Remove TV Wait Time

[DeathZone2]

In my current game, SWF got kicked off of their TV broadcaster (Instead of moving to a different time slot). This wouldn't be a problem, except now they're unable to sign with ANY broadcasters for a whole year. Why is that a thing? When IMPACT got kicked off of their broadcasters, they immediately signed with a new one. They were signed with Destination America, before they were officially kicked off of POP. It doesn't seem realistic and just feels like an unnecessary game mechanic that's just their for "simulated difficulty". The only time I can remember this being a thing, was WCW not getting a TV deal, but WCW was a known money dump and replacing WWF with WCW would see a ratings drop. So my suggestion is removing the year limit entirely.

[20LEgend]

Wholeheartedly agree with this. Would love to see this changed.

[Self]

I think there should be a punishment (if you get kicked off TV, you're doing something wrong) but it does seem a bit steep. Three months, maybe. Or one year before you can negotiate with a broadcaster of equal size or bigger, but the little guys will still talk to you.

[Questlove]

I'm not sure you should be kicked off TV at all. When you sign a deal, it should be locked in stone unless you do something to breach the contract. As for having to wait to negotiate with someone else there's no historical precedence for that, it doesn't really make sense at all.

[nerodragomir1]

I honestly don't understand the thought process for this.

 

So if WWF canceled their USA deal. That means we won't get any TV deal in american for a whole year for WWF? Are you kidding me?!? That's an awful mechanic that I really don't see the value in.

 

Maybe the logic is the company has a bad rep after getting kicked off, but even then. That doesn't hold up at all! Sure, Eric didn't go through buying WCW because TNT wasn't willing to give them the TV time. That doesn't mean they couldn't shop it around & see options.

 

I had to straight up give up on a game because this was implemented & I was basically screwed. Didn't know it was coming & was shocked that something like that would be in the game.

 

I strongly suggest removing that in future updates. Kind of annoyed at myself for not bringing this up 3 weeks ago.

[nerodragomir1]

I'm not sure you should be kicked off TV at all. When you sign a deal, it should be locked in stone unless you do something to breach the contract. As for having to wait to negotiate with someone else there's no historical precedence for that, it doesn't really make sense at all.

 

I agree! Technically the player should never be in any danger of being kicked off. If he is kicked off, then he should be paid some sort of cancellation package.

 

Just like if I wanted to cancel a show, they would make me pay millions of dollars to cancel it.

 

Maybe this would be a silly thing to add to the game, but adding some sort of suing mechanic. So I can take the broadcaster to court & make a claim for some money after getting thrown off the air for poor ratings.

That might be too outlandish, but I'm just saying.

[Self]

I'm not sure you should be kicked off TV at all. When you sign a deal, it should be locked in stone unless you do something to breach the contract.

 

In this case, the contract includes "you need to score X or higher per show" and failing that breaches the contract.

 

In real life there likely isn't as clear a metric, but TV shows get cancelled all of the time when they're underperforming. And the contract probably stipulates that "underperforming" means whatever the broadcaster needs it to mean. Wrestling shows are no different.

[MrTroy03]

I agree with this, there could even be a non-compete agreement for large broadcasters that says if you leave them you can't sign with another broadcaster that has "Big" coverage in USA for 6 months etc. like WWE does with talent.

[Kalmus]

I honestly don't understand the thought process for this.

 

So if WWF canceled their USA deal. That means we won't get any TV deal in american for a whole year for WWF? Are you kidding me?!? That's an awful mechanic that I really don't see the value in.

 

Maybe the logic is the company has a bad rep after getting kicked off, but even then. That doesn't hold up at all! Sure, Eric didn't go through buying WCW because TNT wasn't willing to give them the TV time. That doesn't mean they couldn't shop it around & see options.

 

I had to straight up give up on a game because this was implemented & I was basically screwed. Didn't know it was coming & was shocked that something like that would be in the game.

 

I strongly suggest removing that in future updates. Kind of annoyed at myself for not bringing this up 3 weeks ago.

 

The same reason why I stopped playing my 2010 save and the save I am currently playing(1991) I am enjoying, however. I noticed WWF got throw off ESPN for not delivering their insane requirements. Which with them off their main TV and WCW getting huge amounts of debt and keeping their talents on handshakes made it super easy to dominate.

 

While I understand the block from talking to a company that dropped you for 5 years. I do not understand the block from talking to ANYONE for an entire year.

 

And the worst part about it is how quickly it happens. 3 shows that miss the mark by 1 point and you are out of here.

 

The only way I found around it is if you already have 2 strikes. Make an extra save and if you think you cant deliver the XY number cancel the deal before that show and get a new one on smaller channel. And fix the money you lost due to it with editor. Because if the game wants to throw nonsense at you. You are free to use nonsense against it.

[nerodragomir1]

The same reason why I stopped playing my 2010 save and the save I am currently playing(1991) I am enjoying, however. I noticed WWF got throw off ESPN for not delivering their insane requirements. Which with them off their main TV and WCW getting huge amounts of debt and keeping their talents on handshakes made it super easy to dominate.

 

While I understand the block from talking to a company that dropped you for 5 years. I do not understand the block from talking to ANYONE for an entire year.

 

And the worst part about it is how quickly it happens. 3 shows that miss the mark by 1 point and you are out of here.

 

The only way I found around it is if you already have 2 strikes. Make an extra save and if you think you cant deliver the XY number cancel the deal before that show and get a new one on smaller channel. And fix the money you lost due to it with editor. Because if the game wants to throw nonsense at you. You are free to use nonsense against it.

 

That's really bad! I wasn't aware it was 3 strikes & you're out. Doesn't seem very realistic to me.

I'm positive Fox has to be annoyed with the constantly lowering ratings from Smackdown, yet they don't throw them off the air!

 

I get it's a game, so it will have some gamey features. That doesn't mean it should be so static. I don't recall ever getting thrown off TV in 2016 for bad ratings. Even if I did, I wouldn't sweat it. I could just go sign with another TV deal. Now I'm locked out for a year & basically dead in the water unless I make my own broadcaster.

 

Then again, isn't self owned subscription based broadcasters like super broken? I feel like I heard people talking about that.

 

I personally never make it farther than a month into a save in 2020 so I can't really comment on it.

 

I usually get bored & give up.

 

Wonder if that's just on me or something.

 

Let's say it's on me.

[Questlove]

In this case, the contract includes "you need to score X or higher per show" and failing that breaches the contract.

 

In real life there likely isn't as clear a metric, but TV shows get cancelled all of the time when they're underperforming. And the contract probably stipulates that "underperforming" means whatever the broadcaster needs it to mean. Wrestling shows are no different.

 

I get the logic behind it, but even then the quality of your shows should be below the threshold for longer than 3 shows and the cancellation shouldn't come into effect until the end of your run.

[Kalmus]

That's really bad! I wasn't aware it was 3 strikes & you're out. Doesn't seem very realistic to me.

I'm positive Fox has to be annoyed with the constantly lowering ratings from Smackdown, yet they don't throw them off the air!

 

I get it's a game, so it will have some gamey features. That doesn't mean it should be so static. I don't recall ever getting thrown off TV in 2016 for bad ratings. Even if I did, I wouldn't sweat it. I could just go sign with another TV deal. Now I'm locked out for a year & basically dead in the water unless I make my own broadcaster.

 

Then again, isn't self owned subscription based broadcasters like super broken? I feel like I heard people talking about that.

 

I personally never make it farther than a month into a save in 2020 so I can't really comment on it.

 

I usually get bored & give up.

 

Wonder if that's just on me or something.

 

Let's say it's on me.

 

 

I have so far done....about 5 years on different saves.

 

One and a half year on 2010

One and a half year on 1991

And 3 years on Effganic

 

I really do enjoy competing with AI. As I feel AI is much smarter when it comes to booking...but braindead when it comes to other things. However I do have to say I was very impressed by WCWs recovery. They had droped to 3 milion debt. And cut most of their guys from written deals to handshake per show to get them back to where they were before and now sit on comfy 2.5 mil in balance.

 

WWF however. They are lucky enough to have 3 different TV Shows 1 A show and 2 B shows that are keeping them afloat. But they lost their main one. And are stuck with that for god knows how long.

 

 

 

And yes atm its 3 strikes you are out. Be that 3 strikes in a month or in period of time.

 

To me the biggest kick in the jewls was when I got kicked off after 3 months. And in those 3 months I had 3 shows that missed the required number by 1 point. So out of 12 shows 3 were bad 9 were good and got higher then needed. I was lucky enough to have my own broadcaster so I stuck it out for that year to get back to a proper TV. In that time grew 2x in size and was able to go on a big boy tv.

 

Only for them to throw me off after 2 months due to 3 shows missing a rating by 1 or 2 points.

[Self]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Questlove" data-cite="Questlove" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50817" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I get the logic behind it, but even then the quality of your shows should be below the threshold for longer than 3 shows and the cancellation shouldn't come into effect until the end of your run.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I agree 3 is too steep, particularly when you start a new game and haven't quite got the hang of your roster. Maybe 5. Maybe a grace period when you start a new game/contract where the first bunch don't count. Does broadcaster patience effect this? </p><p> </p><p> I can see the option for guaranteed contracts, when you're massive like WWE. And even for smaller companies if those contracts are short term. You've got 3 months. Hit an average rating of X and maybe we'll sign you for another 3. </p><p> </p><p> Choosing a broadcaster should be a tough choice. Do you go with the big guys with big money and risk falling short and suffering the consequences? Or do you go smaller and safer? If the only consequence is "We won't sign you to another contract" where's the risk?</p>

[MrTroy03]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Kalmus" data-cite="Kalmus" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50817" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>To me the biggest kick in the jewls was when I got kicked off after 3 months. And in those 3 months I had 3 shows that missed the required number by 1 point. So out of 12 shows 3 were bad 9 were good and got higher then needed. I was lucky enough to have my own broadcaster so I stuck it out for that year to get back to a proper TV. In that time grew 2x in size and was able to go on a big boy tv.<p> </p><p> Only for them to throw me off after 2 months due to 3 shows missing a rating by 1 or 2 points.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That's too rough. To me it should be based on wrestling positive / neutral / negative and patience level as well as margin of missing AND time slot.</p><p> </p><p> If you are in Prime Time on a huge network and they are paying you big bucks per show, then yes you should have tighter windows, but not even then should it be 3 shows. If you are in a lesser time slot the wiggle room should be greater both in margin of missing and patience.</p><p> </p><p> If they expect an 80 show and you are getting 70 - 75, that should be "annoying" to them but should really never cancel the deal early, they might consider not renewing it. If they expect an 80 show and you are delivering 40 or 50, then yes they might consider cancelling the show as it may sink their network if its prime time, but this also tie in to whether the network is wresting positive or not, patience level, and even things like the economy.</p>

[daddytorgo1]

The same reason why I stopped playing my 2010 save and the save I am currently playing(1991) I am enjoying, however. I noticed WWF got throw off ESPN for not delivering their insane requirements. Which with them off their main TV and WCW getting huge amounts of debt and keeping their talents on handshakes made it super easy to dominate.

 

While I understand the block from talking to a company that dropped you for 5 years. I do not understand the block from talking to ANYONE for an entire year.

 

And the worst part about it is how quickly it happens. 3 shows that miss the mark by 1 point and you are out of here.

 

The only way I found around it is if you already have 2 strikes. Make an extra save and if you think you cant deliver the XY number cancel the deal before that show and get a new one on smaller channel. And fix the money you lost due to it with editor. Because if the game wants to throw nonsense at you. You are free to use nonsense against it.

 

This. It's gimmicky, but I agree with you. If the game is going to throw nonsense at me I'm going to work around it.

[Donners]

Agreed entirely. It's particularly problematic as it's based on show quality rather than pop.

 

It's easy to get caught out by some obscure product rule which wrecks your main event (eg a match which is considered too dangerous for your fans) - all you need is a few of those, and your deal is toast no matter how many viewers it is getting.

[d12345]

While I understand the block from talking to a company that dropped you for 5 years. I do not understand the block from talking to ANYONE for an entire year.

 

And the worst part about it is how quickly it happens. 3 shows that miss the mark by 1 point and you are out of here.

 

The only way I found around it is if you already have 2 strikes. Make an extra save and if you think you cant deliver the XY number cancel the deal before that show and get a new one on smaller channel. And fix the money you lost due to it with editor. Because if the game wants to throw nonsense at you. You are free to use nonsense against it.

 

That's really bad! I wasn't aware it was 3 strikes & you're out. Doesn't seem very realistic to me.

 

This. It's gimmicky, but I agree with you. If the game is going to throw nonsense at me I'm going to work around it.

 

Ya'll have some of the mechanics of the game misunderstood. Read the manual lol.

 

It is not "3 strikes and you're out." It clearly says the hidden broadcaster unhappiness limit is based on their size and type.

 

It also states that switching your timeslots or signing a new deal resets their unhappiness.

 

It also states that getting kicked off a tv deal only effects TV deals for a year not events.

 

It is very accurate that if a TV show of any kind gets cancelled it is highly unlikely it gets picked up by another network until at least the season cycle is complete (i.e. 1 year).

[Donners]

It is very accurate that if a TV show of any kind gets cancelled it is highly unlikely it gets picked up by another network until at least the season cycle is complete (i.e. 1 year).

 

The game doesn't have a season cycle, though - if it did that might make more sense and be more palatable (as it would usually be well under a year that you'd have to wait).

 

TNA had five months from FSN to Spike, and only a couple from Spike to Destination America, for instance.

 

It's also very much inaccurate that they'll cancel because it doesn't meet some arbitrary quality metric, regardless of how well it is rating - it is odd to argue realism in one respect when it's contingent on a lack of realism in another.

 

It is nonsense that Raw, for instance, could lose its TV deal because of a few bad main events and be stuck running shows to a minimal international audience for 12 months (as I have seen the AI do).

[d12345]

The game doesn't have a season cycle, though - if it did that might make more sense and be more palatable (as it would usually be well under a year that you'd have to wait).

 

TNA had five months from FSN to Spike, and only a couple from Spike to Destination America, for instance.

 

It's also very much inaccurate that they'll cancel because it doesn't meet some arbitrary quality metric, regardless of how well it is rating - it is odd to argue realism in one respect when it's contingent on a lack of realism in another.

 

It is nonsense that Raw, for instance, could lose its TV deal because of a few bad main events and be stuck running shows to a minimal international audience for 12 months (as I have seen the AI do).

 

I do this professionally and I can tell you that a show not dropping below a certain viewership number for the time slot is the only metric these broadcasters look at.

 

Since TEW's show grades are tied in with your weekly viewership it makes sense that low graded shows would put you on the hot seat.

 

Ad sales are automated, so the amount your ad slots sell for is based on the viewership in that slot from the previous week. If the network falls out of a certain tier they lose out on those high priced ad sales. Those big bucks are how they make money. If you mess with their money your show is getting cancelled.

[Vinsmoker]

There are also certain "brodcasters" in the real world that would always be

available. Atleast as a Free-to-Air option.

 

Like YouTube, Twitch or other streaming sites.

I think being dropped by a TV station sould prevent you from getting on a brodcaster of the same size (or bigger) for a year again. But you should always

be able to "downgrade", after being dropped.

 

Perhaps make brodcasters being less generous when they take a dropped TV show.

Like...mabye they demand a larger cut of the money, shorter contract length or more episodes.

Being dropped from a TV station should definitely be bad for you, but being forced

onto a smaller station, with a worse contract, should be enough imho

[nerodragomir1]

Ya'll have some of the mechanics of the game misunderstood. Read the manual lol.

 

It is not "3 strikes and you're out." It clearly says the hidden broadcaster unhappiness limit is based on their size and type.

 

It also states that switching your timeslots or signing a new deal resets their unhappiness.

 

It also states that getting kicked off a tv deal only effects TV deals for a year not events.

 

It is very accurate that if a TV show of any kind gets cancelled it is highly unlikely it gets picked up by another network until at least the season cycle is complete (i.e. 1 year).

 

So another case of removing sandbox in order to make it more of a strict simulation game, play the way the developer wants you to play. Not the way you want to play.

 

My bad for not wanting to look through a manual.

 

It's not a fun mechanic. It's an unnecessary punishment in a game that is supposed to be what we want to make it.

You can make the argument that it's supposed to be challenging, sure. That doesn't mean it should be straight up punishing with killing you off TV for a couple bad shows. Any time I start up a new company like WWE or WCW. I am bound to have at least 2 bad shows to start.

 

Usually get popped for not having enough interesting storylines, or a bad main event because I'm getting into the groove of things. Plus broadcasters sometimes have unreasonable expectations. Saw one I think that was in the 80's. So after my first couple bad shows. Now I'm on thin ice with the broadcaster? One, two, maybe three more bad shows & I'm dead in the water for TV.

Doesn't sound very fun to me.

I'm sure someone would say "Just adjust the TV time so you don't have such high expectations."

That doesn't sound very fun either. Then WCW will just keep Nitro on it's normal time & I'll be on late night or evening time. Not much of a Monday night war to me!

 

Point is, I don't want to be thrown off for a couple bad shows. I seriously only need to look at current day WWE in order to show my proof.

Current day RAW gets like 1.5-2 million viewers a week. Unless USA & FLIPPING FOX have a crazy low expectation in real life.

 

I know Youtubers that average over that number on a regular basis.

Heck, I know Youtubers that upload daily & get double or triple the numbers WWE gets with their TV deals!

Kind of off topic, but still!

 

Change the way the game works in that way is all I'm saying.

[nerodragomir1]

I think the game should be rated off of viewership ratings instead of some weird grade of how good a show was.

 

I get the logic behind it.

 

But why do broadcasters care if you have a "highly rated show." They only care if it gets good viewership ratings. The game should be based on those ratings more than some overall angle & match grading basis.

I know it will technically boil down to the same thing.

High Ratings mean good show, low ratings mean bad show.

I think there is more to consider though in that aspect.

 

Like shows that have 90 rating, could lead to high viewership ratings & give a boost to next weeks viewers because last week was a good show.

Same with a bad show.

 

Right now if you have a fantastic show. It just means more pop. It doesn't have any extra effects to it.

Consistent great shows should add popularity boosts, add more money due to more people watching & it could have other bonuses too!

 

If shows were based on viewership, instead of ratings. or find a way to mix the two in order to make fan viewership more of a thing. TEW could have a fresh new way to present itself.

 

I know each match is based off of a percentile of pop & wrestling skill.

 

What if for the shows overall viewership rating was based off of star power & popularity of the people on the show?

I know Figureheads help attendance, but why doesn't high rated stars on a show help the overall viewership ratings?

 

They introduced pre-booking, yet another cool thing. but I don't think TV ratings improve if you pre-book some stars to be on the show. I think it stays the same.

 

I feel like the game could focus more on TV than it currently does.

If you have multiple good shows in a row, do you get a viewership bump? I don't think so. Sure, you get momentum, prestige & more popularity. But those are kind of stagnant.

 

Say you have 3 great shows in a row, that should lead to a big bump in viewership & give a bonus to popularity gains, because more people are watching due to recent success of shows.

 

I think the same could go if you have 3 bad shows in a row. People will stop watching & eventually you'll get dwindling ratings, less money & eventually start hurting your stars for being associated with a bad show.

 

I currently have a negative perception of the people on RAW & Smackdown due to how bad the shows have been. So it's a realistic thing to have that happen.

 

Storylines should have a bigger impact than just. "Not enough hot storylines."

A hot storyline should bring higher viewership to the show. Especially if you pre-book an angle or match with a hot storyline on the show.

Right now, if you meet the games requirement for how angles. I guess you get a small boost to the angle they are involved in. It doesn't help boost much else though.

If the game was based on TV viewership, the fans could be brought in at a higher rating due to wanting to see what happens next in the hot angle.

Leading to higher viewership ratings.

 

I think there is a lot that can be done with what I'm talking about here. I know it wouldn't be implemented, but I'm just saying the current way TEW does it's TV isn't very interesting or exciting.

 

Book good show, stay on TV. Book a few bad shows, get kicked off TV for a year.

 

Sounds really boring & unexciting.

 

Make it to where the show relies on viewership & fan prospective. Where it fluctuates with star quality, popularity, hot storylines. You can really make it like the Monday night wars.

 

I know ultimately, you can dismiss this by saying the game kind of already does it with the overall show rating, it just doesn't sound as inciting as trying to beat the other show with actual viewership ratings.

 

I think the current way they show viewership is just kind of like a flavor text email. I don't even know if it has any baring on anything.

[Donners]

I do this professionally and I can tell you that a show not dropping below a certain viewership number for the time slot is the only metric these broadcasters look at.

 

Since TEW's show grades are tied in with your weekly viewership it makes sense that low graded shows would put you on the hot seat.

 

Ad sales are automated, so the amount your ad slots sell for is based on the viewership in that slot from the previous week. If the network falls out of a certain tier they lose out on those high priced ad sales. Those big bucks are how they make money. If you mess with their money your show is getting cancelled.

 

The difficulty is that it completely ignores context.

 

Let's say you start a one-year deal. Your company experiences massive growth.

 

You have a few quality blips in the early months - a few main events don't quite work out - but overall your ratings are double what they were when you started.

 

You have one more blip...and suddenly you're cancelled.

 

Your ratings were way above what they were originally - the show is in a much higher advertising tier than when it started - and even this down show is relatively highly rated, but it doesn't matter. Your gains are completely ignored. Not only do you lose your deal, but you are "toxic" to all other networks. A fast-rising company which can draw big ratings is suddenly shunned by the whole industry.

 

That is not realistic at all.

 

If the show was on the bubble, then I can certainly understand a few down shows putting you under pressure, but that is not how it works.

[SirMichaelJordan]

TV deal being canceled should result in only being able to get a TV deal that is smaller in size.

[d12345]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Donners" data-cite="Donners" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50817" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The difficulty is that it completely ignores context.<p> </p><p> Let's say you start a one-year deal. Your company experiences massive growth.</p><p> </p><p> You have a few quality blips in the early months - a few main events don't quite work out - but overall your ratings are double what they were when you started.</p><p> </p><p> You have one more blip...and suddenly you're cancelled.</p><p> </p><p> Your ratings were way above what they were originally - the show is in a much higher advertising tier than when it started - and even this down show is relatively highly rated, but it doesn't matter. Your gains are completely ignored. Not only do you lose your deal, but you are "toxic" to all other networks. A fast-rising company which can draw big ratings is suddenly shunned by the whole industry. </p><p> </p><p> That is not realistic at all.</p><p> </p><p> If the show was on the bubble, then I can certainly understand a few down shows putting you under pressure, but that is not how it works.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Right. I would say that if you're on the bubble you would change timeslots in game and IRL. Happens often. Shoot it happened to TNA a lot. Spike shuffled them all over the place. </p><p> </p><p> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact!_(TV_series)" rel="external nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact!_(TV_series)</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50817" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The final Monday Impact! scored a 0.8 rating and was then moved back to Thursday nights, the reason for the return to Thursdays was due to reduced television audience figures on Mondays</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> They got the coveted Monday prime-time slot on March 8 and by May they were back to Thursday because they weren't hitting the numbers that Spike expected in that slot. They opted to move instead of losing the TV deal.</p><p> </p><p> Also networks really only debut new TV shows 2 times a year (in the U.S.) After new years and in the fall. If you lose your deal in January for not hitting numbers you aren't getting a new deal until September AT THE EARLIEST.</p>