Iron Clad Written Non-Exclusive Contracts

[20LEgend]

Patch 1.02

 

Before starting a new game and I set this as someone's contract in the database:

 

Despite it being ironclad and written, I can sign him to an exclusive written contract with TNA from the start of the game (the contract in the image is ROH). Shouldn't I be unable to do this since he has an iron clad contract elsewhere?

 

Upon signing the deal, his other deal (PWG) went to 28 days, but he'll see out the 8 months 3 weeks ROH contract. Meaning I'll have him on an "exclusive" written contract until then, but he won't be exclusive for 9 months.

[Hoshal]

Exclusive needs to be set to yes otherwise he can work multiple promotions

[MrTroy03]

I think "Exclusive" and "Iron Clad" are two different things. Exclusive controls if he can work for more than one company. Iron Clad is whether or not he can get out of your contract. It sounds like its working as intended to me.

 

In the real WWE, pretty much everyone would be under a Written EXCLUSIVE and Iron Clad deal.

[20LEgend]

<p>I have no problem with the person working multiple promotions, but it just seems odd to me that they can sign an exclusive contract with me, and then stay in ROH for the next 8 months. I've signed him on an exclusive contract, but it isn't exclusive.</p><p> </p><p>

I thought the idea of iron-cladding a contract was to stop them signing exclusive deals elsewhere? I know he'll work out the rest of his deal with ROH then leave, but it just seems strange he'll have this contract with me from January until September that isn't accurate. Theoretically I could sign him to a six month exclusive written deal that would never be exclusive.</p>

[Remianen]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="20LEgend" data-cite="20LEgend" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="49761" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I have no problem with the person working multiple promotions, but it just seems odd to me that they can sign an exclusive contract with me, and then stay in ROH for the next 8 months. I've signed him on an exclusive contract, but it isn't exclusive.<p> </p><p> <strong>I thought the idea of iron-cladding a contract was to stop them signing exclusive deals elsewhere?</strong> I know he'll work out the rest of his deal with ROH then leave, but it just seems strange he'll have this contract with me from January until September that isn't accurate. Theoretically I could sign him to a six month exclusive written deal that would never be exclusive.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You are misunderstanding the mechanic.</p><p> </p><p> All ironclad does is lock him in for the duration of the contract. That's it. He can sign an exclusive deal with whoever he wants, but he won't be able to join them until the written ironclad contract expires. He has prior commitments he has to fulfill and when that's done, <strong><em>then</em></strong> he'll be exclusive to you.</p>

[Bonafide_Bluffa]

an exclusive contract is different from an iron clad contract. iron clad is basically non compete from 2016

[tryker2710]

<p>The point of iron clad is they cant leave before serving the full length of their contract.</p><p> </p><p>

The exclusive part of the contract is that a worker cant SIGN with anybody else while under that deal, but if they have a legally binding agreement to see out a contract thay wasnt exclusive then they have to fulfil those dates.</p>

[20LEgend]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Remianen" data-cite="Remianen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="49761" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>You are misunderstanding the mechanic.<p> </p><p> All ironclad does is lock him in for the duration of the contract. That's it. He can sign an exclusive deal with whoever he wants,<span style="text-decoration:underline;"><strong> but he won't be able to join them until the written ironclad contract expires</strong></span>. He has prior commitments he has to fulfill and when that's done, <strong><em>then</em></strong> he'll be exclusive to you.</p></div></blockquote><p> I assume by this you mean he won't be exclusive to me until the written contract expires? Because as far as I can tell he can work for me right away.</p><p> </p><p> I thought in the trial version it worked differently, and I'd been blocked from negotiating in the same circumstances. I must be misremembering.</p><p> </p><p> So I guess not a bug, just a shame I won't be able to recreate the type of contracts I'd like to.</p><p> </p><p> Does anyone know if there is any way I could set up a contract to stop WWE/TNa from signing him to an exclusive deal within the first 9 months, but also allow him to work elsewhere (such as PWG)?</p>

[Teh_Showtime]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="20LEgend" data-cite="20LEgend" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="49761" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I assume by this you mean he won't be exclusive to me until the written contract expires? Because as far as I can tell he can work for me right away.<p> </p><p> I thought in the trial version it worked differently, and I'd been blocked from negotiating in the same circumstances. I must be misremembering.</p><p> </p><p> So I guess not a bug, just a shame I won't be able to recreate the type of contracts I'd like to.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> What happens if you were to sign them on an exclusive, but when you’re at war with the other promotion?</p><p> </p><p> Would he seriously work for both for years until the first deal ran out?</p>

[20LEgend]

<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="49761" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>What happens if you were to sign them on an exclusive, but when you’re at war with the other promotion?<p> </p><p> Would he seriously work for both for years until the first deal ran out?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I just declared war on ROH and then offered a contract to someone with the same deal as above but this person had one year left on the contract. They've signed the exclusive written with me and was available to work immediately, but will stay with ROH on the non-exclusive written for the full year. So yeah, he'll spend a year working for both warring promotions I think.</p><p> </p><p> Just added a user with ROH to double check. He won't resign beyond the 11 months obviously because the other deal prevents it, but still has the time left on his deal.</p>

[rhyblack]

<p>I wrote a post earlier today about this exact same topic..... from the responses I got it’s working as intended. I dunno.... I guess I just figure too that the game should actually prohibit you from even being able to sign a worker to an EXCLUSIVE contract if he has a written Iron Clad elsewhere.... that’s kinda defeating the purpose of an exclusive contract lol</p><p> </p><p>

So what if a worker has a written iron clad contract with company A for a duration of 3 years and company B signs him to a 2 year EXCLUSIVE written deal? Then in reality the contract with company B is never “really” exclusive the entire life of the deal seeing the worker is following through on his deal with companyA for the whole duration?I guess it may not be a glitch per say but I think the game engine shouldn’t even allow Company B to make that contract offer. Just my opinion.</p>

[ThatCommonGamer]

I wrote a post earlier today about this exact same topic..... from the responses I got it’s working as intended. I dunno.... I guess I just figure too that the game should actually prohibit you from even being able to sign a worker to an EXCLUSIVE contract if he has a written Iron Clad elsewhere.... that’s kinda defeating the purpose of an exclusive contract lol

 

So what if a worker has a written iron-clad contract with company A for a duration of 3 years and company B signs him to a 2 year EXCLUSIVE written deal? Then in reality the contract with company B is never “really” exclusive the entire life of the deal seeing the worker is following through on his deal with companyA for the whole duration?I guess it may not be a glitch per say but I think the game engine shouldn’t even allow Company B to make that contract offer. Just my opinion.

 

I had this exact thing happen to me during the beta, as TCW i signed Marv Statler to a 3 year Written, iron-clad contract, a week later he signed with burning hammer for 2 years on an exclusive written iron clad. In my opinion, it's not realistic, the entire duration of his contract with burning hammer would never be exclusive. A company should not be able to offer exclusive written to workers who already have a written ironclad especially for a duration that is less than the ongoing contract.

[The Otter]

<p>I was really excited about the contract types when they were announced, the idea of being able to have someone on a non-exclusive written deal that was iron-Vlad was awesome, thought we might be able to simulate AEW style contracts and have people work handshake deals whilst not being signed away by the big guys. Sadly doesn’t seem to work that way.</p><p> </p><p>

If you set the two companies as being at war, will the AI still try and offer contracts too the guys in Non-exclusive Written deals?</p>

[20LEgend]

<p>Yeah, that's what I was hoping, but if it's working as intended I don't know.</p><p> </p><p>

I think at the very least there should be a block on signing an exclusive deal shorter than their current non-exclusive deal. I don't see how I can sign an exclusive contract with somebody who will <em>never</em> be exclusive with me. Hopefully that is a fix that can be implemented, and ideally I'd like to see there be a block on signing an exclusive contract with anybody with a non-exclusive deal that is iron-clad.</p><p> </p><p>

By signing an iron clad contract (meaning a contract they can't get out of) that is non-exclusive, that working is saying "for a period of 9 months, I will not be exclusive to anybody". But can they can sign an exclusive deal at any time during that deal. The initial replies last night threw me off, but I do think this is something that isn't working correctly.</p>

[LloydCross]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ThatCommonGamer" data-cite="ThatCommonGamer" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="49761" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I had this exact thing happen to me during the beta, as TCW i signed Marv Statler to a 3 year Written, iron-clad contract, a week later he signed with burning hammer for 2 years on an exclusive written iron clad. In my opinion, it's not realistic, the entire duration of his contract with burning hammer would never be exclusive. A company should not be able to offer exclusive written to workers who already have a written ironclad especially for a duration that is less than the ongoing contract.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> There's still value for TCW in that deal. They stop him from signing elsewhere for the 2 years, but they have the exclusive option to re-sign him beyond the two years.</p>

[The Otter]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="LloydCross" data-cite="LloydCross" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="49761" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>There's still value for TCW in that deal. They stop him from signing elsewhere for the 2 years, but they have the exclusive option to re-sign him beyond the two years.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I get what you’re saying here, it’s just going against the fundamental law of the contract though, he’s meant to be exclusive, but he’s very much not exclusive at all</p>

[SirMichaelJordan]

I get what you’re saying here, it’s just going against the fundamental law of the contract though, he’s meant to be exclusive, but he’s very much not exclusive at all

 

He can’t be exclusive until he fulfill his contract. He’s pretty much on a non exclusive with you until his other obligations are fulfilled.

[The Otter]

He can’t be exclusive until he fulfill his contract. He’s pretty much on a non exclusive with you until his other obligations are fulfilled.

 

That’s the point lol, he’s not exclusive, and not able to be exclusive, thus shouldn’t be able to sign an exclusive deal until the final month of his contract

[SirMichaelJordan]

That’s the point lol, he’s not exclusive, and not able to be exclusive, thus shouldn’t be able to sign an exclusive deal until the final month of his contract

 

Not really, it’s nothing legal keeping them from signing such a contract, they just are obligated to finish their current one. Now it can argued that their new contract shouldn’t start until the old one finish.

 

I wouldn’t be mad at the worker denying an exclusive in favor of a non exclusive contract because he under an iron clad but that’s pretty much the same thing that is happening now without the immersion of feedback from the worker.

[spiffyone]

I was really excited about the contract types when they were announced, the idea of being able to have someone on a non-exclusive written deal that was iron-Vlad was awesome, thought we might be able to simulate AEW style contracts and have people work handshake deals whilst not being signed away by the big guys. Sadly doesn’t seem to work that way.

 

I've mentioned an idea in the suggestions forum regarding such deals that essentially boils down to letting us specify certain contract details like what "exclusive" amounts to, including whether we will allow those workers to work elsewhere, for what type of company we'd allow that (so, say, your medium sized company would allow that worker to work for a small company, but not another medium sized or larger company), and in what area as well (so maybe they can work tours for Japanese companies, but not elsewhere within the U.S.; to simplify matters the option should be "Home Area" or "International" or something along those lines).

 

As for the iron clad stuff: there should be a built in limit to when you can sign someone who is on an iron clad contract. Because it is incredibly unrealistic to be able to sign someone who is, say, 3 months into a 3 year iron clad deal to a 2 year exclusive deal. Hell, it should be unrealistic for anyone to sign a 3 year iron clad deal to begin with, because what worker in their right mind would obligate themselves to work for 3 years iron clad when the company could, at any time, end the "contract". That's not really guaranteed work, so what's in it for the worker?

[The Otter]

Not really, it’s nothing legal keeping them from signing such a contract, they just are obligated to finish their current one. Now it can argued that their new contract shouldn’t start until the old one finish.

 

I wouldn’t be mad at the worker denying an exclusive in favor of a non exclusive contract because he under an iron clad but that’s pretty much the same thing that is happening now without the immersion of feedback from the worker.

 

We can agree to disagree here, that’s cool. FWIW though, the issue legally wouldn’t be with the contract he already has, it’s with the new one he’s signing, he’s signing an exclusive contract with a company he can’t be exclusive with, the terms of his initial contract stipulate he has to work until the end of it, so can’t actually be exclusive until that’s done, so should t be able to sign an exclusive contract elsewhere and then work for 2 companies whilst under an exclusive deal

[SirMichaelJordan]

I've mentioned an idea in the suggestions forum regarding such deals that essentially boils down to letting us specify certain contract details like what "exclusive" amounts to, including whether we will allow those workers to work elsewhere, for what type of company we'd allow that (so, say, your medium sized company would allow that worker to work for a small company, but not another medium sized or larger company), and in what area as well (so maybe they can work tours for Japanese companies, but not elsewhere within the U.S.; to simplify matters the option should be "Home Area" or "International" or something along those lines).

 

As for the iron clad stuff: there should be a built in limit to when you can sign someone who is on an iron clad contract. Because it is incredibly unrealistic to be able to sign someone who is, say, 3 months into a 3 year iron clad deal to a 2 year exclusive deal. Hell, it should be unrealistic for anyone to sign a 3 year iron clad deal to begin with, because what worker in their right mind would obligate themselves to work for 3 years iron clad when the company could, at any time, end the "contract". That's not really guaranteed work, so what's in it for the worker?

 

 

Those are some good ideas.

 

And yes the game is overall too easy atm.

 

It shouldn’t be easy to sign someone on a long term non written contract especially with a iron clad tied to it.

[SirMichaelJordan]

We can agree to disagree here, that’s cool. FWIW though, the issue legally wouldn’t be with the contract he already has, it’s with the new one he’s signing, he’s signing an exclusive contract with a company he can’t be exclusive with, the terms of his initial contract stipulate he has to work until the end of it, so can’t actually be exclusive until that’s done, so should t be able to sign an exclusive contract elsewhere and then work for 2 companies whilst under an exclusive deal

 

He’s still exclusive to you though. He can only work for you and the company he has an iron clad with. If he’s still signing with other companies after you signed him to an exclusive then it would definitely be a bug.

[The Otter]

If he’s working for 2 companies, how is he exclusive?

[KevinStorm]

If he’s working for 2 companies, how is he exclusive?

 

This. Signing an exclusive deal with company A shouldn't be possible for someone with a written, iron clad deal with company B, because going exclusive with A would violate the contract with B.