Market Size

[rahuln]

Just wondering if somebody could clear this up for me real fast. How is market size determined in the game? Does it just have a built in database that knows that "New York" is a much larger market than, say, "Kansas City"? Or what exactly? Thanks

[OldFatGuy]

Originally Posted by rahuln

Just wondering if somebody could clear this up for me real fast. How is market size determined in the game? Does it just have a built in database that knows that "New York" is a much larger market than, say, "Kansas City"? Or what exactly? Thanks

I think it must be random, because in my current game I'm playing the New York Yankees with a market rated "Small" and the smallest budget in MLB. Granted, that was a fictional start-up with real team names and cities, so maybe if you choose a historical start-up it includes "real" market sizes. I dunno, be hard for to see how the game would know New York was HUGE in historical sims and could be SMALL in fictional ones. I'm guessing its random. Here's a question I've always wondered. Do they change over time??? That would be awesome, IMHO.

[rahuln]

I agree that it would be cool if they changed over time, but I also think it should have some way of knowing which markets are bigger than others. Looking forward to OOTP9 and creating a fictional start-up, so it would be nice if the big markets were just that, big.

[ctorg]

Since populations are already known from the cities.txt file, it would be cool if the game would base market size on that. It's far from perfect, but it's a better starting point than random.

[Kivlehan]

Originally Posted by ctorg

Since populations are already known from the cities.txt file, it would be cool if the game would base market size on that. It's far from perfect, but it's a better starting point than random.

Exactly. It would be that simple. I'd also rather see Metro Area used or if I'm going to be a real pain in the ass, some calculation of ((City Size x 2) + (Metro Area Size x 1) / 3) = Market Size.

[rahuln]

Originally Posted by Kivlehan

Exactly. It would be that simple. I'd also rather see Metro Area used or if I'm going to be a real pain in the ass, some calculation of ((City Size x 2) + (Metro Area Size x 1) / 3) = Market Size.

Yes, any variation of this would be great for realism, and seems like a very easy thing to implement. And of course, it could always be an option (Realistic market sizes?), like everything else in this game

[1998 Yankees]

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

I'm guessing its random. Here's a question I've always wondered. Do they change over time??? That would be awesome, IMHO.

Originally Posted by rahuln

I agree that it would be cool if they changed over time, but I also think it should have some way of knowing which markets are bigger than others. Looking forward to OOTP9 and creating a fictional start-up, so it would be nice if the big markets were just that, big.

Well, speaking of OOTP 2007/8 for now, market size is determined at the beginning of the league in order to "balance the payroll" so to speak. I was looking through the manual to see if I could save myself some typing; all I could find was the description of the first option below, which sort of describes the process. So, if New York ended up with a relatively low payroll after the inaugural draft (or after game creation without one), then its market may indeed be rated "Tiny."

As far as market size changing, back in 2006 it was criticized that markets fluctuated too much and too frequently, so the rate of change was slowed considerably for 2007/8. This all makes sense in that the game does not know New York from New Podonk and the size of regional baseball markets (that is, the number of people who could potentially be interested enough in professional baseball to support a team) really does not change much over time.

(BTW, although ctorg's suggestion is a good one, market size is set this way to produce game balance, at least in the beginning of a league; imagine KC with the largest payroll and a market set by cities.txt.)

[Le Grande Orange]

Frankly, I say most of the financial system in OOTP needs an overhaul. Teams in the game aren't getting revenue from enough sources; teams don't have nearly enough things to spend their money on; and there's no flexibility in changing either of the two aforementioned items to easily customize the finances of a league.

I've got a system in mind that'll fix all that. I need to put it all together and write it up in a proposal for OOTP 10... if Markus adopts it and can get it to work, then things will be much farther ahead of where they are now in terms of realistic financial numbers for both fictional and historical leagues.

[1998 Yankees]

You go, LGO.

[mikev]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Frankly, I say most of the financial system in OOTP needs an overhaul. Teams in the game aren't getting revenue from enough sources; teams don't have nearly enough things to spend their money on; and there's no flexibility in changing either of the two aforementioned items to easily customize the finances of a league.

I've got a system in mind that'll fix all that. I need to put it all together and write it up in a proposal for OOTP 10... if Markus adopts it and can get it to work, then things will be much farther ahead of where they are now in terms of realistic financial numbers for both fictional and historical leagues.

NO SIR. WE NEED ANIMATION!

[enuttage]

Originally Posted by ctorg

Since populations are already known from the cities.txt file, it would be cool if the game would base market size on that. It's far from perfect, but it's a better starting point than random.

This is always how I've hoped it would work as well. Could even be optional, but it would certainly add to the challenge of taking a job in one of the smaller markets in your league.

In the States you could easily base it on (gasp!) *actual* DMAs.

Elsewhere in the world (unless they have such a similar designation - and I suspect at least Western Europe does), you could run it on agglomeration size.

[1998 Yankees]

Originally Posted by enuttage

This is always how I've hoped it would work as well. Could even be optional, but it would certainly add to the challenge of taking a job in one of the smaller markets in your league.

It really would be good as an option. Frankly, what I said above notwithstanding, even in a fictional league using real cities, I will go through and edit the New Yorks to "huge" markets and the Kansas Cities to "average." I figure the finances will sort themselves out eventually (KC will go through a decade or so of belt-tightening) and be more realistic than the other way around. If KC needs a bit of help to survive in the short run, I can be merciful and help them in other ways.

[DrArbiter]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Frankly, I say most of the financial system in OOTP needs an overhaul. Teams in the game aren't getting revenue from enough sources; teams don't have nearly enough things to spend their money on; and there's no flexibility in changing either of the two aforementioned items to easily customize the finances of a league.

I'll add to that the issue that the game pretends you can set salaries and revenue parameters independent of each other. Player salaries are a function of the revenue pie that's out there, and their bargaining power (e.g., free agency, arbitration, other things that are in the CBA but aren't explicitly modeled in the game).

I could make some crack about how some parts of Europe seem to like pretending that supply and demand don't have to match up, but I won't.

[jbmagic]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Frankly, I say most of the financial system in OOTP needs an overhaul. Teams in the game aren't getting revenue from enough sources; teams don't have nearly enough things to spend their money on; and there's no flexibility in changing either of the two aforementioned items to easily customize the finances of a league.

I've got a system in mind that'll fix all that. I need to put it all together and write it up in a proposal for OOTP 10... if Markus adopts it and can get it to work, then things will be much farther ahead of where they are now in terms of realistic financial numbers for both fictional and historical leagues.

So financial part in ootp 9 is still not improved from ootp 8?

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by jbmagic

So financial part in ootp 9 is still not improved from ootp 8?

No, it's better. Improvements have been made.

I'm just of the opinion that for things to really be taken to the next level, the financial model needs a substantial rebuild. (I always tend to be thinking one OOTP version ahead.) The model I have in mind works in a fundamentally different way. As DrArbiter said, things should start with revenue — how much teams generate, from where, how that revenue is distributed, and then move on to the areas that revenue gets spent on.

Think league totals for financials and you get a hint of the concept I think needs to be followed for OOTP 10. (Note that this is just my personal opinion. I have yet to show and prove to Markus that my concept offers big advantages over how the game does things currently.)

[Bishop]

LGO, I have to say, I'm really glad you're on this board. Quite a fount of baseball information, which only helps the game get better. Danke.

Ok, lovefest over.

[Kemp]

Personally I think the financial model (at least the revenue side) should be simpler. I actually make ticket prices $.01 for all teams, make average coaches salaries $1, and make all markets really small. Likewise, I set merchandising income to $0 for all teams.

Then I give each team a long-term media contract at some pre-determined figure (because the media contract does not change).

For me, this "stabilizes" the financials for each team and they can expect to generate close to the same amount of revenue each year. I don't have to worry about market sizes changing, teams running out of cash, etc.

[spark240]

Someday, I'd like to see these in OOTP:

Minor League Financials. LGO knows what it needs here, I think. Depending on parameters set, a team in an affiliated minor league might be, in net, either a revenue source or a cost to the parent team (beyond the value of players, of course), just as an independent minor league team could be profitable or not in its own right.

Travel Costs. Should be tied to geography, but with some kind of flexibility to allow for different costs per distance traveled. What happens if the per-distance cost of the "flight" league suddenly shoots up, relative to the "train" league? It should always cost more to play a continent-wide or international schedule than it would to play a Connecticut State League schedule, shouldn't it? Unless the feature is disabled, of course.

Ballpark Construction Costs. Sometimes building a big new stadium might lead to greater attendance and more profits. Other times it might turn out to have been a bad idea. Construction costs lead to...

Ballpark Maintenance/Game Operations Costs. These could run together as one line item.

[Curtis]

The basic principle for startup of fictional leagues needs to be reversed. The financial (revenue) information should be generated or input first, THEN the managers (AI and human) would do their intial drafts based upon the funds available. I understand that the current system of expenses determining revenues is much easier to code, but it defies all common sense, and makes pseudo-historical leagues (historical with fantasy players) very difficult to set up.

After getting that straight, add as much chrome as Markus will stand for.

[enuttage]

If it *isn't* insanely too complex to tackle along with everything else he's got going on, I agree that this would be the way to do it. Much more of a challenge on draft day, too.