho Man, Sting, Lex Luger, Goldberg

 

One would be justified in making the argument that despite Mankind's entertainment value, he wasn't going to carry your company like most other guys on both lists could have.

 

That's the argument for SQ being highly important. Mankind did contribute to show grade boosts though.

[The Rock]

You can always switch to "rated on best show" in the user preferences if you don't like it, so what's the problem?

 

The problem is, that best show alone is not realistic for bigger companies.

The system as it is now (a combination of Stars and best show) is much more realistic.

 

But you don´t need SQ for that.

Mankind is one example (and by that point, end of 1998/beginning of 1999, he was extremely popular, HBK has retired 9 months earlier, HHH wasn´t a Main Eventer yet, so Mick would most likely be Top 5), Vince McMahon is another one.

 

In TEW 2020 Vince will count in the National Battle and rightfully so.

Why?? Because he became a MEGA Heel after the Screwjob, people absolutely hated him and you could argue that Austin wouldn´t have become SO big, if it wasn´t for Vince as his enemy.

But if you take SQ into the mix, Vince doesn´t have that much, he would drop out of the Top 5 and that would hurt your company.

 

 

... For me, it takes away a huge strategic and realistic part of playing as big+ promotion.

You could even make it a fourth option in user preferences so everyone would be satisfied.

 

Strategic, yeah, I give you that. But realistic, no, the way it is now is more realistic.

But as an fourth option, if that is possible, sure, that would be great.