Cornellverse Broadcaster Rework (Input / Suggestions Wanted)

[Derek B]

After much internal debate on whether this belongs in the mods section or the general discussions, I decided it would be better here.

 

I've been working on some CV97 stuff and one of the aspects of the mod I'm not happy with are the Broadcasters. A lot of the info in there is left over from versions of the mod going back up to a decade and I don't think what I have lines up particularly well with real world broadcasting trends or the changes made to the system for TEW20 in particular. Since this has a major affect on popularity (workers and companies) and finances, I feel like completely overhauling this aspect of the mod will do some good things. And as with any mods I make, this will be a freeware mod that anyone is free to use for any purpose.

 

With that in mind, I'm looking to get some general input on broadcaster types and the kinds of things people feel are missing from the default data and from the CV97 data. So here are some topics I'd appreciate feedback on and some of my own thoughts on them too.

 

------------------

 

1. Would you prefer for networks to rise and fall in size/scale over time or remain static?

 

For my own preference, I would definitely like to see some networks evolving over time. Some of them rising and falling, some new ones existing, some dying.... just generally more fun things going on over time. It's more work, but it's not too hard to do and some narratives can be used to give information to players.

 

2. Do you prefer broadcaster sizes to err on the side of being bigger (leading to bigger popularity changes, more money) or smaller (leading to smaller popularity changes, less money)?

 

Personally, I definitely lean towards networks being smaller so as to help balance out the game world. The downside would be that it's a bit harder to grow, but also that would mean that things like the state of the wrestling industry may become more important. I already intend to reduce the scale of PPV broadcasters a lot (which will balance finances better) which would be a fairly major change and use eras to also reduce PPV buys a bit (which might already be in the CV97 data) but lowering some of the other larger broadcasters could limit their scope a lot.

 

3. Would you rather see a small number of networks where companies are competing for good deals, or a large number of networks so that everyone can potentially get deals?

 

I'm on the fence on this myself. I like having options, but I also don't want there to be too much redundancy within the data. Having more broadcasters available could mean limiting the number of deals each one would accept, so it would be unlikely for one network to have lots of companies on it, which can currently be the case in CV97 with certain ranges of broadcaster.

 

4. Do you like having generic options for YouTube-like deals, which can get lots more popularity spread over more areas for a company, but may artificially grow them to regions beyond their natural reach?

 

I'm torn on this one. Lots of companies use YouTube for their shows, but this doesn't seem to generate much growth for any company, though does seem to help get workers more over.... for that reason alone, it feels like they should be options in order to help some workers go viral if they are doing well, but seeing companies growing (even with natural growth limits on their highest settings) makes me wonder how to balance this given that this also knocks on to finances. Which is exactly why I want feedback.

 

5. For YouTube-like deals, would you prefer to have a higher production level required to maintain those deals and act like a minimum floor for those deals to actually help companies grow, with the assumption being that not enough fans will watch low quality content to matter?

 

Higher production levels could be used to stop lots of companies benefitting from these deals, but that may then hinder the workers and also push lower companies to overspend on production, which is a very real issue for lower level companies who already overspend on talent, especially for new debut companies. Is a tricky balance, and the AI isn't always smart enough to find this balance but I want to hear how other's feel about that.

 

6. Should WrestleWorld be included in their current form?

 

I've not been a fan of WrestleWorld in general as lots of companies end up on there and end up creating a huge wrestling boom where lots of workers become popular and the companies can often grow far beyond the levels they normally would, which changes the balance of the game. I'm tempted to remove them in this form, but this also links to the YouTube-like deals too. Even Adam's description of WrestleWorld has people arguing about whether it's a revolution or the end of indy wrestling as we know it... so I'm pretty much asking how people feel about that to see what the preference is. Similarly, it could also be rebranded slightly from Subscription to PPV to make it more like iPPV, which would slow things down more for companies but might still be good for workers. I think that could work, but I've not tested it yet.

 

7. Should there be some unrealistically big broadcasters that are almost impossible to get on by having them be anti wrestling and with high demands? Or is that just bloating the data with almost useless data?

 

There are already some in the data that are exceptionally hard to get on to as it is, but I'm thinking of the kind of network that wrestling companies would kill to get on. If I'm tweaking the existing data, these may be lowered already but if people like having these networks I may leave them at the highest levels for people to have in the data.

 

8. Do you have any suggestions for broadcasters to be added?

 

Any and all suggestions welcome. Short term or long term, national or local, big or small, anywhere in the world. Anything you'd like to see included is welcome and having names helps because my biggest weakness is naming things.... or graphics. Maybe you think we need lots of internet broadcasters and want to add them? Maybe you think we should have a bunch of modern Netflix and Amazon Prime style companies in the Cornellverse battling for supremacy. Maybe there should be a TV conglomerate somewhere in the world that owns loads of channels of different kinds. Whatever you think the game needs in the default data or CV97, here is your place to make suggestions and give feedback so that I can build up a coherent datapack that anyone can use

[KyleCamelot]

1. Would you prefer for networks to rise and fall in size/scale over time or remain static?

 

 

I am very much for this. More dynamism in systems, in general, are a boon.

 

2. Do you prefer broadcaster sizes to err on the side of being bigger (leading to bigger popularity changes, more money) or smaller (leading to smaller popularity changes, less money)?

 

Especially in this version, where making money (especially for the AI) seems a lot easier, I'd rather have much smaller broadcasters to limit growth.

 

3. Would you rather see a small number of networks where companies are competing for good deals, or a large number of networks so that everyone can potentially get deals?

 

In the future, I would love to see networks offer deals and try to get the biggest and best programing (ala ECW to WWF.) I like the idea of smaller networks, but unless the company currently attached to them does poorly in ratings, they will keep the company even if there is a bigger fish. I'm not sure how much chance is involved for the AI to get a tv deal (would it be the same companies every time, which can be boring.) So, I guess it would depend how the companies fair with each option, but I think a small number of networks is better.

 

4. Do you like having generic options for YouTube-like deals, which can get lots more popularity spread over more areas for a company, but may artificially grow them to regions beyond their natural reach?

 

Is there still an option to release your events on Internet, as opposed to DVD? I'm not sure if that was taken out. I think this just needs a rework in the game, and you won't find an elegant solution this year, and I don't really have a solution. But I think less popularity is better, generally speaking.

 

 

5. For YouTube-like deals, would you prefer to have a higher production level required to maintain those deals and act like a minimum floor for those deals to actually help companies grow, with the assumption being that not enough fans will watch low quality content to matter?

 

Would the owner tendencies apply to this? For example, if an owner is prudent, would he be less likely to raise his production level? If so, I think this would work.

 

6. Should WrestleWorld be included in their current form?

 

I think it is interesting in universe, but yeah, I don't like it for the growth of the game world once you start playing. It is realistic, I guess, similar in a way to how people stopped going to shows in Mexico in the 90s because they could watch it on tv. If WrestleWorld counted as having a show in an area, I think it could work better, as there would be regional battles and the lesser shows wouldn't gain as much popularity, which is what would happen if you had every indie on a single subscription network.

 

 

7. Should there be some unrealistically big broadcasters that are almost impossible to get on by having them be anti wrestling and with high demands? Or is that just bloating the data with almost useless data?

 

I like trying for the unachievable, so I wouldn't mind them being kept in. Again, I don't really know the engine that well, but if there was a wrestling boom, and you were a Titanic company, would the biggest anti-wrestling broadcaster be willing to negotiate? I assume once you're titanic there's not a lot to do as far as game is concerned so it might be nice to have it in as a goal to work for.

 

8. Do you have any suggestions for broadcasters to be added?

 

No suggestions, but I just wanted to thank you for constantly working to improve the game, and for CV97 which I always end up running a game in each edition.

[lavelleuk]

The Wrestleworld one is interesting, I did an alt 2018 CVerse mod and I am currently working on the 2022 version and I have done dozens of test sims to help get an idea of how things should play out and it does lead to companies going medium very easily, I've seen guys in 60+ pop due to being on there

 

 

One thing I considered was making them have tiny coverage instead of very small in the areas they cover, but I feel like they are there in cannon so I shouldn't mess with them. Lucky for my mod I have created a few more companies so you do still get some who just can't get on there

 

 

I also created a few more regional broadcasters just to give more options for TV deals, HPO as an adult commercial cable network across America and Canada, a regional Hawaiian broadcaster and one that covers the West Coast of America. Also a tiny British free-to-air internet one and a load of small commercial cable broadcasters in Europe. Oceania as well I think I added two maybe three broadcasters as they were just lacking, in the current form they would just be RAW and nothing else forever

 

 

From what I have seen having these options really helps the world develop and creates more variety, HOWEVER it only works due to the amount of promotions. I feel if I just stuck with the default amount it would just lead to every promotion going towards medium and makes the game incredibly imbalanced

 

 

Ok so after writing all that I am not even sure I have a point anymore lol. I would say don't add broadcasters if you don't have more promotions, and with wrestleworld I would consider either making it small OR limiting the amount of promotions that could use it? Maybe just allow three or something so you don't end up with every available company just jumping straight on

[Self]

Just musings from my CGC game from your 1997 mod (up to August 1999). I started with local TV in British Columbia and Alberta, and after a long grind of running money-losing spot-shows in Saskatchewan, I hit the popularity goal with that region's local station and got onto TV there too. Now I'm faced with a similar grind for Manitoba, and it's kind of a bummer to have to repeat the process. Perhaps if there were TV stations that covered multiple regions, but not the whole country, that could create a nice sense of progression at this level. For example, maybe Canada has a station that covers BC/Alberta/Saskatchewan, and another for Maritimes/Quebec/Ontario, while only requiring popularity in 1 or 2 of those regions. Perhaps both stations cover Manitoba, for a bit of a war. Perhaps these stations are only Very Small in size, giving the player a choice between strong ratings and revenue in a couple of areas, or weak ratings in more areas.

 

I wonder if local stations could also be stronger in some places, at least in earlier years. Growing up, S4C was one of the 'Big 4' TV Channels in Wales, but you could only get it in Wales itself. Feels like 'Small' coverage would undersells that. For the time period anyhow.

 

1. Would you prefer for networks to rise and fall in size/scale over time or remain static?

 

Rise & Fall, but mostly in terms of general trends, rather than each company having its own wacky (fiddly) history. Local TV begins very hot, but slowly national networks take over, buying out most of the little guys.

 

3. Would you rather see a small number of networks where companies are competing for good deals, or a large number of networks so that everyone can potentially get deals?

 

When I hit the threshold to get national PPV coverage in Canada, only to find that network had filled all 3 of its slots, it was a huge bummer. So I like more options, with hoops to jump through. As opposed to an easy task with limited slots.

 

4. Do you like having generic options for YouTube-like deals, which can get lots more popularity spread over more areas for a company, but may artificially grow them to regions beyond their natural reach?

 

I don't like the global options. I don't think they work right, even at minuscule levels. If TEW worked in a way that a Tiny broadcaster couldn't raise you above 15 popularity, maybe. But I don't believe that a real life indy promotion having its shows on YouTube, or iPPV on FiteTV, actually increases popularity. They all do, but none of them get tangibly more popular (i.e. more tickets sold) because they uploaded shaky-cam footage to YouTube.

 

6. Should WrestleWorld be included in their current form?

 

Not in their current form. Last time I saw them in action (An Australian 2020 game) they seemed too strong, particularly in USA. The real world equivalents (Go Fight Live, Fite TV) are a nice way to monetize promotion's popularity, but no promotion really gained popularity from it, did they? This isn't Netflix. No niche wrestling subscription service is going to be large enough to move needles.