quite a collection you have!A fair question. Let me go to my watch box. :)
Ah, I see I forgot one for looks. It's ugly duckly, a total misfit in my collection and I still bought it because I was digging the looks. A rose gold plated Invicta Pro-diver with Seamaster/Yachtmaster bezel and MOP dial. Crazy watch. Miyota movement that runs seriously fast. Movement itself is not bad but nothing special.
Of the 19 remaining watches I'd say that the taste verdict would tend to think the G-shocks and the Seiko/Casio digitals can't be said to be "stunningly beautiful". So you can take at least ten watched off. About 9 left. The Oris GMT TT1 would be a matter of taste. The Swatch (day/date) has a very simple look. I think it's beautiful but I really liked to find a cheap day/date.
The JLC, IWC, Cartier and Chronomaster are indeed real lookers but also have a movement character which is why I bought them.
The good thing is that at that level watches are rarely ugly. So you can make a movement decision and still get a beautiful watch.
As I said, functionality can be subsumed either in looks or in movement. Diver functionality would be looks, perpetual calendar would be movement.
Alan, thanks very much for moving the thread. It makes more sense in the Public Forum as gettocard rightly noticed.