How does everyone pick their champions?

[de knegt]

As the thread title implies, the question is a simple one, or maybe not a simple one.

 

Basically, what are the criteria for people to pick their champions, and potentially to stick with them for multiple years as i've seen in many posts over the years where some workers have held titles for 3-4-5+ years as unstoppable forces.

 

Beyond the basic criteria for say a world champ in having to be over enough, how does everyone go about picking who to make your champ, but also who to keep champ for longer periods, or maybe why they get pushed aside after a shorter reign?

 

I assume there are many different styles for many different bookers, some probably love to hot shot (some) belts around to make colourful extremely chaotic title histories, whilst others prefer to stick a belt on someone for a set minimum of time before even thinking about having them drop the strap.

 

So the question is, what's the method to everyone's respective madness? How do you book your titles and champions, and most importantly, why do you do it the way you do?

[jean-vic]

Put titles on the workers I see potential or actual success in and change champions if the story needs it. For instance, in my Attitude Era save, Austin is my top guy so he is the main holder of the world title, but he drops and regains the title as the story demands. Same with my midcarders but also take titles off them if they transcend a certain championship.

[Vinsmoker]

Usually I look at who the company has and keeping the title scenes how they are, while deciding who I want to be the champs a year later. So over the year I push these people accordingly.

 

For example...

In a current RW playthrough of post-WM 2019 WWE, I have Andrade "Cien" Almas as my main project on SmackDown. He's currently Mr. MitB, while feuding with popular midcard babyfaces until SummerSlam, before moving up to Upper Midcarders until Survivor Series and then Upper end Upper Midcarders/Lower end main eventers afterwards.

 

I do similar things for every title belt, making the transition rather organically. So...I pick my champions based on my personal bias, which can come from any random thing. Me being a fan IRL, the picture in use being great, great match ratings, Next Big Things, etc.

[Self]

After going through the obvious baseline things (over enough, skilled enough) it comes down to whoever has the most interesting opponents that can deliver the most headline feuds. I don't need a talkative heel if there are three great entertaining babyfaces to carry the angles. I don't need a babyface with great basics if I have a number of ring general heels to get main events from him. However, even the most skilled worker and charismatic talker is useless to me if there's no one for him to fight that interests me. Or if he's already beaten everyone on the way to the big title match. Fresh, interesting matches are what matter to me.

 

Also, no lightweights.

[BrokenCycle]

Storylines, mostly, like how it should be done in real life a lot of the time.

[Zero]

I go in stages. For example in my 87-04 game

 

87-92 - My top guys will be Hogan, Savage, Lawler, Piper, Roberts, Brody, and Andre (maybe a few others). The World Title and main stories will involve these men. I may release them or put them on vacation but the belt will circulate through them in some way.

 

During this time my up coming talent is feuding over the IC title. So between 87-92 that would be Bret Hart, Davey Boy Smith, Kerry Von Erich, Bob Orton Jr., Shawn Michaels etc)

 

Then from 92-96 my main event is Bret Hart, Davey Boy, HBK etc. Then I rotate talent out.

 

If I don't have a story for someone, I release them or put them on vacation.

[Jaysin]

Honestly I just play favorites.

[Historian]

I look at a combination of things.

 

First, and most importantly, I look at who I like. I don't want to put the belt on a worker I don't like.

 

Second, storyline. Does it make sense for the worker? Did I build to it? Do I have a plan for them that necessitates them having the belt? Do I have a plan for the champion that necessitates them losing the belt?

 

Third, overness. I can't put the Heavyweight strap on a midcarder -- because they don't have the popularity to main event. I *can* put it on an Upper Midcarder if the storyline makes it work.

 

When it comes to length of time with the belt, that is almost always dictated by story and available opponents. You can be a great champion, but if you're running out of opponents to wrestle, well it's going to need to switch. I also try to stagger lengths. I don't want to go from a year-long reign to another year long reign to another year long reign (I also rarely go over 12-13 months as the main event champion). I like to have say, an eleven-month reign mixed with a six month reign. I know some people like really long title reigns -- and I do occasionally, but only if I'm playing as a monthly or twice monthly company.

 

Now, this changes for level of belt. In The Climb (shameless plug), I flip the Tag Team Titles fairly frequently, we are on our twenty-seventh reign near the end of our eighth year of operation. We are on our eighteenth reign of Heavyweight Champion -- but several of those title changes were made necessity by people leaving/injuries/game world developments. The Tag Titles, on the other hand, are designed to look extra-competitive, that my tag division is very tough to build long reigns as. I'm not as concerned with overness in the tag division as much as I am skills as a tag competitor. We are a performance > pop company, so I look for my teams to have good skills.

 

My midcard title is meant to develop midcard talent and see if they have what it takes to come to the main event or if they're probably going to stay a midcard talent. So really it depends on the belt.

[TLCJR4LIFE]

<p>Usually have 5 titles</p><p> </p><p>

1: World - This goes to another worker after the champion runs out of feuds, how long this takes really depends on company size, turnover, turns and various other factors. Usually it’s around 8 months, but sometimes it’s close to 2 years for a top star. Shorter runs usually the result of feuding someone they are worse than</p><p> </p><p>

1a - Sub-World - Goes to the best worker in the company independent of feuds, bscislly who can get the best ratings with the largest amount of the cast. Then goes to the heel version if it’s a face and vice versa. This tends to change a lot during normal gameplay so it changes more than you think, plus the face guy may get another title so it would then go to the second best face guy, etc.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>

2. Women’s - Same as Worlds, but usually more polarized</p><p> </p><p>

3. Tag Team - Same as Sub-Worlds</p><p> </p><p>

4. Midcard Title - Best 15 minute midcard act in the company, usually a well rounded worker missing main event qualities.</p><p> </p><p>

5. Television Title - Similar to midcard title but usually more of an emphasis on prospects, since they need the time more than others to develop.</p>

[EBEZA]

<p>I think my primary motivation is probably story. For example, even though my <a href="http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=543845" rel="external nofollow">WCW Lives dynasty</a> (cheap plug) is only one Nitro and one pay-per-view in (I'm currently half-way through typing up the next episode of Nitro), I know my World Heavyweight Championship storyline's progression (all being well) until about a year from now, and have tentative plans in place extending up to four years from now!</p><p> </p><p>

I might not have every show's World title match planned, but I have the important ones, such as key defences and title changes. The ones in-between, I'll build up someone to be a believable challenger for a month or two, use them to help the champion build a memorable reign, then move onto the next story piece/temporary challenger.</p><p> </p><p>

I treat all of my titles somewhat similarly, because with story being my number one priority, that means all titles end up being presented somewhat differently, as story may call for a long World title reign, but for the Cruiserweight title to flip-flop on four successive months, so it keeps things varied.</p>

[bhalbur]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46873" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Honestly I just play favorites.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yep</p>

[Levinux]

<p>Great feedback here. For me, it's combination of a favorite and if it makes sense while building them. In my WCW dynasty I ended recently, I put the TV title on Owen Hart, but wouldn't have if I couldn't have gotten him over or if he was putting on poor performances.</p><p> </p><p>

It has to make sense to the story, and if it can be someone I like in the process, even better.</p>

[franticloser]

I mainly play historical mods so there is some factor of pushing favorites. But I also like to do play around and push people differently whenever I start a new game in that era and company.

 

World title - This will usually revolves around 2 or 3 top guys and depends on my face/heel divide on who is going to be holding it.

 

Upper Card - I usually keep this on whom ever I am trying to get pushed up into the Main Event scene, they will usually be a NBT or a pet project.

 

Mid/Low - This goes to the NBT's who aren't in the upper mid card or pet projects. (Great way to push say Alex Wright)

 

Tag - I don't usually have to much rhyme as to who gets the tag belts, I do try and use it to build up mid carders and keep it out of the upper and main event scene, just to keep it more accessible to more teams.

[WilburTrey]

It depends on storylines. I try to let my top guys all get a turn with it at some point. However from time to time I do use it for a I have nothing for these guys let them battle over the belt kind of deal. In the wcw mod I couldn’t figure out a good storyline for Booker T (still haven’t really) but it’s why I had him keep the belt for a good long while. Kept him relevant without the need to be overly creative. So kind of a cheap way to storyline.

[RatedRKO16]

For me its all about the story I want to tell. I don't like repetitive stories (like WWE) so I'll end up with a bunch of different world champions.

[Tom Bombadil]

I'd say about two parts playing favorites, one part mechanics (who has good feud options? who has good stats?), and one part what makes storyline sense. (....to me, at least!) I also tend to play games with reader input or other restrictions, and therefore tend to focus more on month-to-month rather than long sweeping plans and stories. My title reigns tend to be like 4-6 months, and rarely booked farther ahead than the next title change. I also tend to spread the love with the singles titles, rather than giving somebody multiple runs.

[Kiheiji]

1. Are they Ahmed Johnson?

2. How close do they resemble Ahmed Johnson?

[Dead_Jester]

Personal favorites, Storylines/feuds and worker behaviour are usually the top reasons for a Title run for me but every so often i'll just push someone "just because"

 

The one common thread in my booking choices is long term planning, I usually have Title changes planned out well in advance, sometimes years ahead, though I'm flexible enough that if something alters the plan (failed drug test, injuries, a new inspired idea...) I can run with it.

 

An example would be the Intercontinental Title, I use this for upper midcard guys or even main eventers that aren't factoring into the World Title picture. Currently the belt is on "Stunning" Steve Austin, he will drop the belt to Bret Hart at Wrestlemania, who will drop it to Arn Anderson at Summer Slam, who will drop it to The Great Muta at the Rumble before winning it back at the following years Wrestlemania. If something happens that alters the plan I tend to replan the whole thing. This way I know who I'm pushing, when to build people up and what I can get out of their run as Champion, no matter if it is a year long reign or a simple three month courtesy run.

[Blake Trask]

Storyline based, mostly, but it's a little bit more complicated than that, because who I choose to give story time--in particular story time involving belts--depends on a few different things.

 

 

Main event title holder needs to be able to carry the show or have a very strong set of opponents to mask their weaknesses. Main event goes on last and carries the grade, and I almost never have another match headline over a world title match. It's important to me that they're able to do well with opponents perhaps a little below their own skill level, otherwise booking options are limited and storylines become constrained by a talent gate. I've yoinked titles early because the performances weren't up to standard. Otherwise I exclusively book to the story and pretty much know exactly when a given reign will end based entirely on that.

 

 

Upper mid is a featured spot where I put people I want to be able to wrestle in higher profile matches but don't necessarily have a lot going on. It's very useful to have available for when there isn't otherwise a feud spot available, opens up another opportunity and the booking is relatively straightforward if it's just a title chase kind of deal. UMC is an awkward kind of bridge since I tend to have Main event and midcard stories and if UMC doesn't get drawn into a main event story and isn't in a stable it can become a bit of a mire for them.

 

Tag team I just let people who have good matches win and keep it competitive. Very susceptible to reigns based off of who I like and which teams I'm high on at a given time.

 

Midcard/low title I basically use as a 'book this person' marker for myself. It's incentive/excuse to use someone extensively and trial out how they do against a variety of opponents. I switch this in and out a bit more often than usual most of the time but can also go for indordinately long times if it's working well for the worker in question and/or there aren't viable people to take it off them. This level title has been longterm launching pads for a number of prospects just because it's given me that 'use this guy!' label.

 

Also allows me to give little screentime trials to people who have been doing well/I'm considering for a push.

 

 

I do play favourites a lot too, though. If I'm not that interested in someone they're not going to get a title regardless of how good they are. I plot out future title reigns for people I like/people I'm loyal to and that includes if they aren't necessarily super great performers. If I like you, you get stories, and I'm a sucker for longterm history and legacies so the longer someone is with me the more likely it is they start getting to win gold since otherwise I clearly don't care about them that much and perhaps I have to reconsider their role on the roster.

[James Casey]

Bored now. Next!

 

I suspect I’m more like Vince in that regard than i’d care to admit.

[ErocFluffy]

I usually give the title to whoever can carry a division and whoever needs the popularity for it.

 

I gave Shinsuke Nakamura the WWE World Championship and he went from a great wrestler with no pop, to one of my Most Valuable Players. Same with Strowman. Meanwhile I gave Asuka the Smackdown Women's Championship and my Smackdown Women's division went from averaging 40s-50s to 60s in less than a year.

 

But sometimes I give the title to people that I just want to get over, like Tyler Breeze, Ruby Riott, and Karl Anderson and Luke Gallows. While I have them as champions I make sure to put them with people who I know will put on a decent match with them.

[pat666]

<p>Most of the time if personal choice,</p><p>

I mostly play Real World, so I normally push the workers I like and the workers that gives me the best results.</p>

[brianc2008]

<p>To start, I look at the Creative Meeting and pick one of the top 4-5 wrestlers as champion to start with.</p><p> </p><p>

After that, it's based on storyline and feel.</p>

[BuddyGarner]

I just book title matches and let the AI pick.

[noknuckles]

I have one and only one criterium.

 

If their action figure is on the shelf in a toy store, how many 6-10 year olds would buy it?