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.

As I stated to the other poster: Kowalski indeed ran under the International Wrestling Federation (IWF) banner, later changing it to Kowalski's All Star Wrestling/Killer Kowalski's All Stars. Here's some cards from the promotion under both names, with results, up on cagematch: https://www.cagematch.net/?id=8&nr=782&page=8 As for Gunkel's All-South Wrestling Alliance, you should put it back in. Ann re-launched the promotion in '85, as the video I posted earlier shows, and this one as well:

Ann didn't die of cancer until Feb. 1987. Regardless, while it is true the ASWA was open for 2 years in the '70s, she did indeed relaunch it in '85 and gave it a go as you can see here: As someone else pointed out, Kowalski promoted under the IWF (International Wrestling Federation) banner, but also did promote under Killer Kowalski's All Star Wrestling later on. Kowalski's promotion absolutely existed in the '80s as the IWF, as there are results available on a variety of sites (cagematch, wrestlingdatabase, etc.) and, iirc, ads that one can find on newspapers.com and other such sites.

Obviously this is a suggestion for a future version of TEW, as I don't know if it's possible to integrate it now. The feature would mimic the territories having exclusives on venues within their territories and, post-death of the territories, the cutthroat business strategies used by Vince and the rest who tried to go national. The basics would work in one of two scenarios: A. the company offers the venue money to get the exclusive rights to running events there. B. the venue suggests that they are open to a bribe. Scenario B can still be in play even if a company has used scenario A, so that venues aren't completely locked down as they can always take a better offer and, indeed, seek a better offer. Example: Vince had a pretty iron clad grip on Boston Garden, but for the right price Crockett or ol' Verne or Fritz could've stepped in to run it. And then the venue could go back to Vince and try to start a bidding war of sorts. Of course, there would need to be a method to mitigate just having larger companies war amongst themselves for venue exclusivity across the board which would end up just locking smaller companies out completely. A solution could be to have venues take into account loyalty (years/time the company has used the venue) and the specific wants of the audience in the region (and here I mention that broadening the product trends from area to region was another suggestion I had). Additionally, the companies themselves would take into account importance of the region and the venue, size of the venue, the make-up of the crowd, etc. Those two things would make it so, say, Turner's WCW isn't gonna seek out to run shows at the ECW Arena in Philly because they would figure that area wouldn't dig them and the arena isn't good enough for them.

Awesome renders! Slightly off-topic (don't know whether to post it here or in the London-verse topic), but I figured it would be okay to ask this here: Some belt renders were done for the London-verse, but the WBW Tag Team belt is missing from the pack of pics I have. Was it ever created? If so, do you mind posting it if you still have it?

"Huge in Baltimore"? Let's go over the numbers: '87 they drew 10k or over twice in that town, ran it about 10 times. The 10k was Hogan vs. Kamala on top, huge draw. Then subsequent gates of dwindling numbers, going as low as 3,500. Then the last is 12k for Bruno's last match at the end of the year, teaming with Hogan. Hogan was the draw in Baltimore that year, not WWF itself. '88 two gates we have are 5500 and 7000. Quite good, but not matching the level of pop we'd have in the game if following the size criteria needed due to the base of operations. '89 we have a sellout of nearly 15k. So much better there. '90 we only have one show, no figures. They're doing much better in Landover, yes, but is that one area enough to say that they were "Big" in the entire region? Florida? Well-ish, but not as well as they were in places of actual "Big" pop for them (Tri-State, South West, Great Lakes, New England, Mid West) over a much larger swaths of those regions. South East, of which Florida is part, includes GA where they weren't a draw. Alabama where they weren't a draw (and hell, they were outdrawn by Continental consistently until Fuller sold, and even afterwards). Vince didn't start getting over the southern hump until the very early '90s in those areas. It was the last hold out. It's the size criteria that's the issue. IRL, they were at about a Medium in the Mid-Atlantic, South East, and Mid-South regions. But they were indeed Big in Tri-State, New England, Great Lakes, Mid-West, and South West. If the size criteria to be considered "Big" in game were under the "Taking America by Storm" criteria, they'd be Big due to those actual strengths but a bit weaker in the areas in contention ITT, which is more accurate to what the case actually was at the time. I will state that I was in error mentioning "mid to late '90s" as the time line in the first post, as it was early '90s, but the greater point still does stand for '80s mods in particular. Are you going to argue that WWF wouldn't have been considered "Big" in '87? Attempting some measure of accuracy for that year in game is nearly impossible, because they'd be drawing higher in the game than they actually drew irl in that year or the year after up until '90/91 or so in the regions we're discussing. Again, in the '80s (when they actually were drawing bigger numbers in strong areas domestically than the early '90s, mind you) they'd have been Medium in the regions we're discussing. But they'd be Big nationally...if only the criteria were "Taking America by Storm" instead of the "Taking the East" criteria.

No. Hogan was big, to a point. Context is key here. Look up the gates, and you'll see that they were wildly inconsistent in Baltimore, JCP was outdrawing them there in the '80s. In that time frame, WWF was not "big there" as they were drawing in the low thousands. No, they weren't. Look up the attendance figures for the '80s into the early '90s (circa '91/92). They were drawing low in Kentucky, much lower than they were in the Tri-State. They consistently sold out MSG. They were lucky to get over 3500 in Louisville the few times that they tried there in the '80s. Same deal with VA. Less so in Baltimore, but not to the level you suggest. Of the four you mentioned, only D.C. was good for them, and even then it was NEVER as consistently big as they drew in the Tri-State. As they weren't actually "big" in those areas in the '80s, they wouldn't be "Big" in-game under a mod that attempts for historical accuracy. That's my point. In order for them to be "Big" in the game, you have to go against their actual level of popularity in that region at the time in comparison with the competition housed in those areas, which puts the latter at a greater disadvantage than they were actually at irl and gives WWF a greater advantage than they actually had at that time. In order for them to be "Big" in, say, '88, they have to have the capability to consistently draw 10k in the aforementioned Charlotte. As noted, they only drew that once in '89 for their first try in the Coliseum and then drew far less well into '92. This isn't a mod problem. WWF was indeed "Big" irl, just not under the criteria used in the game. They were drawing the biggest in areas that would make them "Big" in game if the criteria were under "Taking America by Storm", which is my point. Any five mainland regions including one's own and an adjacent region. New England, Tri-State, Great Lakes, Mid West, South West. There's your five right there, and it was those five where WWF in the '80s was actually drawing high thousands for house shows and TV tapings on a consistent basis. That wasn't happening in the South East nor Mid-Atlantic regions at that time. Look up the figures.

On Charlotte: their first show at the venue. So they got a bump from that. No sites list attendance for the subsequent '89 show. There are no figures for the shows in '90. No figures typically mean less than stellar attendance. There were no shows at all in Charlotte in '91, apparently, so there's likely a reason for that (less than stellar figures in the two years previous). They go back in '92, and draw 1,300 for a matinee and 3,000 for a July show. Go and look up the figures for their Tennessee shows, where they weren't drawing very well either on anywhere near a consistent basis in the '80s into the early '90s ('92 has a show where 7,500 attended...but only 3,700 paid). My point stands.

Please consider revising so that "Taking America By Storm" is the criteria used for all of the mainland U.S. company: the necessary level pop in any five regions, but must include one's own and one adjacent region. I somewhat understand the logic behind the criteria for reaching Big size being different for non-mainland regions as they are essentially cut off, but it really doesn't make much sense for mainland regions - particularly with regards to the U.S. and especially since it does impact historical mods in a rather significant, albeit unintended, way. The way it's set up now, the criteria means that mid '80s WWF wouldn't accurately be a Big (that is, National) promotion during that time. WWF was national (Big), but it wasn't until the mid to late '90s that it popular enough in two of the regions (Mid-Atlantic and South East) necessary in game to achieve that size. Not giving it that level of pop in those two areas means it isn't Big when it should be, but doing that for those areas to make it Big doesn't accurately mimic its level of pop at the time in those two regions. Set up as-is makes WWF stronger than it was because it was very popular well outside the eastern seaboard area (in the Mid-West and South West) and weakens the southern promotions that were really the last one's standing against Vince's machine. Having Big size use the "Taking America By Storm" criteria for all company bases, though, would allow the company to be Big sized and accurate to history (because, again, it did have enough pop in the Mid-West and South West) while also giving the companies in the hold out areas of the south more of a fighting chance as they had irl.

That's a tremendous idea, and would make it easier to have events like the old Championship Wrestling from Florida events like Battle of the Belts where you had both the NWA and AWA World champions in separate world title matches on the card. Perhaps if something like what you've mentioned can't be coded an alternative could be to borrow and or loan title belts in a similar manner to how one does it for workers or have the option. The way it would be handled is that when borrowing or loaning a worker who happens to hold a title belt/is a champion, the player (or AI) can have the option to also borrow or loan the title that they hold. It'd be great if, when requesting to borrow or getting a request to loan a champion (with their belt), you (or the AI) can turn down the request. Better still if when borrowing or loaning the belt alongside the worker who holds it, you (or the AI in the case of borrowing) can set a rule that the belt is not to change hands - a rule that can be broken and, if so, will set off hostilities between the companies.

Oh, okay. I was confused there for a bit, asking why AWA was on WGN and how in the world the NWF of Eddie Einhorn and Pedro Martinez were still in operation.... Alternate history mod or not, the more the merrier. Looking forward to it.