Thumbtacks and products

[cps_1908]

Hi using latest patch, just a small thing but the Ruthless Aggression product states - Ultra-Dangerous match setups (like glass or explosives) will be penalised however it is also currently penalises any match involving thumbtacks. There were numerous matches in WWE during that time that featured Thumb Tacks - Foley v Orton Foley v Edge Ric Flair v Big show, Ric Flair v Foley, and even a bit more recently when they had become PG, Chris Jericho v Dean Ambrose so just wondering if that could be changed for the Ruthless Aggression product. Thanks

[BiffJordan]

I don't see the penalty as a reason to not book the match. You could still do Foley/Edge, accrue the penalty and still have a great TEW rating. That type of match was presented on PPV and marketed to a bloodthirsty sect of fans which has never been WWE's target audience. Even if they throw them a bone now and then.

[cps_1908]

Not really when I ran the match the first time it got a rating of about 57. I wanted to see what had caused the problem so I went back and rebooked the whole show and the only possible thing I could see was the thumb tacks so I removed them and it got a rating of 79 so had a big effect.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Like Corny says...The match would have been better without the thumbtacks.

[BrokenCycle]

Just use your imagination. It's really not a big deal.

[eayragt]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="SirMichaelJordan" data-cite="SirMichaelJordan" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51540" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Like Corny says...The match would have been better without the thumbtacks.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I don't think that's in doubt, but the suggestion (this would really be better off in the Suggestions Forum) is that for this product the penalty should be smaller.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BrokenCycle" data-cite="BrokenCycle" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51540" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Just use your imagination. It's really not a big deal.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well, both the product and match type are part of the game, so this is not just about how you imagine the match to go.</p>

[Gorilla Monsoon]

<p>One thing that's very odd, and I mentioned this on TheWho's mod thread as I thought at the time it was something he had edited in and not that the product was default to the game itself - but I'd imagine for the most part with WWE being the biggest wrestling product in the world, that the PG Sports Entertainment type products are based off of WWE.</p><p> </p><p>

Now, this WWE has Hell in a Cell as a PPV which often has multiple Hell in a Cell matches. We have Elimination Chamber which has typically two Elimination Chamber matches. We have TLC which has a ladder match, a tables match, a chairs match, and a TLC match itself.</p><p> </p><p>

We just had a match where a guy had to get his eye removed from his eye socket (see also: ping pong ball covered in paint).</p><p> </p><p>

Even with PG I'm not sure I'd say with the reliance the company has given to these gimmick matches over the years, that it makes a lot of sense for those matches to be considered too hardcore for the product. I mean, yeah HiaC has had some bad bumps with Mankind and the like, but for the most part it's just a match with a cage around it. A table match is just a match but they try to break a table. It's not really what I picture when I view as a "hardcore" match.</p><p> </p><p>

But I also imagine getting an accurate PG representation is kind of difficult in text format. So I'm not entirely sure what to suggest aside from editing certain stipulations to not be considered hardcore, as it wouldn't push the fan base away.</p><p> </p><p>

Because the only reason I've ever heard anyone complain about the HiaC matches is because they're doing them too often rather than saving them for feud ending matches, rather than them being hard to watch or whatnot.</p>

[SirMichaelJordan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Gorilla Monsoon" data-cite="Gorilla Monsoon" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51540" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>One thing that's very odd, and I mentioned this on TheWho's mod thread as I thought at the time it was something he had edited in and not that the product was default to the game itself - but I'd imagine for the most part with WWE being the biggest wrestling product in the world, that the PG Sports Entertainment type products are based off of WWE.<p> </p><p> Now, this WWE has Hell in a Cell as a PPV which often has multiple Hell in a Cell matches. We have Elimination Chamber which has typically two Elimination Chamber matches. We have TLC which has a ladder match, a tables match, a chairs match, and a TLC match itself.</p><p> </p><p> We just had a match where a guy had to get his eye removed from his eye socket (see also: ping pong ball covered in paint).</p><p> </p><p> Even with PG I'm not sure I'd say with the reliance the company has given to these gimmick matches over the years, that it makes a lot of sense for those matches to be considered too hardcore for the product. I mean, yeah HiaC has had some bad bumps with Mankind and the like, but for the most part it's just a match with a cage around it. A table match is just a match but they try to break a table. It's not really what I picture when I view as a "hardcore" match.</p><p> </p><p> But I also imagine getting an accurate PG representation is kind of difficult in text format. So I'm not entirely sure what to suggest aside from editing certain stipulations to not be considered hardcore, as it wouldn't push the fan base away.</p><p> </p><p> Because the only reason I've ever heard anyone complain about the HiaC matches is because they're doing them too often rather than saving them for feud ending matches, rather than them being hard to watch or whatnot.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> You can argue that a HIAC match or elimination chamber match doesn’t hit the same as it did during RA and AE eras compared to now which would lean more toward the PG era because the product and storylines are so soft and watered down that a match type of those significant feels out of place. I personally can’t think of the last time I was excited to see one of those matches. The storylines (outside a select few) haven’t been intense enough to warrant a stipulation.</p><p> </p><p> Just because WWE does it often now doesn’t mean it’s correct, their product is a mess right now for reasons...</p><p> </p><p> But the good thing is that the game isn’t stoping you from doing the matches either. Just won’t get the best grades just like real life WWE.</p>

[thadian]

Attitude is probably the most worthless product, and it's certainly one of the two that betrays its own claims.

 

- Must have eye candy

- Penalties for eye candy

 

PICK ONE!!

 

-No violent matches

 

Wait, you mean the PG Era, right?

 

- No lengthy angles

I introduce you to... The Rock.

 

- No lengthy matches

Clearly, the dev didn't watch Wrestling during the Attitude Era.

 

 

But then again, Wrestling Nerd Nirvana hates deathmatches (I guess Adam Ryland has never heard of AEW either?), matches must be 20 minutes, AND no comedy gimmicks for stars? Okay, now that I have reasonably proven the products are not based on Real World companies, do not reflect them, then we should NEVER EVER again see any argument "but in the real world", because even the products don't line up.

 

Xtreme Adult Filth cannot use most comedy on stars or major stars AND must have clean finishes? Wow. Sure, dude.

 

None of the products really reflect the booking of any real world company. Ruthless Aggression better describes both the Attitude Era and the RG Era. No comedy but I guess it intends Hurricane and Goldust to be given a new custom gimmick that doesn't carry the penalties, thus we do have the ability in contracts to make comedy/gimmicky gimmicks that do not have any penalties, for those extremely rare cases (though I still give them penalties when losing to legitimate, dominant, bad ass, and realistic).

 

There are only two solutions:

1. Give us the ability to make our own products already.

2. Thumbtacks, Cage join the "Low Injury" category with Ladders and do not count as "Hardcore". Reduce content risk to "Average".

[thadian]

I would love to make custom matches with things like Cage, Barbed Wire, etc. that have less than the default Injury and Content - but at the price of a slightly lower rating from disappointing fans. "This was a ladder match but they hardly used it... He broke out thumbtacks but it was only used for one spot at the end of the match..." - Just because there's a weapon doesn't mean it will be heavily used. Of course, this means giving fans less than what they expected. It shouldn't be enough of a penalty that it makes even having the match worthless, but it should get a lower score. A 100 rated Thumbtacks Match with "Low Injury Risk" might get penalized to 90. Add "Low Content Risk" and it's dinged to 85. Still enough to not lose popularity, but also a far cry from the match it could've been.

[SirMichaelJordan]

I would love to make custom matches with things like Cage, Barbed Wire, etc. that have less than the default Injury and Content - but at the price of a slightly lower rating from disappointing fans. "This was a ladder match but they hardly used it... He broke out thumbtacks but it was only used for one spot at the end of the match..." - Just because there's a weapon doesn't mean it will be heavily used. Of course, this means giving fans less than what they expected. It shouldn't be enough of a penalty that it makes even having the match worthless, but it should get a lower score. A 100 rated Thumbtacks Match with "Low Injury Risk" might get penalized to 90. Add "Low Content Risk" and it's dinged to 85. Still enough to not lose popularity, but also a far cry from the match it could've been.

 

Idk. I think HBK vs Razor is the greatest ladder match of all time and that risk factor is nothing compared to what we see now with ladder matches.

 

Maybe something like this would be tied to fans expected content from the product and maybe trends.

 

Maybe content risk can be freely moved from low risk to very high risk having an effect of fans depending on product. But the minimums fir injury risk should stay. There is always a factor of someone getting hurt when foreign objects are used. No way should a very low risk singles match and a very low risk cage match exist at the same time.

[eayragt]

Attitude is probably the most worthless product, and it's certainly one of the two that betrays its own claims.

 

- Must have eye candy

- Penalties for eye candy

 

PICK ONE!!

 

-No violent matches

 

Wait, you mean the PG Era, right?

 

- No lengthy angles

I introduce you to... The Rock.

 

- No lengthy matches

Clearly, the dev didn't watch Wrestling during the Attitude Era.

 

 

But then again, Wrestling Nerd Nirvana hates deathmatches (I guess Adam Ryland has never heard of AEW either?), matches must be 20 minutes, AND no comedy gimmicks for stars? Okay, now that I have reasonably proven the products are not based on Real World companies, do not reflect them, then we should NEVER EVER again see any argument "but in the real world", because even the products don't line up.

 

Xtreme Adult Filth cannot use most comedy on stars or major stars AND must have clean finishes? Wow. Sure, dude.

 

None of the products really reflect the booking of any real world company. Ruthless Aggression better describes both the Attitude Era and the RG Era. No comedy but I guess it intends Hurricane and Goldust to be given a new custom gimmick that doesn't carry the penalties, thus we do have the ability in contracts to make comedy/gimmicky gimmicks that do not have any penalties, for those extremely rare cases (though I still give them penalties when losing to legitimate, dominant, bad ass, and realistic).

 

There are only two solutions:

1. Give us the ability to make our own products already.

2. Thumbtacks, Cage join the "Low Injury" category with Ladders and do not count as "Hardcore". Reduce content risk to "Average".

 

You are allowed penalties though - trying to run a show without penalties is not necessary. To suggest that Attitude Era WWE never had a match / segment that suffered because it's not what the fans wanted is totally false.

 

The question is the level of penalty. You would expect a comedy worker to struggle to get past a miscarder. You would expect the crowd to be bored in a kind segment, unless it had the cream de la cream in it. You expect T&A to not get huge segment ratings, even if people want to see it.

 

There's worthy discussion here, but "remove these penalties" over simplifies it, and goes back to the days where people just tried to create the perfect product that broke the game. I haven't used this product, so I don't know if it makes comedy gimmicks difficult or impossible - of it's the former, it's fine. The thread started about tacks, and those matches should definitely get a penalty (tacks don't make for a good match), but circumstantial evidence presented did suggest that it could be lowered.

 

If you would like the developer to react to your suggestions, I would suggest looking at how you post them.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Another thing to keep in mine is that when foley used tacks it was moreso a stunt or bump vs the use of tacks in a death match company.

 

Don’t forget context.

[thadian]

Idk. I think HBK vs Razor is the greatest ladder match of all time and that risk factor is nothing compared to what we see now with ladder matches.

 

Maybe something like this would be tied to fans expected content from the product and maybe trends.

 

Maybe content risk can be freely moved from low risk to very high risk having an effect of fans depending on product. But the minimums fir injury risk should stay. There is always a factor of someone getting hurt when foreign objects are used. No way should a very low risk singles match and a very low risk cage match exist at the same time.

 

But then again the first was Shawn vs Bret, and it was almost not used. It's almost like the ladder was in the way of a normal match. The fans had no expectation set for them of what a ladder match should be, so no ding. After the first TLC, the standard was known.

 

As for injury risk, I think it should be proportional to the amount of how frequent the object is used and in what way it's used. A very low risk cage match would be like the one with Sid vs Bret Hart, or Flair vs Hogan with Mr. T as the referee in WCW. Or that one with Hogan, Sting, Luger, Macho vs Dungeon of Doom. Those were booked as very low risk indeed.

 

But when an expected risk is reduced, fans (having expectations) should be disappointed. So the match penalty.

 

If I wanted to "cheat", I would save scrum until I got my rating and no injury, so "cheating" is also not really a good argument. People who just want the match without the risk will just save scrum. People who want a lower risk than default have no options but to cheat.

 

This is why I avoid ALL such match types. Some, I can't run because Content Risk upsets my broadcaster deal, but others I can't run because Injury Risk upsets some of my roster and the guys it doesn't, I don't want to damage that way over a single match. As-is, if we use a 16 minute "All Out, Slow Build" match, we get injuries with a high enough frequency. Add the risk of a cage or thumbtacks and it's save scrumming time. I think a better built game discourages save scrumming, rather than using it as the only "out".

 

It's also false to say EVERY time Foley broke out thumbtacks, all the viewers tuned out, got angry, and he sent people to the emergency room for 2 years. Just like it's false to say there were zero "Sex Appeal" angles that really worked (a few really did). That's the issue I have - the product rules are so tight there's no room for variation, leaving you to book the same show formula over and over and over.

[thadian]

Content Risk - reducing it should give a penalty proportional to what the product expects. Episodic Entertainment fans would enjoy a "Very Low Risk" cage match, while Wrestling Nerd Nirvana fans should feel betrayed by such an insult.

 

Injury Risk - reducing it should give a penalty proportional to how many steps from the default "Risk" you are reducing it.

 

I also support a bonus for increasing the risk.

[Historian]

 

It's also false to say EVERY time Foley broke out thumbtacks, all the viewers tuned out, got angry, and he sent people to the emergency room for 2 years. Just like it's false to say there were zero "Sex Appeal" angles that really worked (a few really did). That's the issue I have - the product rules are so tight there's no room for variation, leaving you to book the same show formula over and over and over.

 

In WWE, Foley wasn’t wrestling a thumbtack death match though. He would use them as a spot in a match. Same with barbed wire. It would be akin to having a hardcore match in TEW. Just a standard old hardcore match. He could do the specific spots he wanted but there weren’t boards filled with thumbtacks all over the ring. All of the hardcore things WWE did during the attitude era (or well, the vast majority of them) were just spots and not entire matches. There weren’t a lot of barbed wire rope matches that I can recall. That’s the difference that I think often gets overlooked. A spot in a match is not the same thing as a match type.

[Gorilla Monsoon]

You can argue that a HIAC match or elimination chamber match doesn’t hit the same as it did during RA and AE eras compared to now which would lean more toward the PG era because the product and storylines are so soft and watered down that a match type of those significant feels out of place. I personally can’t think of the last time I was excited to see one of those matches. The storylines (outside a select few) haven’t been intense enough to warrant a stipulation.

 

Just because WWE does it often now doesn’t mean it’s correct, their product is a mess right now for reasons...

 

But the good thing is that the game isn’t stoping you from doing the matches either. Just won’t get the best grades just like real life WWE.

 

Personally, I feel like that has more to do with the fact they became stipulation matches done for seemingly just the reason of having a HIAC match, moreso than the feud being so developed that it required this penultimate cage fight to put the dot on the exclamation mark to end the feud.

 

It's difficult to judge a lot of the reaction to those matches because there is no longer really the elaborate well written feuds going on in the company any more. HIAC is just a PPV gimmick now, rather than the grand finale. So how can you maintain the interest you once had for it, when you're getting it for a random tag match with a set of teams where this is their first encounter together?

 

But again, it's not that the crowd is adverse to the match. They're still watching the HIAC PPV. One could argue it shouldn't have a huge effect on a match's rating, due to general lack of excitement - but nobody is actively scoffing at the match existing, so I'm not certain it should be actively hurting the product.

 

 

In WWE, Foley wasn’t wrestling a thumbtack death match though. He would use them as a spot in a match. Same with barbed wire. It would be akin to having a hardcore match in TEW. Just a standard old hardcore match. He could do the specific spots he wanted but there weren’t boards filled with thumbtacks all over the ring. All of the hardcore things WWE did during the attitude era (or well, the vast majority of them) were just spots and not entire matches. There weren’t a lot of barbed wire rope matches that I can recall. That’s the difference that I think often gets overlooked. A spot in a match is not the same thing as a match type.

 

There may be some value in introducing a "Sports Entertainment Hardcore Match" as a match type, for those who run a mainstream TV show and wish to have a "Hardcore" division, like the WWE once did without the game picturing it being a Japanese Deathmatch.

[Vinsmoker]

<p>Attitude Era didn't really have any "Violent Matches". Risky? Sure. But Violent? Not even close. Compare the stuff you saw in FMW, BJW or the trashiest of CZW deathmatches. The Attitude Era really didn't have syringes going through people's cheeks or lightbulbs being grinded on people's backs, like a cheese grader.</p><p> </p><p>

If you look at each point, you can find something like this. Like...yeah. Lots of AE shows had scandly clothed women in Eye Candy matches/segments, but all stories based around that, usually were the designated "piss break" segment. Something that, as far as game mechanics are concerned, would show itself as a penalty.</p><p> </p><p>

I'm not going to do this for every point of the Attitude product, because that would be pointless. Overall I agree with the topic in general, but I would further extent the suggestion, by saying that every product itself could have a list of the weapons, objects, set up and finishes that will either be recieved favorably or badly by the crowd.</p><p> </p><p>

Since match types are completely customizable (or rather should be all around), we can simply create a match catalog based on the product we picked.</p>