EWR Stats and Scenarios in Theory and Practice

[Mick]

I'm not sure how this is logically even possible considering that most of the wrestling world barley knows what TNA is let alone who is in that company.

This statement nullifies any legitimacy to your comments.

Well no, he does have a point, but I agree that that's pretty dumb. The only problem is the point has already been said.

[Colly]

Depends how you define 'the wrestling world' really. Is it a die hard wrestling fan, or does it include someone who might flick Raw on having seen some merchandise in a supermarket?

[pokerfreak]

Its both really. The die hard wrestling fan or someone part of the IWC would just be a small micro dot though.

[mkpunk]

Any random yard tard could be treated as a big deal in WWE or any company for that matter. The point is he wouldn't be that popular. Taking a look at Bills data which I'm just using for reference. AJ Styles is 89 and Booby Roode is 87. Meaning they are more over than most of the WWE roster and pretty much on par with their top guys outside of Cena and Punk. I'm not sure how this is logically even possible considering that most of the wrestling world barley knows what TNA is let alone who is in that company. The only reasonable logic I can think of is that a) someone is way overstating how popular TNA really is and b) guys are being treated on how over they are in that company and not in the grand scheme of things. If its the latter than the top guys in every promotion should be in the high 80's. Which I don't think anyone would agree with. Which brings me back to me not seeing any reasonable logic for that kind of overness on guys who virtually have little exposure or audience recognition in the grand scheme of things. The further down in promotions you go the worse it seems to get too. In ROH, Nigel, Steen and the briscoes are low 70.meaning they are on par with a Goldust. Not to mention that they are just as over as X-Pac who while not on tv now a days would still be a much bigger draw than any of those 3 even on an indy show. What would have to happen is a rehaul o fthe entire database or a new database made. Where we look at WWE's roster and scale back from there even possibly scaling back some of WWE's roster. The scale back the wages on everyone so they are not making more money than they should be and then scale back the promotions.

TNA has a standard 1 million televised which is in between 1/3 and 1/4 of WWE's standard rating for RAW, similarly TNA's largest attended shows are at about half the size of the general WWE shows. However most of the TNA guys are more over than the average WWE guys. Some WWE guys are just not over while TNA guys like the Bro-Mans still have pretty over reactions despite being midcard at best.

Nigel was pretty over in TNA for a bit of time before his hepatitis outbreak that forced his retirement and pretty over with ROH for a long time. Now I am not sure if he is more over than X-Pac but he isn't worth a 50, a 60 would be fine. The same with Steen and the Briscoes.

Edited December 18, 2013 by mkpunk

[Meacon Keaton]

Nigel was pretty over in TNA for a bit of time before his hepatitis outbreak that forced his retirement and pretty over with ROH for a long time. Now I am not sure if he is more over than X-Pac but he isn't worth a 50, a 60 would be fine. The same with Steen and the Briscoes.

But what are you basing that off of? If X-Pac showed up on RAW next week, more people would know who he is than Nigel McGuinness.

[Colly]

And if X-Pac and Nigel McGuinness both turned up to some random indie in the middle of nowhere, the same would apply. This is a landscape were wrestling = WWE, and even moreso with folk who were over in the last big boom period.

[Reflecto Is My Favorite Poster]

Even then, though, that is a point- just because in the real world, "wrestling= WWE", you also have to account for how the average wrestling fan would react. Taking the "layperson vs. hardcore fan" argument, "well, the average fan only knows WWE or Monday Night Wars- era WCW, so only WWE/WCW guys should have high overness"- and it did seem like it was said by the "if no one, even top guys, has an overness higher than 80, so be it" to the obvious conclusion, then you have to lower everyone in WWE's overness and make a roster where the only people allowed to be 90+ overness are The Rock, MAYBE Hulk Hogan, and the Jersey Shore/Maria Menounous type celebrities who snuck into the game because "average-to-non fans know them", then have people like, say, an Alberto Del Rio or a Sheamus [main event WWE guys, but unknown on a mainstream level) at midcard level- and that's unreasonable as well.

There is that problem with just going completely to "Wrestling is WWE" for it- you have to also account for the wrestling bubble and adjust the overness based on what a regular wrestling fan would view for overnesses, just because it's reasonable. It's a wrestling simulator, not an entertainment simulator on a whole, so people have to be judged on their overness in wrestling.It's more feasible to just say "shut up and Arsenic it yourself" on problems like overness, simply because in most cases, overness issues like the "TNA-to- WWE conversion" for TNA stars is a problem that will only come into play IF YOU HIRE THE WORKER TO WWE. It's more feasible to make choices like, say, "The American Wolves are high 60s, but they just got hired by WWE under development deals- Drop their overness into the low 40s to accommodate for them being under development deals and the WWE changeover" then it is to give people who prefer to play TNA games a harder time by dropping TNA homegrowns' overness to something adjusting what they'd be in WWE, solely to accommodate people who prefer to play as WWE.

[mkpunk]

Nigel was pretty over in TNA for a bit of time before his hepatitis outbreak that forced his retirement and pretty over with ROH for a long time. Now I am not sure if he is more over than X-Pac but he isn't worth a 50, a 60 would be fine. The same with Steen and the Briscoes.

But what are you basing that off of? If X-Pac showed up on RAW next week, more people would know who he is than Nigel McGuinness.

That is true but I am sure that Nigel's overness would be adjusted a lot more easily when he is on WWE. Many people watch WWE and TNA on here but you have less who input on the indies (which cause often over-rated wrestler stats because of lack of views.)

And if X-Pac and Nigel McGuinness both turned up to some random indie in the middle of nowhere, the same would apply. This is a landscape were wrestling = WWE, and even moreso with folk who were over in the last big boom period.

If Nigel and X-Pac showed up at an indy, they would get the same reaction because most if not all fans are the hardcore fans.

[conker8]

How is calculate the efficiency of an angle ?

[Jayzon]

I don't know if this is the right thread for this question, but it seemed like it. Also, this question may have been answered somewher already, so if it is, feel free to point it out to me.

Should the stats in EWR reflect the worker's skill compared to current workers or on an all-time scope? I mean, let's think of Bruiser Brody, who usually gets 100 in brawling. Even though he isn't active anymore (for obvious reasons), should all brawling stats, even current ones, be compared to his prime, ie. if someone in a current setting has 100 brawling, it'd mean they're as good as Brody? Or, should the stat be compared to contemporaries only, so that the best brawler at a given time should have 100, even though they wouldn't be as good as Brody?

I'm not sure if that makes any sense, but it's just something I've been thinking about a lot since getting back into EWR.

[mkpunk]

I think they are as current as possible given what is done and how limited they are in the promotion style (namely WWE.) El Torito for instance is the wrestler with the best speed statistic in the game BUT doesn't really use it in WWE as it is more about comedy with him. Compare that to Rey Mysterio who has gotten repeatedly injured and isn't as good anymore.

[Mancuerda]

With over 5800 workers in the database currently, I'm really not liking the idea of going through and making sure none of them have shooting checked, only to have to go through and recheck it, if this whole "shooting only affects who PRIDE will sign" theory is incorrect.

Or you could start a new game, click "other workers," search for those with 'Shooting Ability' and manually remove it.

Just saying

That's fine and dandy... But, what happens if we find out that there is something else in the game that having shooting ability triggers? such as working for an ingame promotion run by an owner that prefers Mixed Martial Arts, as I said before?

Then, I have to have either had a list of all of the people I've removed it from and re-add it, or go to a past update, get the list from that update and again, re-add the shooting ability for those that it applies to... Either way, huge waste of time... Time that could be better spent on other things...

Unless, of course, everyone feels that this shooting being checked thing is more important that adding workers, name changes, title changes, face/heel changes, etc, etc.

-Bill

I have no idea if this was ever addressed. I don't mean to necro bump an old post from so long ago, but I was curious and bored waiting on family. I made a scenario with just WWE (which I controlled) and a company called Shooting with an owner that prefers martial arts. I let the game fill in workers. It only created two workers with shooting ability (based on checking the other workers on the very first day before WDW, NPW, or Shooting nabbed any). I advanced to the next day, letting the other promotions pick their guys. NPW picked one of the workers with shooting ticked. The other one is still unemployed. So there you go. Now we know. Or maybe someone else already did this. Considering it took about 5 minutes to do, I assume someone else already answered it, but again I was bored.

Go Bucks.

[Mancuerda]

I don't know if this is the right thread for this question, but it seemed like it. Also, this question may have been answered somewher already, so if it is, feel free to point it out to me.

Should the stats in EWR reflect the worker's skill compared to current workers or on an all-time scope? I mean, let's think of Bruiser Brody, who usually gets 100 in brawling. Even though he isn't active anymore (for obvious reasons), should all brawling stats, even current ones, be compared to his prime, ie. if someone in a current setting has 100 brawling, it'd mean they're as good as Brody? Or, should the stat be compared to contemporaries only, so that the best brawler at a given time should have 100, even though they wouldn't be as good as Brody?

I'm not sure if that makes any sense, but it's just something I've been thinking about a lot since getting back into EWR.

I don't know if this is the answer you'll like, but I think of it as skill regardless of time frame. I don't think anyone should ever have 100 in brawling, speed, or tech, as nobody is going to have a perfect performance every time. Even 100 in charisma is iffy, but there are some guys who literally have classic promos just about every time (Stone Cold comes to mind). But yeah... I wouldn't say just because Bruiser Brody was this amazing brawler in his day, it doesn't mean no one else should get high marks in brawling, but say Brody is a 97 in his prime in brawling, and if you think he's the greatest brawler ever (personally I'd argue for guys like Foley in his prime, Masato Tanaka in his, etc. being up there as well), that doesn't mean other guys couldn't get 94's or whatever. But I would say, yes, it is skill regardless of the time frame for me, but that's just me. It's why... say you think the guy who's best on the mic right now is Seth Rollins. Well, he's nowhere near as good as a prime CM Punk or Ric Flair was, so I wouldn't give Rollins a 100.

[mkpunk]

Charisma rarely falls off unlike say speed, brawl, technical and even overness. The main problem I notice is with a guy like El Torito who is quite possibly the best areial wrestler today doesn't get to show it in the highly restrictive WWE style.

[Lint]

- Add the Itami and Balor team, 3 exp, inactive.

With the talk of the stats being overly bloated, whats the point of adding a tag team, with such little experience, and making them inactive?

[Mick]

Someone might want to use them again.........some...decade.

[Skummy]

- Add the Itami and Balor team, 3 exp, inactive.

With the talk of the stats being overly bloated, whats the point of adding a tag team, with such little experience, and making them inactive?

I just mentioned this in the other thread, but they're not inactive, are they? Sure, they faced each other in a tournament, but the team itself doesn't seem to have officially broken up unless I've missed something. Not to mention that EWR gives an experience point every time a team tag together, and they've teamed together more than three times in real life...

[cellarood]

Damian Dunne stats & attribute, please? 

[Lint]

@Lineker just curious, since @Paige Turner stepping down reminded me of this.  Whatever happened to the crowd sourced "slim" update you and some other people were working on?

[Lineker]

We didn't do it.