PW Boards Draft XII - Discussion Thread

Necro

I'll admit I'm also struggling with the 4 post limit tbh, I've a couple of ideas I threw in the bin because I can't make them work within the limit.

It's a shame and I'm not sure how to change it without upsetting some people, or indeed putting them off entirely with the volume of work some like myself might produce with no limit.

I want everyone to enjoy the draft, but equally I want people to submit some form of work and hopefully vote when the time comes so I'm between a rock and a hard place.

Bounty Hunter

I'm ok with the 4 post system and as the Nasty Shagger said above we could just make our PPV a single post (or take from the 1st post) if we really need extra feud building. I think there are probably only a few of us who will be restricted in what we write as a result and considering how many more submitted shows last year it's probably worth doing as planned.

Maybe next year we could increase it to a 5 post Max especially if like this year there are less people involved than the usual 20 again.

Necro

ShagNastii wrote: »

Swap it around and make your PPV one big post.

I’m always amazed how you produce such fantastic writing for your PPVs every year. I generally dread writing the blow offs cause it involves match write-ups.

Give me set piece or gimmicky storylines to expand on and make entertaining no problem, but boy do I struggle to document exciting matches.

Interestingly I absolutely adore writing the matches moreso than the set-ups, I love the minutiae details in scripting them.

I also love the build up stuff, I'd be the same as beaker in that I used to enjoy the 3/4 week build and then the climax at PPVs.

But - I think to be fair to all this year who may have signed up within the parameters as outlined I'm not going to make any changes this year.

As Bounty says above perhaps it should be revisited next year depending on interest and/or sign up numbers.

We're likely the minority who do enjoy the longer type of format anyways.
If I'm still running it next year I'll definitely put some work into trying to make it more enjoyable for both sides

A Brad Maddox Guy

I'm all about the set-up, always feel like I struggle to write matches without making them sound samey. Gimmick matches are easier & fun to write but I find straight matches tough (could be a struggle this year given the technical wrestling strengths of my roster).

I also enjoyed writing the multiple week builds of a few years ago, at the time I was very into Total Extreme Wrestling & was doing that kinda thing for fun anyway. It was very difficult to get votes in for them though & I still think we were right to change it. I definitely wouldn't have taken part this year if it was the same as before.

With the reduced numbers taking part this year though maybe it's worth reviewing the idea of doing a two-tier competition again. Split the write-ups & roster picking entirely, everyone can vote for best roster but only people who submit PPVs can vote on them. Scrap the Overall winner award & take it that the write-up victor is the tier-1 winner. Or maybe maintain the 4 post limit but PPVs can be extended to 2 without the extra post counting towards the total. That way you've the freedom to have 2 TV shows & flesh things out a little.

I'll have my picks up in a bit, nice trade there.

Necro

I'm open to the idea of changing it if the majority want however.

As I said in the beginning I've created a number of extra Slammies for the picking phase to further entice voters.

If people want to split it and there's a majority happy to do so (with the caveat that a simple PPV card is also acceptable as an entry for those with less time than others), then I'm quite happy to do that tbh.

A Brad Maddox Guy

I meant changing it for next year based on us already having reduced numbers this year. I'll not complain if the majority want it changed now but I'd not be able to use it anyway

Necro

A Brad Maddox Guy wrote: »

I meant changing it for next year based on us already having reduced numbers this year. I'll not complain if the majority want it changed now but I'd not be able to use it anyway

Oops. Point still stands though and I'm of the mind to keep as is for this year and reassess again for 2020 based off sign ups etc.

Necro

Haha I love that recent pick of Brad's. Hussan and Trump are such natural adversaries it just works. And in today's environment, it's not quite clear who the face or heel would be

Mr.Nice Guy

I don't think the rule should be changed this year. It can always be reviewed at the end of the game. The real test for me is how many people complete the write-up stage. Let's remember the reason the changes were brought in is because we had something like 13/20 people fail to complete the game. That was a shocking statistic and the game wouldn't be sustainable for much longer if that trend became the norm where two-thirds of the players didn't feel they could finish it.

beakerjoe

Necro wrote: »

Haha I love that recent pick of Brad's. Hussan and Trump are such natural adversaries it just works. And in today's environment, it's not quite clear who the face or heel would be

Id see them as allies.

beakerjoe

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I don't think the rule should be changed this year. It can always be reviewed at the end of the game. The real test for me is how many people complete the write-up stage. Let's remember the reason the changes were brought in is because we had something like 13/20 people fail to complete the game. That was a shocking statistic and the game wouldn't be sustainable for much longer if that trend became the norm where two-thirds of the players didn't feel they could finish it.

Oh dont misatke my vent for a declaration of change. Its just not working for me specifically. It boosted the game last year in terms of numbers, Im just struggling to adapt

Bounty Hunter

Actually looked into Bockwinkel & Race myself but couldn't find 3 months in a row they teamed together so fair play on your research Slick, awesome pick this late in the game.

Mine is a little controversial but he will not be a major focus in the BWA this year but spoiler

He is going to get his ass kicked

.

Necro

Wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I opened up the eligibility but it's a valid pick surely.........

Never in 10 million years did I see that coming!

Mr. Guappa

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

Actually looked into Bockwinkel & Race myself but couldn't find 3 months in a row they teamed together so fair play on your research Slick, awesome pick this late in the game.

I think Slick took them as his double pick, not as a team.

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

Mine is a little controversial but he will not be a major focus in the BWA this year but spoiler

He is going to get his ass kicked

.

A little controversial? Yeah, that's an understatement.

beakerjoe

No problem with BH taking Saville, I cant talk about picks of bad taste after last year.

Can I draft another celeb this round?

Necro

beakerjoe wrote: »

No problem with BH taking Saville, I cant talk about picks of bad taste after last year.

Can I draft another celeb this round?

Nope, soz. One per roster but can be drafted at anytime.

Bounty Hunter

beakerjoe wrote: »

No problem with BH taking Saville, I cant talk about picks of bad taste after last year.

Can I draft another celeb this round?

I’m hoping people will only consider it bad taste depending on how he’s used and I have no intention of giving him a high profile position on the card nor putting him over in anyway whatsoever.

I actually always found Benoit hard to pick for the same reasons as given who he was and his backstory he’d probably have to be in and around any main event scene.

beakerjoe

Necro wrote: »

Nope, soz. One per roster but can be drafted at anytime.

But with Saville and Ali has BH not got two celebs?

Bounty Hunter

Mr. Guappa wrote: »

I think Slick took them as his double pick, not as a team.



A little controversial? Yeah, that's an understatement.

Ahh that makes sense, had just assumed slick found some match I had missed.

Not going to use the controversy creates cash line but can’t deny it might get a few more eyeballs on my undercard, but who wouldn’t want to see Savile getting some much deserved comeuppance?

beakerjoe

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

Ahh that makes sense, had just assumed slick found some match I had missed.

Not going to use the controversy creates cash line but can’t deny it might get a few more eyeballs on my undercard, but who wouldn’t want to see Savile getting some much deserved comeuppance?

Thats my Erics line .. we will sue the pants off ya

Bounty Hunter

beakerjoe wrote: »

But with Saville and Ali has BH not got two celebs?

Savile wrestled loads of matches for world of sport etc back in the day and iirc wrestler used to be listed in his bios, now such things are kinda overshadowed though.

I’ll pick someone else if needs be though

beakerjoe

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

Savile wrestled loads of matches for world of sport etc back in the day and iirc wrestler used to be listed in his bios, now such things are kinda overshadowed though.

I’ll pick someone else if needs be though

No, ive no objection to it at all.

I would just like to draft a 2nd celeb.

Actually Id love to trade my current celeb for a different celeb. I doubt thats possible though.

Bounty Hunter

beakerjoe wrote: »

No, ive no objection to it at all.

I would just like to draft a 2nd celeb.

Actually Id love to trade my current celeb for a different celeb. I doubt thats possible though.

If anyone hasn’t taken a celeb and is still to pick this round you could trade for whoever you’re looking for

beakerjoe

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

If anyone hasn’t taken a celeb and is still to pick this round you could trade for whoever you’re looking for

That would mean Id have to trade Hugh Jackman away, i doubt anyone would want him

Necro

beakerjoe wrote: »

No, ive no objection to it at all.

I would just like to draft a 2nd celeb.

Actually Id love to trade my current celeb for a different celeb. I doubt thats possible though.

I mean, to be honest I don't really mind if you draft a second celeb, but given the round has already started I don't want to change it midflow as others 'may' have taken celebs had they known it was allowed.

Savile counts as a wrestler under the new rules allowing any promotion, so the pick whilst highly controversial is permissible.

beakerjoe

Necro wrote: »

I mean, to be honest I don't really mind if you draft a second celeb, but given the round has already started I don't want to change it midflow as others 'may' have taken celebs had they known it was allowed.

Savile counts as a wrestler under the new rules allowing any promotion, so the pick whilst highly controversial is permissible.

Would any one object to me swapping my Jackman pick for another celeb?

Necro

beakerjoe wrote: »

Would any one object to me swapping my Jackman pick for another celeb?

How do you mean, just dropping Jackman and picking a different one this round?

beakerjoe

Necro wrote: »

How do you mean, just dropping Jackman and picking a different one this round?

I was thinking just swapping out Jackman for a different celeb.

Necro

beakerjoe wrote: »

I was thinking just swapping out Jackman for a different celeb.

Hmmm... not sure on that tbh. I'd be inclined to say no, however if there aren't any objections then I'd permit it if the celeb you want to change to remains undrafted following the conclusion of the picks.

daithi1989

beakerjoe wrote: »

I was thinking just swapping out Jackman for a different celeb.

Have sent a DM to Beaker about this.