Non-Wrestler Overness

[tristram]

I'd like to think managers could gain overness from being lumped with a wrestler. For example, if Bobby Heenan was completely unknown in the mid 1970s, and then started managing.... Ivan Koloff against Bruno Sammartino in the WWWF, and in a match at Madison Square Garden pulled on the boot of Sammartino as you'd expect a heel manager to do, and it ends up putting Sammartino at a distinct advantage, the pro Sammartino crowd would IMHO react to Heenan for his heel actions, and start to gain him notierity, which transcends to overness. Realistically, Miss Elizabeth was a southern girl who did not a lot except look beautiful at the beginning, true, she did become a focal point for Macho Man's craziness and a centre point for the marriage angle and the Destruction of the MegaManiacs, but, she was starting to get over IMHO being at ringside with Macho Man for her looks and the unbelievable chemistry and conflict they had. Same could be said for Paul Bearer, I wouldn't rate his entertainment skills absurdly high, and he wasn't massively over from his days in the territory when he came to the WWF, but he had a connection with the Undertaker that made him reverred. Good discussion, and I can certainly understand Adam's point of view on the issue irrespective of my own perspective.

[tristram]

I'd like to think managers could gain overness from being lumped with a wrestler. For example, if Bobby Heenan was completely unknown in the mid 1970s, and then started managing.... Ivan Koloff against Bruno Sammartino in the WWWF, and in a match at Madison Square Garden pulled on the boot of Sammartino as you'd expect a heel manager to do, and it ends up putting Sammartino at a distinct advantage, the pro Sammartino crowd would IMHO react to Heenan for his heel actions, and start to gain him notierity, which transcends to overness. Realistically, Miss Elizabeth was a southern girl who did not a lot except look beautiful at the beginning, true, she did become a focal point for Macho Man's craziness and a centre point for the marriage angle and the Destruction of the MegaManiacs, but, she was starting to get over IMHO being at ringside with Macho Man for her looks and the unbelievable chemistry and conflict they had. Same could be said for Paul Bearer, I wouldn't rate his entertainment skills absurdly high, and he wasn't massively over from his days in the territory when he came to the WWF, but he had a connection with the Undertaker that made him reverred. Good discussion, and I can certainly understand Adam's point of view on the issue irrespective of my own perspective.

[eayragt]

[QUOTE=tristram;156021]I'd like to think managers could gain overness from being lumped with a wrestler. For example, if Bobby Heenan was completely unknown in the mid 1970s, and then started managing.... Ivan Koloff against Bruno Sammartino in the WWWF, and in a match at Madison Square Garden pulled on the boot of Sammartino as you'd expect a heel manager to do, and it ends up putting Sammartino at a distinct advantage, the pro Sammartino crowd would IMHO react to Heenan for his heel actions, and start to gain him notierity, which transcends to overness. Realistically, Miss Elizabeth was a southern girl who did not a lot except look beautiful at the beginning, true, she did become a focal point for Macho Man's craziness and a centre point for the marriage angle and the Destruction of the MegaManiacs, but, she was starting to get over IMHO being at ringside with Macho Man for her looks and the unbelievable chemistry and conflict they had. Same could be said for Paul Bearer, I wouldn't rate his entertainment skills absurdly high, and he wasn't massively over from his days in the territory when he came to the WWF, but he had a connection with the Undertaker that made him reverred. Good discussion, and I can certainly understand Adam's point of view on the issue irrespective of my own perspective.[/QUOTE] I think you make some key points here, that show that this feature isn't just because it would make it easier to "cheat" that game. Firstly you said Miss Elizabeth got over before being a focal point on her looks and conflict with Macho Man. Those two show Miss Elizabeth actually participating in angle. The same could definately be said of Paul Bearer - all his urn antics were angles.

[eayragt]

[QUOTE=tristram;156021]I'd like to think managers could gain overness from being lumped with a wrestler. For example, if Bobby Heenan was completely unknown in the mid 1970s, and then started managing.... Ivan Koloff against Bruno Sammartino in the WWWF, and in a match at Madison Square Garden pulled on the boot of Sammartino as you'd expect a heel manager to do, and it ends up putting Sammartino at a distinct advantage, the pro Sammartino crowd would IMHO react to Heenan for his heel actions, and start to gain him notierity, which transcends to overness. Realistically, Miss Elizabeth was a southern girl who did not a lot except look beautiful at the beginning, true, she did become a focal point for Macho Man's craziness and a centre point for the marriage angle and the Destruction of the MegaManiacs, but, she was starting to get over IMHO being at ringside with Macho Man for her looks and the unbelievable chemistry and conflict they had. Same could be said for Paul Bearer, I wouldn't rate his entertainment skills absurdly high, and he wasn't massively over from his days in the territory when he came to the WWF, but he had a connection with the Undertaker that made him reverred. Good discussion, and I can certainly understand Adam's point of view on the issue irrespective of my own perspective.[/QUOTE] I think you make some key points here, that show that this feature isn't just because it would make it easier to "cheat" that game. Firstly you said Miss Elizabeth got over before being a focal point on her looks and conflict with Macho Man. Those two show Miss Elizabeth actually participating in angle. The same could definately be said of Paul Bearer - all his urn antics were angles.

[Remianen]

[QUOTE=eayragt;156031]I think you make some key points here, that show that this feature isn't just because it would make it easier to "cheat" that game. Firstly you said Miss Elizabeth got over before being a focal point on her looks and conflict with Macho Man. Those two show Miss Elizabeth actually participating in angle. The same could definately be said of Paul Bearer - all his urn antics were angles.[/QUOTE] Right. But in all of the cases mentioned, those angles were TELEVISED. People outside of the arena SAW them. That's how these managers got so much popularity (or notoriety). In the days prior to eye candy managers, you had people like Jimmy Hart, Heenan, Paul Bearer, Paul E., Johnny Polo (remember Raven?), and the like making an impact because of their performances that were widely seen. Honestly, I think there's a correlation between manager momentum and that message "Manager did some good work at ringside", though I haven't tested it out yet. But I do notice that most of my managers have B to A momentum and they don't shoot t-shirts. That's probably the most glaring issue. Support workers don't benefit from television or PPVs. If you put them in angles on TV or PPV and they actually showed progress from being seen on TV or PPV, it wouldn't be so bad. On the other hand, it would have to be weighted differently, otherwise you'd have managers for massively over workers getting massively over VERY quickly. Yes, this is the case in reality (Melina Perez isn't getting over on the strength of her in-ring skill, after all) but the biggest reason for that is level of exposure. Heck, as boring as Melina is on the mic, there has to be SOME reason why many casual fans know who she is, doesn't there?

[Remianen]

[QUOTE=eayragt;156031]I think you make some key points here, that show that this feature isn't just because it would make it easier to "cheat" that game. Firstly you said Miss Elizabeth got over before being a focal point on her looks and conflict with Macho Man. Those two show Miss Elizabeth actually participating in angle. The same could definately be said of Paul Bearer - all his urn antics were angles.[/QUOTE] Right. But in all of the cases mentioned, those angles were TELEVISED. People outside of the arena SAW them. That's how these managers got so much popularity (or notoriety). In the days prior to eye candy managers, you had people like Jimmy Hart, Heenan, Paul Bearer, Paul E., Johnny Polo (remember Raven?), and the like making an impact because of their performances that were widely seen. Honestly, I think there's a correlation between manager momentum and that message "Manager did some good work at ringside", though I haven't tested it out yet. But I do notice that most of my managers have B to A momentum and they don't shoot t-shirts. That's probably the most glaring issue. Support workers don't benefit from television or PPVs. If you put them in angles on TV or PPV and they actually showed progress from being seen on TV or PPV, it wouldn't be so bad. On the other hand, it would have to be weighted differently, otherwise you'd have managers for massively over workers getting massively over VERY quickly. Yes, this is the case in reality (Melina Perez isn't getting over on the strength of her in-ring skill, after all) but the biggest reason for that is level of exposure. Heck, as boring as Melina is on the mic, there has to be SOME reason why many casual fans know who she is, doesn't there?

[Rob4590]

I think that Remi's point is the most obvious thing that is currently wrong with support worker's overness (or seems to be), and that is that they only get an overness boost in the area that the show is held from appearing in an angle (as do wrestlers too). Now if the show is televised (or on PPV) then they should get that boost in all areas that the show is shown. On the flip side to this, wrestlers in dark matches should NOT get overness boosts in all areas that a TV show / PPV is shown. just in the area that the live show takes place. If this is already SUPPOSED to work like this, then a note to Adam - it doesn't !!! ;)

[Rob4590]

I think that Remi's point is the most obvious thing that is currently wrong with support worker's overness (or seems to be), and that is that they only get an overness boost in the area that the show is held from appearing in an angle (as do wrestlers too). Now if the show is televised (or on PPV) then they should get that boost in all areas that the show is shown. On the flip side to this, wrestlers in dark matches should NOT get overness boosts in all areas that a TV show / PPV is shown. just in the area that the live show takes place. If this is already SUPPOSED to work like this, then a note to Adam - it doesn't !!! ;)

[tristram]

[QUOTE=eayragt;156031]I think you make some key points here, that show that this feature isn't just because it would make it easier to "cheat" that game. Firstly you said Miss Elizabeth got over before being a focal point on her looks and conflict with Macho Man. Those two show Miss Elizabeth actually participating in angle. The same could definately be said of Paul Bearer - all his urn antics were angles.[/QUOTE] The way I personally view the career of Miss Elizabeth is that she began to get over by not doing a heck of a lot. Coming out to Pomp and Circumstance, looking all worried, fretting for Macho Man during the match, they're not really angle worthy. Certainly you could run an entrance skit angle that's available in some angle packs, but she began to get noticed by fretting for Savage at ringside. People connected with her emotionally. Here was this drop dead beautiful lady who loved her man and stood by him through thick and thin, yet here was this paranoid hyperactive on the knife edge type character. They were chalk and cheese. Complete opposites. And I think that built up Elizabeth to being over enough to do the MegaManiacs/Sherri/Summer Slam wedding angles. It's one of those wierd parts of wrestling, some people get over for doing literally... nothing. It's like Hulk Hogan I think said that you give them more by giving them less. Some managers are not particularly good talkers, so aren't really "angle" orientated. A case in point is Sonny Onoo. A lot of his work in WCW was sly and brutal interference in matches. That got him notierity. As I understand it, regardless of whether he did good work at ringside, or if he played well off his wrestler, he wouldn't gain overness from his impact in a match. Similarly, I believe commentators can gain respect or notierity from their comments in a match, rather than necessarily through a build up to match or review storyline type angle. The hardest part about it would be to find the fairest, and best way to get the system to generate overness for non-active wrestlers IMO.

[tristram]

[QUOTE=eayragt;156031]I think you make some key points here, that show that this feature isn't just because it would make it easier to "cheat" that game. Firstly you said Miss Elizabeth got over before being a focal point on her looks and conflict with Macho Man. Those two show Miss Elizabeth actually participating in angle. The same could definately be said of Paul Bearer - all his urn antics were angles.[/QUOTE] The way I personally view the career of Miss Elizabeth is that she began to get over by not doing a heck of a lot. Coming out to Pomp and Circumstance, looking all worried, fretting for Macho Man during the match, they're not really angle worthy. Certainly you could run an entrance skit angle that's available in some angle packs, but she began to get noticed by fretting for Savage at ringside. People connected with her emotionally. Here was this drop dead beautiful lady who loved her man and stood by him through thick and thin, yet here was this paranoid hyperactive on the knife edge type character. They were chalk and cheese. Complete opposites. And I think that built up Elizabeth to being over enough to do the MegaManiacs/Sherri/Summer Slam wedding angles. It's one of those wierd parts of wrestling, some people get over for doing literally... nothing. It's like Hulk Hogan I think said that you give them more by giving them less. Some managers are not particularly good talkers, so aren't really "angle" orientated. A case in point is Sonny Onoo. A lot of his work in WCW was sly and brutal interference in matches. That got him notierity. As I understand it, regardless of whether he did good work at ringside, or if he played well off his wrestler, he wouldn't gain overness from his impact in a match. Similarly, I believe commentators can gain respect or notierity from their comments in a match, rather than necessarily through a build up to match or review storyline type angle. The hardest part about it would be to find the fairest, and best way to get the system to generate overness for non-active wrestlers IMO.

[djthefunkchris]

[QUOTE=Rob4590;156078]I think that Remi's point is the most obvious thing that is currently wrong with support worker's overness (or seems to be), and that is that they only get an overness boost in the area that the show is held from appearing in an angle (as do wrestlers too). Now if the show is televised (or on PPV) then they should get that boost in all areas that the show is shown. On the flip side to this, wrestlers in dark matches should NOT get overness boosts in all areas that a TV show / PPV is shown. just in the area that the live show takes place. If this is already SUPPOSED to work like this, then a note to Adam - it doesn't !!! ;)[/QUOTE] How exactly does it seem to work now? I am asking because I would like to know for sure what is better, staying in your place of popularity (if your promotion needs the money) and having huge shows, or going all over the place to enhance their overness in other places?

[djthefunkchris]

[QUOTE=Rob4590;156078]I think that Remi's point is the most obvious thing that is currently wrong with support worker's overness (or seems to be), and that is that they only get an overness boost in the area that the show is held from appearing in an angle (as do wrestlers too). Now if the show is televised (or on PPV) then they should get that boost in all areas that the show is shown. On the flip side to this, wrestlers in dark matches should NOT get overness boosts in all areas that a TV show / PPV is shown. just in the area that the live show takes place. If this is already SUPPOSED to work like this, then a note to Adam - it doesn't !!! ;)[/QUOTE] How exactly does it seem to work now? I am asking because I would like to know for sure what is better, staying in your place of popularity (if your promotion needs the money) and having huge shows, or going all over the place to enhance their overness in other places?

[Remianen]

[QUOTE=djthefunkchris;157093]How exactly does it seem to work now? I am asking because I would like to know for sure what is better, staying in your place of popularity (if your promotion needs the money) and having huge shows, or going all over the place to enhance their overness in other places?[/QUOTE] If your goal for your wrestlers is to raise their overness, then your best bet is to stay in your home region (or wherever your promotion is more over) and run your shows from there until you get a TV deal with a network that covers more than your area. But even then, when you get that TV show, ONLY run your televised shows from the area you are most over. This allows for maximum returns by having you produce shows in "best foot forward" manner. The TV show's rating will raise your promotion's overness but it will also raise your worker's overness at the same time. If you're based in the South East and and C+ overness there and run a B-rated show on a network that broadcasts to the South East and Mid Atlantic regions (where you have say E overness in the Mid Atlantic), your overness in the South East will get a little boost and your overness in the Mid Atlantic will get an even bigger boost. Reverse the scenario and hold the show in the Mid Atlantic and not only will fewer people show up to the arena to watch the show (which means less gate revenue) but the show won't be rated B (unless the workers involved have the exact same amount of overness in the Mid Atlantic as they have in the South East) and it's probably going to rate somewhere around the D range. That's going to make you take a hit to your South East overness (eroding your power base) and only give you a slight boost to your Mid Atlantic overness. Short answer is, the best way to grow quickly in a linear fashion if money is an issue, is to hold your shows in the area(s) you are most over. Let the threshold spillover (that is, when your overness reaches a certain level, your overness in the surrounding areas goes up to a certain minimum) and TV/PPV broadcasts handle the rest. And with regard to Rob's post, as it stands now, a worker wrestling a dark match on a TV show or PPV gains/loses overness in ALL the areas that TV show or PPV covers. That's not the case with angles, which only gain overness in the area the show is held in, regardless of whether it's televised or dark.

[Remianen]

[QUOTE=djthefunkchris;157093]How exactly does it seem to work now? I am asking because I would like to know for sure what is better, staying in your place of popularity (if your promotion needs the money) and having huge shows, or going all over the place to enhance their overness in other places?[/QUOTE] If your goal for your wrestlers is to raise their overness, then your best bet is to stay in your home region (or wherever your promotion is more over) and run your shows from there until you get a TV deal with a network that covers more than your area. But even then, when you get that TV show, ONLY run your televised shows from the area you are most over. This allows for maximum returns by having you produce shows in "best foot forward" manner. The TV show's rating will raise your promotion's overness but it will also raise your worker's overness at the same time. If you're based in the South East and and C+ overness there and run a B-rated show on a network that broadcasts to the South East and Mid Atlantic regions (where you have say E overness in the Mid Atlantic), your overness in the South East will get a little boost and your overness in the Mid Atlantic will get an even bigger boost. Reverse the scenario and hold the show in the Mid Atlantic and not only will fewer people show up to the arena to watch the show (which means less gate revenue) but the show won't be rated B (unless the workers involved have the exact same amount of overness in the Mid Atlantic as they have in the South East) and it's probably going to rate somewhere around the D range. That's going to make you take a hit to your South East overness (eroding your power base) and only give you a slight boost to your Mid Atlantic overness. Short answer is, the best way to grow quickly in a linear fashion if money is an issue, is to hold your shows in the area(s) you are most over. Let the threshold spillover (that is, when your overness reaches a certain level, your overness in the surrounding areas goes up to a certain minimum) and TV/PPV broadcasts handle the rest. And with regard to Rob's post, as it stands now, a worker wrestling a dark match on a TV show or PPV gains/loses overness in ALL the areas that TV show or PPV covers. That's not the case with angles, which only gain overness in the area the show is held in, regardless of whether it's televised or dark.

[djthefunkchris]

Thanks, that helps out alot.......... It's actually HUGE help. Why isn't this part of one of the help threads I've read?

[djthefunkchris]

Thanks, that helps out alot.......... It's actually HUGE help. Why isn't this part of one of the help threads I've read?