New limited pop growth mechanic is way too harsh

[DjRelativity]

If I put on an amazing show even as a tiny or insignificant company I should still gain popularity. In real life, word would spread how great the show was and more people would tune in to the next show.

 

There should maybe be a system where if the show rating is 20+ higher than your popularity in that area, then you still gain popularity regardless of the popularity blocks, or at least gain more viewers to allow you to gain popularity.

 

This change was brought in to reflect reality, but in reality, if something is amazing then people will talk and more people would watch the next show and you would gain popularity. The new system leaves smaller companies stuck and unable to progress. How are we supposed to gain popularity if a 30 pop company can't get more than 5000 viewers. Maybe I'm missing something here but this is how it appears to me.

 

I get that you can turn this feature off, but the feature is supposed to reflect reality and I don't believe it does.

[Fjall]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DjRelativity" data-cite="DjRelativity" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50859" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>This change was brought in to reflect reality, but in reality, if something is amazing then people will talk and more people would watch the next show and you would gain popularity. The new system leaves smaller companies stuck and unable to progress. How are we supposed to gain popularity if a 30 pop company can't get more than 5000 viewers. Maybe I'm missing something here but this is how it appears to me.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This is a serious problem. You can see this very well in the Effgenic Mod. Companies move up to 30 pop and then are just stuck for years. How do they get over this point? Took over some companies in my watcher game. They could sign broadcasting deals but the AI doesn't do it. How is this supposed to work?</p>

[Adam Ryland]

It is being lessened in a coming patch.

[DjRelativity]

Thanks Adam You've been so excellent at listening to community feedback

[LloydCross]

Haven't had a chance to play since the patch, but based on the posts here it does sound extremely realistic, but possibly to the detriment of actually being a game with progression.

 

Wrestling companies definitely have ceilings and distribution is a huge component of that. Regardless of how well you're doing, if the show isn't available you really can't get many more fans. However, the game functions a lot better when you actually can progress.

[DjRelativity]

At the moment a tiny or insignificant company can't get past 30 popularity as they can't attract enough viewers, even if they put on incredible shows. In reality word would spread and they would get more popular.

 

If you play as a low popularity company you are basically stuck even if you sign a load of world stars. So i'd argue this is in no way realistic.

 

Big stars pull in viewers as does good shows. The way it is at the moment, you are basically stuck no matter how good the show is and how many stars you have.

 

Take AEW for example, they have become Americas second most popular company in less than a year due to star power and great shows. You cant replicate this in TEW atm due to the restrictions.

[Teh_Showtime]

I brought this up in the discord as well, the current method wants you to prioritize TV deals in general which is how wrestling works, but the floor is far too low. Raising the floor so that you can actually get big enough to attract a broadcaster in the first place is what makes the most sense to me.

 

The 30 cap means you’re limited to Tiny size, you can’t even hit 35 to reach small. Which tiny promotion can feasibly get a broadcasting deal? Maybe internet broadcasters sure but then any mod before the 2000s is impossible to grow those companies.

 

It makes more sense as a roadblock to Medium/Cult than to Small/Regional

[DjRelativity]

I brought this up in the discord as well, the current method wants you to prioritize TV deals in general which is how wrestling works, but the floor is far too low. Raising the floor so that you can actually get big enough to attract a broadcaster in the first place is what makes the most sense to me.

 

The 30 cap means you’re limited to Tiny size, you can’t even hit 35 to reach small. Which tiny promotion can feasibly get a broadcasting deal? Maybe internet broadcasters sure but then any mod before the 2000s is impossible to grow those companies.

 

It makes more sense as a roadblock to Medium/Cult than to Small/Regional

 

^^^ 100% with you on this

[Self]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="DjRelativity" data-cite="DjRelativity" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50859" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>At the moment a tiny or insignificant company can't get past 30 popularity as they can't attract enough viewers, even if they put on incredible shows. In reality word would spread and they would get more popular.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think there's a limit to that kind of growth. Lots of really cool local shows get stuck at a certain size. Plenty of indies around my way hit a ceiling, despite positive reviews. They could draw a certain number of fans (with bumps for big names coming in) and that was it. Without big production investments and TV, there was no more movement to be had. </p><p> </p><p> I haven't experienced the current mechanic. If Adam says it's being revised then you're probably right it was too harsh. I agree with a cap, but I couldn't say where it should be. 1000 fans in attendance? 500? Feels like you'd need fans travelling in from other areas in order to beat those numbers. Sucks if you can't hit Small though.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50859" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Take AEW for example, they have become Americas second most popular company in less than a year due to star power and great shows. You cant replicate this in TEW atm due to the restrictions.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> They didn't start from zero. AEW are the equivalent of starting a new company on the "Easy" setting. With starting popularity across their country, money to spend on production values, the ability to get TV right away, etc. They didn't 'grow' it in the same way a Ring of Honour, Pro Wrestling Guerrilla etc came from nothing.</p>

[Teh_Showtime]

<p>Let’s keep in mind the <em>five thousand</em> viewer requirement though. That number for AEW is incredible and it’s still a moderate level for a WWE TV taping. Maybe have it so only broadcasted events are subjected to that minimum requirement? Five thousand live fans is still more on average than basically every promotion in 2020 if you include NJPW/WWE house shows. It shouldn’t be treated as the bare minimum to get that many live bodies to the arena.</p><p> </p><p>

Slowing the growth of a PWG because they get 4,000 fans instead of 5,000+ completely misses the point. Furthermore, how do you even increase your attendance to reach that level and subvert the penalty if you get hard capped on popularity? I understand capping growth from a broadcaster if nobody sees it airing, but that shouldn’t be lumped in with thousands of live fans loving a show.</p>

[DjRelativity]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Self" data-cite="Self" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50859" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>They didn't start from zero. AEW are the equivalent of starting a new company on the "Easy" setting. With starting popularity across their country, money to spend on production values, the ability to get TV right away, etc. They didn't 'grow' it in the same way a Ring of Honour, Pro Wrestling Guerrilla etc came from nothing.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I do agree with this^^, except that AEW did need to produce a couple of acclaimed PPVs before TNT would even look at them.</p><p> </p><p> What I don't agree with is a 30 pop company needing 5000 people in attendance to gain any pop at all as this is near impossible with a company that size in the game. Even if you had the world's biggest stars headlining the shows. In reality if you signed big names it would attract bigger audiences and you would gain some recognition for that. It's how TNA rose to significance between 2004-2008. Big names = more viewers</p>

[Self]

TNT's requirements were probably a little more than you start with on Easy mode, sure. AEW needed those couple of shows on PPV broadcasters first. Forgot about that period. I didn't pay attention until they were on TV for a few months.

[BiffJordan]

Did you try to change organic growth to weak?

[VBigB]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Self" data-cite="Self" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="50859" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I haven't experienced the current mechanic. If Adam says it's being revised then you're probably right it was too harsh. I agree with a cap, but I couldn't say where it should be. 1000 fans in attendance? 500? Feels like you'd need fans travelling in from other areas in order to beat those numbers. Sucks if you can't hit Small though.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> In my CV game at 28 pop with 95 wrestling industry and 5 economy I draw about 170 people to an annual event and about 70 to a weekly event in BC. My problem with caps as implemented is it breaks the natural progression for every promotion as hinted at in the size criteria (which the average player and new players are likely going to try to follow). It also hampers spillover somewhat. With the current system in the CV I have to get on Wrestleworld to progress which will basically result in flat gains across the US and Canada so I might as well ignore the spillover mechanic until I start getting decent international spillover. We should not introduce a game mechanic to fix a problem that breaks other game mechanics.</p><p> </p><p> Two way I think we could alleviate the problems above but still restrict growth from broadcasters (which was the initial problem people wanted solved):</p><p> </p><p> 1. No caps for a companies home region:</p><p> - This allows allows a company to continually progress in their home region and still organically expand using spill-over.</p><p> - the caps still apply to every other region and broadcasting thus slowing expansion.</p><p> </p><p> Or</p><p> </p><p> 2. Separate popularity gains from the live show and viewership.</p><p> - in other words where-ever a company holds a show if the score enough to increase popularity then popularity in that region can increase. Everywhere else the show is seen, the potential gains are capped.</p><p> </p><p> The blocks from a game play perspective as implemented now hampers a sense of natural progression which in my opinion is bad for the average player/new players which will just add frustration. Seasoned players can usually find a work around but we're currently forced in one direction which I also consider not ideal.</p>

[Adam Ryland]

Closing this. As I've already stated, this is addressed in the next patch. The new system will be that the region the show is being held in is exempt, regions in the company's home area have a very high ceiling, minimum 55, and foreign regions have a lower cap, minimum 35. This addresses the issues raised and still performs the necessary task of stopping companies like EILL from gaining high levels of popularity in the US through a small broadcasting deal without ever visiting there.