|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 12, 2012 0:58:44 GMT -5
In my Lachikaras Vegas fed, instead of the Young Lions Cup, I have the California Cup where eligibility is determined by a wrestler's geography/billing instead of their age.
To be eligible for the California Cup, the wrestler must be from West of the Mississippi River and can not be a current holder of another title in Lachikaras Vegas which bans simultaneous title reigns. As a result, Bryan Danielson and the Tribe are not eligible this year for my Califiornia Cup despite being billed from Aberdeen, Washinton (Danielson,) the Navajo Nation (Navajo Warrior,) and Hilo, Hawaii, (Hawaiian Lion) since Danieslon is my current Grand Champion and the Tribe are my current Campeonatios de Pareajs.
The winner of the California Cup Tournament will defend the California Cup against other wrestlers from West of the Mississippi River until next year's tournament when the California Cup must be surrendered for the next tournament and no wrestler can hold the California Cup more than once.
Who do you think will win the California Cup?
|
|
|
|
Post by Demosthenes on Sept 12, 2012 5:44:11 GMT -5
Im stealing this for my fed  Great creativity! |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 12, 2012 7:59:48 GMT -5
Im stealing this for my fed Great creativity! Thank you Demosthenes. I like my idea because IMO the YLC is hard to do in this game based on age (especially when I play more than one year of game time in a year of real time) plus it is a way to bring the billings into the game as stats to determine eligibility for the tournament. Since my fed is based out West, my California Cup makes sense for me. But if somebody else wanted to do something similar and their fed is based elsewhere there are other similar possibilities/ideas I could think of (for example a Carolina Cup for a fed based in the South, a Connecticut Cup for a fed based in the Northeast, a Canada Cup for a fed based in Canada, a Chicago Cup for a fed based in the Midwest, etc with whatever geographic qualifications the promoter wanted to use to determine eligibility.) |
|
|
|
Post by Eliath on Sept 12, 2012 8:29:58 GMT -5
I went with Adam Pearce.
Love the change from the YLC; agree with your reasoning.
I do have a question though...Why the California Cup? Why not the Vegas Cup? It is for "Combat Vegas Wrestling" after all. LOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by marktaggart on Sept 12, 2012 8:32:14 GMT -5
Yeah, it's hard to go against Pearce here. That's my pick, although I kind of wanted to vote for Raunchy Rico as the dark horse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 12, 2012 9:31:00 GMT -5
I went with Adam Pearce. Love the change from the YLC; agree with your reasoning. I do have a question though...Why the California Cup? Why not the Vegas Cup? It is for "Combat Vegas Wrestling" after all. LOL. It is actually not for Combat Vegas Wrestling, instead my annual California Cup Tournament is actually for Lachikaras Vegas which is a different fed.  and while Lachikaras Vegas is based in Las Vegas and Las Vegas is the site for many of its shows, some Lachikaras Vegas shows are also scheduled regionally around the West too and the California Cup Tournament takes place in California instead of Las Vegas - which to answer your question is why I call it the California Cup and why I do not call it the Vegas Cup. |
|
|
|
Post by Tournament Master on Sept 12, 2012 9:44:08 GMT -5
Interesting concept and great way around the age limit problem. I love it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Eliath on Sept 12, 2012 9:50:36 GMT -5
I went with Adam Pearce. Love the change from the YLC; agree with your reasoning. I do have a question though...Why the California Cup? Why not the Vegas Cup? It is for "Combat Vegas Wrestling" after all. LOL. It is actually not for Combat Vegas Wrestling, instead my annual California Cup Tournament is actually for Lachikaras Vegas which is a different fed. and while Lachikaras Vegas is based in Las Vegas and Las Vegas is the site for many of its shows, some Lachikaras Vegas shows are also scheduled regionally around the West too and the California Cup Tournament takes place in California instead of Las Vegas - which to answer your question is why I call it the California Cup and why I do not call it the Vegas Cup. Thanks for the clarification. I'm familiar with Lachikaras Vegas as well. The regional explanation makes perfect sense. |
|
|
|
Post by pikemojo on Sept 12, 2012 11:52:09 GMT -5
Really like the idea and the stipulations preventing current title holders from challenging and past cup holders from challenging ever again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slymm on Sept 12, 2012 12:42:27 GMT -5
I went with El Generico, but only because I didn't see Dirty Sanchez listed.
|
|
Great creativity!
