Market size

beorn · 08-03-2007, 08:46 AM

On the Front Office ==> Edit Financials page, market size is given a 1-20 scale. However, 10 produces the "Analysts currently the the market at HUGE message", and a 15 produces an ASTRONOMICAL rating. Either the rating scale or the message has to be wrong.

Initially, I assumed that the Edit Financials page just had an incorrect label for the rating scale, and that it is really a 1-10 rating. That may be the case, but I am not so sure.

Other relevant facts:
* The "import from 2006" places market ratings on a 1-10 scale, whether that is correct or not.
* Several people have reported that AI teams tends to run in the red over time. Most recently here... This may or may not be related to market size irregularities.
* When, as a commish, I was asked to look at the beta for five days before release, I pointed out that the AI tended to run in the red. Another beta tester, as I recall, felt that the problem was new and could be traced to problems with market size.

tysok · 08-03-2007, 11:45 AM

It was changed to 1-20 scale, with the norm being 1-10. If I recall correctly, above 10 allows for some more growth and the simulation of a team like the Yankees. What the message says when the team goes over 10 was considered for a while, and trying to put a descriptor to every number looked silly... so it was reduced to just one "upgrade" after 10.

Whether it works right or not I don't know, and the rest of the post I don't know.

battists · 08-11-2007, 12:51 AM

Hi there.

I'm very sorry your issue has sat here for so long without a response.

Us volunteers are a little on the burnt-out side right now! That's not an excuse, though, but let's see if we can make some progress, if you're still around after all this time...

Tysok provided some excellent information. I'm not clear whether that answered your question. If not, can you let me know what else you were looking for?

Regarding the issue of teams running in the red... I can log this issue as a bug, TT 3838. Do you happen to have posts or data or other "evidence" that I could provide along with the issue?

Thanks,

Steve

beorn · 08-11-2007, 11:55 AM

Tysok did provide the key information.

However, the tendency for AI teams to run in the red is pretty overwhelming. When Dog Days was down on owners, every single team that had AI management during an off season got itself into serious long term financial trouble. When testing out finances the other day, I set up a test league using default settings, and half the teams were in the red when I checked after several seasons.

My theory is this: If the AI looks at anything before offering a contract to a FA, it is the text at the bottom of the page -- cash plus budget room.

Even if the budget room number is reliable and accurate (I am far from sure that it always is), it is a terrible financial strategy to spend all your "cash plus budget room." If a team does that, they will be broke at the end of one year, and on the hook for salaries far beyond their income in the second year. Thus, this methodology is only reasonably prudent when the league cash max is very small.

08-03-2007, 08:46 AM	#1
beorn All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: near Rochester, NY Posts: 1,269	Market size On the Front Office ==> Edit Financials page, market size is given a 1-20 scale. However, 10 produces the "Analysts currently the the market at HUGE message", and a 15 produces an ASTRONOMICAL rating. Either the rating scale or the message has to be wrong. Initially, I assumed that the Edit Financials page just had an incorrect label for the rating scale, and that it is really a 1-10 rating. That may be the case, but I am not so sure. Other relevant facts: * The "import from 2006" places market ratings on a 1-10 scale, whether that is correct or not. * Several people have reported that AI teams tends to run in the red over time. Most recently here... This may or may not be related to market size irregularities. * When, as a commish, I was asked to look at the beta for five days before release, I pointed out that the AI tended to run in the red. Another beta tester, as I recall, felt that the problem was new and could be traced to problems with market size. __________________ Commish of Dog Days Baseball Commish Pennant Chase Baseball League (PCBL) Commish and Blue Jays GM Extra Innings Baseball Last edited by beorn; 08-03-2007 at 08:48 AM.

08-03-2007, 11:45 AM	#2
tysok Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 4,925	It was changed to 1-20 scale, with the norm being 1-10. If I recall correctly, above 10 allows for some more growth and the simulation of a team like the Yankees. What the message says when the team goes over 10 was considered for a while, and trying to put a descriptor to every number looked silly... so it was reduced to just one "upgrade" after 10. Whether it works right or not I don't know, and the rest of the post I don't know. __________________ I don't know about you, but as for me, the question has already been answered: Should we be here? Yes! Jack Buck, September 17, 2001 It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. I firmly believe that any man's finest hour... is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi) I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom. (George S. Patton)

08-11-2007, 11:55 AM	#4
beorn All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: near Rochester, NY Posts: 1,269	Tysok did provide the key information. However, the tendency for AI teams to run in the red is pretty overwhelming. When Dog Days was down on owners, every single team that had AI management during an off season got itself into serious long term financial trouble. When testing out finances the other day, I set up a test league using default settings, and half the teams were in the red when I checked after several seasons. My theory is this: If the AI looks at anything before offering a contract to a FA, it is the text at the bottom of the page -- cash plus budget room. Even if the budget room number is reliable and accurate (I am far from sure that it always is), it is a terrible financial strategy to spend all your "cash plus budget room." If a team does that, they will be broke at the end of one year, and on the hook for salaries far beyond their income in the second year. Thus, this methodology is only reasonably prudent when the league cash max is very small. __________________ Commish of Dog Days Baseball Commish Pennant Chase Baseball League (PCBL) Commish and Blue Jays GM Extra Innings Baseball

08-11-2007, 12:51 AM	#3
battists Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 18,506	Hi there. I'm very sorry your issue has sat here for so long without a response. Us volunteers are a little on the burnt-out side right now! That's not an excuse, though, but let's see if we can make some progress, if you're still around after all this time... Tysok provided some excellent information. I'm not clear whether that answered your question. If not, can you let me know what else you were looking for? Regarding the issue of teams running in the red... I can log this issue as a bug, TT 3838. Do you happen to have posts or data or other "evidence" that I could provide along with the issue? Thanks, Steve