spiffyone

Have you set their expansion limit to Small? That should help against them over-expanding and spending beyond their means. It may also help to set up the NWA as a protective alliance if you haven't already, so at the very least other NWA members wouldn't directly compete against them in Puerto Rico. While that may hamper JCP's expansion a bit, it would be somewhat accurate as Crockett didn't really run shows in fellow NWA territory areas until and unless he either bought them out or they went under. As Jarret, Watts, and Fritz all left the alliance in '86, and the others essentially followed suit shortly thereafter, having it set up as a protective alliance wouldn't impact JCP's ability to run in those regions. You may want to set only one or two PR specific broadcasters as well (Teleonce had the deal with CSP, iirc, and/or WAPA) with the one that has a deal in place with CSP being longer term and having a one company limit so there's no danger of another promotion taking their local TV slot. It was easier to keep them afloat in TEW 2016, as one could edit the importance and community/fanbase size for each region via "Game World" in the database. So PR would be relatively unimportant for other companies outside of that region, but for the local promotions it would have a sizable potential audience from which to continue drawing. It would've been nice to have that option not only be in 2020, but expanded upon so region specific effects could've been tinkered with (like, say, the mid-'80s Oil Glut in the Mid-South region hurting business there for all companies). Ah well.

Just found out about this mod being worked on. Wonderful! Was hoping someone would work on that year, as it was a big turning point year for the business, and probably the last real time up until the Monday Night Wars that the WWF was somewhat vulnerable to the competition, IMHO. Warning: long response post ahead. That Battlestar event wasn't actually an AWA event, but a Pro Wrestling USA event that kind of borrowed from CWF's own previously Battlestar events (and indeed essentially became a CWF event itself as in Summer of '86 CWF hosted "Battle of the Stars II", not to be confused with their Battle of the Belts events). As for AJW: yeah, they had a forced retirement rule in place, where the wrestlers "aged out", automatically retiring at 26 years old iirc. That was later changed, because it is what brought about their own competition when wrestlers who didn't want to retire would leave and join other nascent promotions. As for their schedule: it is kinda hard to discern, but there are some of their TV shows from '86 on youtube which have some scrolling text showing upcoming tour events (like all Japanese promotions at the time, they were strictly tour schedules with periodic big events). That should give you some idea of their schedule. While Crockett definitely pulled back on Flair's touring as champion, it was still somewhat in effect in '86. TBQH, there's no elegant solution for how JCP handled it. It was still an alliance title, technically, but one in which Crockett kept tight control due to his position within the NWA hierarchy at the time. I've tried editing dbs to make it so that title is rarely defended by setting the event frequency to being very infrequent and the rest to "none", but again...inelegant as a solution as the AI will still borrow the belt on occasion. I have been thinking about creating a copy of the belt, one alliance controlled and one JCP owned and controlled - both with the same lineage. Maybe that would work to mimic the '86-92 history a bit, if the alliance belt is set to being inactive. Again, no elegant solution there with the way the game works, but maybe that would suffice. BTW, the World Women's and World Women's Tag Team belts were not actually alliance belts at the time, per se. They were both essentially traveling regional belts controlled by Moolah at first until she went to WWF. The later World Women's belts were also territory and/or worker controlled. There's no real way to mimic that in the game, though. Wish there was, as it would make the similar, but much more headache-inducing situation of worker controlled titles in Mexico workable. But I guess making them alliance belts in games somewhat mimics it enough. The NWA National title to which you later referred definitely wasn't an alliance belt, though, and shouldn't be treated as such. There were a few "National" belts used in respective territories, none controlled by the NWA as an alliance. They were promotion specific belts using the NWA moniker. The one that you may be referring to is that used in Georgia, which by '86 was essentially swallowed up by JCP (it's a bit more complicated that than, but long story short the NWA supported Georgia territory and its titles were taken over by JCP once Crockett got the exclusive on wrestling TV on TBS and brought in Ole). I would just have the Georgia belts Crockett used for a time be retired/inactive and owned by JCP with the original owners being Championship Wrestling from Georgia or Georgia Championship Wrestling if you prefer). And I dunno if setting them as a touring schedule would help things, as it would hinder their house show ability. In-story, the MSW North American Heavyweight championship and the UWF Heavyweight championship are two completely distinct championships, the latter having no lineage ties to the former. That was the big deal with the story of Duggan finally winning the NA belt only to have it stripped from him when the UWF HW title was created. It was playing on the tragedy of him finally winning the big one and then getting cheated by the system (kinda/sorta) and then cheated by the heels when he tried to do the right thing by winning the new title in the tournament the right way. So I vote keep it separate. As for Reed's having the belt...he dropped it on the first day, his last day with MSW. So...eh, start with Slater holding it, IMO. Or have Reed as champ on a 1 show deal to open and let the AI (and eventually, the player, if they play as MSW/UWF) decide what to do. On the subject of the company branding: I'd say have it start as MSW and set narratives to handle the name change to UWF, and then just instruct players to rename the belts when playing (even if they're not playing as MSW/UWF). Another inelegant solution, sure, but probably the best strategy for sake of historical accuracy. Or...have the start date for the mod be later, after the rebrand. When the UWF rebranding came about, Watts and company sold their TV as a direct competitor to World Class'. And they were in league with the Houston office. So, yeah...either the Houston arena or the Cowtown Coliseum seems apt. But note that they did tape weekly in Tulsa in addition to the Dallas based Cowtown - and the A show was at the former, with Power Pro, the B show at the latter. For events, in '86 and '87, there were a handful of named events: Jun. 14 - Superdome Extravaganza Jun. 29 - Summer Spectacular '86 Sep. 27 - Wrestlefest 1986 Nov. 27 - Superdome Extravaganza Note that the Nov. show was their annual Thanksgiving show, which they typically held at the Superdome. Even when they had the deal with Crockett to hold a local show and have the Closed Circuit feed of Starrcade as the main attraction they still held it in the dome on that date, iirc. They skipped the Spring show at the Dome in '86, which they had held in years previous. But they did bring it back the next year, on April 11th, this time with a new name: Superblast at the Superdome Their other big events were the annual Christmas and New Year's Day shows.

Not the Rule 35 to which I referred.

I fear Rule 35 applies in this case.

As the topic title implies, I'd like to see the option to sign a worker to an exclusive contract, but only have that exclusivity tied to the particular area or region. Example: In the '80s, Bill Watt's Mid-South Wrestling/UWF signed workers like Ted DiBiase, Steve Williams, and Terry Gordy to exclusive contracts that only applied to the U.S. but did not apply outside of the US, and allowed them to work dates or short tours in Japan or elsewhere. Upon return, they would go right back to Watts. There's no real way to mimic that sort of contract in TEW.

Someone will inevitably mention the workaround for this issue is to just set up IYH events for each month save for March/April (Mania) and the other months of the then Big Four (Royal Rumble in Jan., KotR in June, Summerslam in Aug., and Survivor Series in Nov.). But, of course, that ignores that IYH events were sequentially numbered. And how your request could definitely prove useful for setting up Saturday Night's Main Events and Clash of the Champions events.

I was thinking of just this the other day, when I tried to mimic the A/B/C house show loop set up for the '80s mods using brands (using tour events, as another poster mentioned, as I wanted to directly book the "house" shows). Didn't work, obviously. But it'd be nice if it did. Back in the '80s in particular, promotions like WWF and Jim Crockett Promotions were running 2-4 shows a day in different areas of the country. Which leads me to another idea that would actually work really well in conjunction with the ability to run multiple shows in different places: the ability to run shows on the same day at different times of the day. That way the same workers can appear on shows in the same day in the same general region, with one as a matinee show and the other in the evening or the same workers can be at a matinee show in one region and follow that with an evening show in a different region. There were quite a few times, for example, where the big stars would work a show on the East Coast US and follow it later that night with a West Coast show.

The option to move all of a child company’s IP (tv shows and events, stables, etc.) and broadcast deals to the parent company just as one could with workers and titles would be an appreciated addition. It could be handled in two ways: 1. When going to the child company’s schedule, broadcasting, and/or stables submenu, the option to move any of them over to the parent would be available as is the case for titles and workers 2. If choosing to close down a child company, one would be presented with the same sort of options seen when taking over a company (take on worker contracts, titles, events, tv shows, broadcasting deals, etc., etc.). The latter in particular would allow players to keep remnants of the child company alive without having to jump through hoops in the editor, and simulate what usually occurs with broadcast deals/tv slots in reality, wherein it is more likely than not that the tv deals that child companies hold will simply he taken over by the parent upon the child company being closed down. Right now, there’s no way to simulate that in-game.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Historian" data-cite="Historian" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="54007" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think it would be beneficial if someone could own more than own promotion. It has happened in history with Jim Crockett owning Mid Atlantic and then taking over Florida that he tried to run separately.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Crockett didn't actually buy or own Championship Wrestling from Florida, technically, in contrast to how he owned UWF when he bought out Watts. The Florida office was still owned and operated by Mike Graham, Duke Keomuka, and Hiro Matsuda. It was a weird deal, but it ended up with Crockett taking over the Florida territory and their TV timeslots without actually buying or owning the Florida promotion itself.</p><p> </p><p> Anyway, to your larger point:</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="54007" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> In more modern years, Gabe S. (I can never spell his last name) owned Evolve and Dragon Gate USA. Jerry Jarrett owned Memphis and then bought Dallas but had two separate bookers for each, etc.<p> </p><p> It would just make having sister companies make sense -- you could have the same person own two companies but have different bookers.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You can pretty much simulate this using child companies, having CEOs run the child organizations and with different bookers. Or even using brands and a bit of imagination with regards to bookers. That's how I have the whole TWN/JCP and Florida and UWF set up in two of my own mods that I'm working on. In one, the latter two are child companies under Crockett, and in the other they're brands. </p><p> </p><p> I've been playing around with having TWN (The Wrestling Network, which was JCP renamed after picking up the UWF and Florida TV) owning all three as a media company, but that ran into issues with securing TV deals (that whole media group ownership thing needs to be sorted out, as later Turner WCW ownership means no TV on any thing not owned by Turner, which makes no sense).</p><p> </p><p> Actually, there's a fix: allow for different bookers for different brands. Wish the game had that.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blake Trask" data-cite="Blake Trask" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="54013" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Wrestling booking in general? Like, it's a wrestling booking sim, not a WWE sim.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> True, but it really only simulates modern non-WWE wrestling moderately well, in terms of how contracts and the business is handled.</p><p> </p><p> As for how a non-compete clause can add to the gameplay: the business and relationship meta game, which honestly should be increased a bit IMO. Exercising clauses, or even having, clauses of that nature can have the effects of </p><p> </p><p> A) decreasing talent's popularity prior to competitors being able to sign them (screwing them and any competing company that signs them over)</p><p> and</p><p> B) creating or increasing animosity between that individual worker and the company that released them, which would have the ripple effect of doing the same, to varying degrees, for those other workers with whom they have friendships or strong bonds</p><p> </p><p> It would make for a bit more dynamic business strategy in the game. Do you screw over talent and competitors and face the potential blowback for exercising that sort of control, or do you sweeten the pot by not having such clauses with the caveat that if you let go of talent you may end up regreting it sooner rather than later? </p><p> </p><p> BTW, WCW had similar non-compete clauses. So it was not, in fact, a WWE-only thing. That other companies don't do it <em>now</em> doesn't mean that other companies had no similar clauses in the past.</p>

Trying to mimic periodic broadcast events like Saturday Night's Main Event or Clash of the Champions has always been an issue in TEW. Part of the problem arises if the promotion has several different broadcast deals in place for events, which creates instances where the AI will inevitably air an event on all signed broadcasters rather than just one or a select few. And exclusivity really alleviate the issue. Example: WWF in the '80s had deals to show events, as far as TEW knows them, with several U.S. based "broadcasters": PPV companies, NBC, USA, and Closed Circuit. If you create a SNME event in the database and want it to air solely on NBC even by an AI controlled WWF, then SNME will air on every single one of those broadcasters not just NBC. This is because Event broadcasting deals are handled by creating a deal without a specific TV show tied to it, and without the option for a specific event to be tied to it. Yes, one could create an SNME TV show, but even setting it so it only has a handful of shows to air during the contract is not a solution as the AI will tape and air all 6 back to back rather than with gaps of months in between. Not a solution. So, how about an option to make an Event exclusive to a Broadcaster? This can either be handled under the Event section of the database, or the Broadcasting Deals section. Either one would be handled with a drop down menu. If under "Events", the drop down menu would show the different broadcasters one has a deal with that aren't tied to TV shows. If under "Broadcasting Deals" then the drop down menu options would be the promotion's events. Of course, that leaves the scheduling issues such events face in the way TEW is set up as there's no way to schedule events to run bi-monthly (as in once every two months) or quarterly , but that's a problem for another day.

An option to have PPV events on tape delay is indeed a great idea that I think is being lost amidst the debate over your second idea regarding broadcasting pre-shows, so I'll write this in bold to show how great an option it would be: An option to have PPV events shown on tape delay is a great idea that should be implemented With that out of the way: Broadcasting pre-shows may be an issue with the way TEW is set up, as others have pointed out. I do agree that it is realistic but, as far as the game is concerned, dark matches are dark because they do not air anywhere and therefore, within the game engine, are treated completely differently from matches that air. With that said, you can kinda get a flavor of your idea via a workaround for "Free For All" type shows: either change the day your promotion's TV show airs so it happens the same night of your PPV event, and airs just before it live. Or, if you want it to air on the same broadcaster as your PPV event then just create a minor throwaway event to happen right before the PPV event on the same night and have both air on that broadcaster. Boom! Instant PPV event pre-show that airs for free.

I'm confused as to how it would be "unworkable". It would simply replace inputting a hard number for "Company Pays" and "Broadcaster Pays" with percentages via a drop down menu - including "0%" just as is the case currently for the "Revenue Split" (that "0%" which itself denotes something that doesn't generate revenue, at least for the company). "0%" as a drop down option among other percentages (5% - 100%, again as is the case for Revenue Split) would simply replace the hard number "0" inputted for both Company Pays" and "Broadcaster Pays" not only in several modded databases, but the default database itself. If "0%" and so on wouldn't work properly, how then does "0" and whatever hard number we would enter work properly? Are you saying that it didn't work properly for TEW 2013, which had the exact options which I described? I'm honestly curious about this.

In a future TEW, I'd like to see an option for alter egos and/or gimmicks to be completely company owned sans tied to any specific workers rather than the only option being just tied to certain workers and only with certain companies as it is now. As an example of how it works now: SWF effectively controls the Calamari Kid alter ego. Sam Pratt/Cannonball Kid is the only one that can use that alter ego, and only in SWF, in the editor. As Pratt does not work for SWF, that means that no one can use the Calamari Kid alter ego even in SWF unless the player tinkers with the database. What I'm proposing would allow SWF, not only player controlled but also AI controlled, to assign the alter ego to anyone they want if Pratt is not in their employ rather than having to wait for him to be rehired by the company or through the use of database tinkering. This would introduce some dynamics to both real world and fantasy mods that aren't there now. Real world scenario: WWE owns and created The Undertaker alter ego. What if they didn't hire Mark Calaway in 1990 an assign him the alter ego? Who would have been given that alter ego? Historical modders can choose another worker in a historical fantasy mod, sure, but that creates a fixed path whereas what I'm proposing adds an element of surprise as the AI could assign virtually anyone to it (or to a certain type of worker if alter ego worker assignment preferences are tied to certain criteria in the database).

Under Broadcaster Deals in the database editor, it would prove better and simpler if the cost split was set up to be percentage based as is the revenue split, and as it was in the last TEW in which it appeared (TEW 2013). That is, a single menu item with a single drop down menu with options of 0% to 100% of the cost to the company (or to the broadcaster), just as is the case with the revenue split. Right now, the way it's set up, database editors and modders, whether experienced or not, barely utilize the option which particularly impacts real world mods (historical or otherwise) and which is pretty damned important with regards to the economics of wrestling on television and the business as a whole. As the economics of the game are not 1:1 with the real world, even trying to mimic real world splits on the cost side proves futile. Going with a simple drop down as pointed out would simplify things and it would likely cause it to be used in more mods. I don't know if the change can be implemented in TEW2020 at this point, but I would hate to see the entire cost and revenue split thrown out due to not being used much not because people don't want to use it or don't see it as beneficial in concept but rather because the implementation of it in the game design was not as well thought out as it should've been.