My only thoughts are:
Balancing it around average like you have is probably best.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by canadiancreed
If two or more teams are in one city, the market size for each is reduced by two levels. For example two teams in toronto woudl reduce each team from slightly average to below average. No affect on loyality ratings.
|
I wouldn't reduce it by 2 levels. I'd only split the pop and then see where they fit. So, using your levels say Toronto for example had 750K with 2 teams I'd look at what level 375K is (average). If Montreal had say 2M and 3 teams I'd look at what level 667K is (saa). One might think that if there's more than 1 team it should be lowered even more than divided by how many teams, but I'd argue that the close rivalry would help interest rather than hurt it.
Looking at the Australian Football League for example there were like 8-12 teams from Melbourne or very close to Melbourne for like a century or more. Of the current 16 there are still like 10 from Melbourne. And Melbourne is not even Australia's largest city! They do love their sports though and that's why they can support so many teams.
In my solo Canadian league for v7 out of 32 teams I'm going to have 4 teams in Toronto and 3 in Montreal just to try to get that feel of close rivalries. I'm not going to bother much with the markets though, just set them to average and let the game take them wherever.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by canadiancreed
If there's a college that plays in the CUBA there, it raises the market size by one level. For example there's three in Toronto, so the market for one team would be rated as really big from above average.
|
I wouldn't bother with that especially since there were far fewer colleges and universities back in those days and how the growth across the country has not been the same.