|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 17, 2013 18:22:53 GMT -4
It's also possible Poffo is better than he should be because he asked for it that way. After seeing the surprise guys, I decided to go ahead and order, and try doing a fed again (first time in a WHILE). Been wanted to get back into playing for a while, so hopefully some cool new cards will do it I started a new fed based on the Bellator format. 13 episode "seasons" with eight man tournaments where the winner faces off against the champ the next season.
|
|
|
Post by lowtrav on Dec 17, 2013 20:40:30 GMT -4
I got mine today. I would have been very surprised at the huge name "holiday card" had Tom not made the move of retweeting something by a guy who got his order and tweeted a picture of the card in question. Tom should have known he spoiled the surprise for all of his twitter followers. BUT it's a great gift, an amazing card, and I am very thankful to receive it. That one accidental spoiler aside, I'm really pleased with everything about Legends Madness. I would NOT take those "Rahl ratings" as gospel about where the cards stand stat-wise until you've seen them in person. AS we've discussed at length there are quirks in the ratings that can make cards look ratings-wise like better or worse performers than they'll actually turn out to be. Wildfire, Lanny comes off as very humble and is well aware of his place in wrestling. There's NO WAY he'd ask for a better card. Lanny's card looks just about right to me; he'll be competitive but will lose significantly more than he'll win. This one could turn out to be one of the all-time classic editions of Legends. Everyone involved did a great job. Much credit goes to Tom, Steve Stanley, Tony Atlas, and The "Legends crew" on stats. I also can't forget the fans like Grant, Zeke, Ty, and the others who have landed some great legends for the game. PS: I got Randy Savage card 142 in case anyone is tracking that. The Ratings are definitely not gospel and I found there are some flaws in the ratings (For one, I think a - 3 move on L1O is rewarded with too many points. With most of the action taking place on L2O, I think more points should go towards that. I tweaked it to my liking But I only use it for two things: 1) I play a year and intro a set. Ill intro guys by having a tournament. The ratings help with seeding 2) I use it when ranking guys. Someone can be 10-0, but their wins can be against say Doring, Koko, Etc and another can be 7-3 but losses against guys like Rude, Race, etc. I don't feel that 10-0 is more impressive or merits a higher ranking. So I broke it up: over 40 rating earns a wrestler 5 points (DQ s are half since they didnt earn it), 30-39 is 4 points, and so on I also think losses should hurt, so a loss to a guy over 40 will give you a -1, 30-35 is -2, etc Just a couple of instances where ratings can help a bit
|
|
|
Post by Chad Olson on Dec 17, 2013 22:25:03 GMT -4
A couple of things...
1. Poffo had no input on his card. We just felt his "Leaping" Lanny stats should be a little better than his "Genius" stats.
2. I agree with Mark, I think this set ends up pretty cool, as there's a ton of great utility characters, topped off with the "Holiday Madness" additional card. Plus, the two "extras" that Tom referred to in the color Savage card and Atlas doing his own drawing.
3. I hope everyone enjoys their set and has a happy holiday season!
|
|
|
Post by Peter F on Dec 18, 2013 2:36:38 GMT -4
If you imagine the Poffo card as being for the ICW/Memphis version of Poffo, then I think it works fine. He wasn't on Savage's level but in ICW he wasn't far behind, and in Memphis he was at least a fringe title contender. He was higher on the card than the Genius, notwithstanding that infamous victory over Hogan.
|
|
|
Post by MT on Dec 18, 2013 4:48:27 GMT -4
If you imagine the Poffo card as being for the ICW/Memphis version of Poffo, then I think it works fine. He wasn't on Savage's level but in ICW he wasn't far behind, and in Memphis he was at least a fringe title contender. He was higher on the card than the Genius, notwithstanding that infamous victory over Hogan. I just rolled my first match with him a while ago and he got beat pretty handily by Eddie Gilbert. He put up the good effort at the beginning, then Gilbert took over and won without ever really being in peril. One match isn't a great gauge, but what you have to be aware of is the single reversal on level 2 offense. That, coupled with the down-3 on level 2, really holds him back. His excess rating points come from his agility and a level 3 potency move on level 1 offense. That move on level 1 is followed by a (ch) so it's got the potential to be a defensive reversal for the opponent, anyway. Once again, this points to things in the actual physical card that can't be accurately reflected by ratings points. I'm going to debut Atlas next, then I've got to figure out a way to work "Holiday card" into the mix when I'm already heavy with talent at the top of the card.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire on Dec 18, 2013 14:17:18 GMT -4
I actually wouldn't mind if he was better than he should be... he's got a cool gimmick that can be fun to book I have no 'inside knowledge' or anything, just thinking out loud, really. I'll let you know what I think of the stats when I get mine... I didn't pre-order (the surprise guy is what sealed the deal for me, to be honest), so I suspect I'll not see it until next week. @ Maddog -Saw you new fed... looks cool, I've tried to do some variations of that over the years, and it's usually pretty fun... the last time I did ELO ratings for the guys, played a 'season' of 8 weeks, then had the tourney at the end with the top 8 guys... think I did 3 or 4 seasons before I decided to do the LWA thing
|
|
|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 18, 2013 20:01:53 GMT -4
Has anyone ever tried to sign Rip Rogers for the game?
|
|
|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 19, 2013 19:28:06 GMT -4
I ordered my sets on Saturday and got #166 for my Savage card if anyone is interested in knowing.
|
|
|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 19, 2013 19:34:17 GMT -4
I think Leaping Lanny is where he should be. I don't see how that card is any stronger than Koko B. Ware is.
|
|
|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 19, 2013 20:47:51 GMT -4
I disagree with Jannetty having a -3 agility. Just in this set alone, he was never as agile as 2 Cold Scorpio who also has a -3. Scorpio brought a lot of moves to the U.S. like the 450 Splash. Jannetty always tended to wrestle as a quick heavyweight.
|
|
|
Post by MT on Dec 19, 2013 20:57:13 GMT -4
I disagree with Jannetty having a -3 agility. Just in this set alone, he was never as agile as 2 Cold Scorpio who also has a -3. Scorpio brought a lot of moves to the U.S. like the 450 Splash. Jannetty always tended to wrestle as a quick heavyweight. I agree with your assessment and I'd have gone with -2. Other than that the card seems right in every other aspect. My only problem with him is figuring out who will be the less talented half of his tag team (in other words the Legends equivalent to Shawn, the lesser of the two Rockers).
|
|
|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 19, 2013 21:08:10 GMT -4
To me, if you have a -3 agility that means you do some crazy shit in the ring. That means moonsaults, suicide dives, etc. If Billy Kidman was ever in the game he should be a -3 agility. That's when you start climbing into superior junior territory but you aren't the quickest guy out there.
-1 or -2 agility is for your smaller heavyweights that wrestle like heavyweights. Brad Armstrong and Stevie Richards would be great examples. Being quick is part of what you do in matches but you really have a heavyweight moveset. You don't do anything super crazy other than maybe a cross body block. Jannetty is in that superior junior territory where he doesn't belong. He shouldn't be keeping pace with guys like London, Kendrick, Bastien and Scorpio. He should be keeping those guys on the mat with his more technical style.
They were contemporaries at the same time but Bobby Eaton also has a -3 agility. Think back to Eaton and Jannetty in the 80s when they were in their primes. Eaton did all sorts of crazy shit off the top rope while I can't think of anything Jannetty did like that.
|
|
|
Post by lowtrav on Dec 19, 2013 21:10:35 GMT -4
I disagree with Jannetty having a -3 agility. Just in this set alone, he was never as agile as 2 Cold Scorpio who also has a -3. Scorpio brought a lot of moves to the U.S. like the 450 Splash. Jannetty always tended to wrestle as a quick heavyweight. Can't argue. I think the same could be said about Robert Gibson
|
|
|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 19, 2013 21:11:36 GMT -4
I think Gibson would be a -2 and Morton would be a -3. Gibson and Jannetty would be good analogues as far as style.
|
|
|
Post by maddog1981 on Dec 19, 2013 21:44:12 GMT -4
I think this set also sets a record for most 7 (4) pin ratings ever in a set with 6.
|
|