2019-21-22-25-26 Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

Message
Author
User avatar
Matt
VIP
VIP
Posts: 6453
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:21 pm

2019-21-22-25-26 Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#1 Post by Matt »

This season (Commish Edit: 2019) we have implemented a new performance based system for Market and Fan Loyalty changes. The new system does not rely on the OOTP games scores, but instead is based on the expectations for each market. A teams expectations are based on their market size, playoff appearances last ten seasons, and won/lost record over last 3 and 5 seasons. A team earns points based on place in division, record against 3 and 5 year averages, making a playoff appearance, and winning a championship.

The nuts and bolts of it are this; markets like Aurora and Bakersfield have high expectations. Markets like Kentucky and Yuma have lower expectations. Much like MLB, where the expectations in markets like NY and Boston are very different than the expectations in Kansas City or Seattle.

The final scores for the season were as follows:

19 Kentucky Thoroughbreds
19 Yuma Bulldozers
17 London Underground
17 Connecticut Nutmeggers
14 Reno Zephyrs
11 Kalamazoo Badgers
10 Aurora Borealis
10 San Antonio Calzones of Laredo
7 Florida Featherheads
6 Crystal Lake Sandgnats
6 Gloucester Fishermen
6 Palm Springs Codgers
5 Canton Longshoremen
4 West Virginia Alleghenies
4 Tempe Knights
2 Duluth Warriors
1 Arlington Bureaucrats
1 New Orleans Trendsetters
0 Manchester Maulers
0 Omaha Cyclones
-1 Fargo Dinosaurs
-1 Charleston Statesmen
-5 New Jersey Hitmen
-7 Bakersfield Bears


So what does this mean?

Kentucky and Yuma, since they tied at the top, will both see market size increases of +1.

Bakersfield, with the lowest score, will see a market size decrease of -1.

Connecticut, Reno, and London qualified for fan loyalty increases of +1. Since the fan loyalty in Connecticut and Reno were already maxed out, there was no change.

New Jersey, Charleston, Fargo, Omaha and Manchester each saw a fan loyalty decrease of -1.

Much like the old system, there are some limits to the changes. A team that wins a championship will be exempt from any downgrades for 3 seasons. On the other side, any team that finishes with a 3 yr avg win total below 62 will be exempt from an improvement for 3 seasons.

Teams that receive a Market size change will not be eligible for another Market change for 5 seasons. Teams that receive a fan loyalty change will not be eligible for another loyalty change for 3 seasons.


Keep in mind, OOTP generated changes are completely separate, and changes that occur within the game do not affect eligibility for performance based changes, and vice versa.

All changes have been implemented with today's sim.

LRS changes will occur after the conclusion of the playoffs.
User avatar
Evas
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 3294
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:37 am

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#2 Post by Evas »

I like the new system. Adding some dynamism should be great.

I think it will also help keep successful clubs that were built from humble beginnings successful.

I also like the disincentive at the bottom of the league. That ups the cost of tanking for picks in a big way.
Kevin V. - GM of the Shin Seiki Evas.
User avatar
Hitmen
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 2890
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:34 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#3 Post by Hitmen »

Ouch, first "bad" year in a long time and already hit.
Michael Czosnyka

Current PEBA Board Member
Current - New Jersey Hitmen 2011 - 2023; 2024-2033 AI lead, 2034+
Former - Madison Malts (f.k.a. Canton Longshoremen) 2029 - 2033

Attending PEBAholics Anonymous meetings since 09/22/2009
User avatar
roncollins
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 2777
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:53 pm

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#4 Post by roncollins »

Definitely like the idea. Hopefully Lupin will do pretty well in this area for a little bit. :)
Ron Collins
GM - Toyama Wind Dancers
2020 Neo-Tokyo Cup Champions
_______________________________________________________________
Steel Dragons

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#5 Post by Steel Dragons »

I like this also, I know we have been bringing in the fans and always having money at the end of the year :)
User avatar
Dinosaurs
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#6 Post by Dinosaurs »

I like this change alot (even though my team took a hit this offseason :shake: ), Loyalty really helps with ticket prices from what I've seen and even smaller franchises with smaller stadiums can make up some of the difference if they are able to drive up fan loyalty.
Cristian Shofar - GM Fargo Dinosaurs
User avatar
Borealis
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8430
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 9:27 pm
Location: San Francisco

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#7 Post by Borealis »

Can we get some breakdown on the math involved and what those numbers mean? Some context? What does a 19 mean for Kentucky v. a 10 for Aurora and SA? What's the max possible?
Michael Topham, President Golden Entertainment & President-CEO of the Aurora Borealis
Image
2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 PEBA Champions
User avatar
John
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15566
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:34 am
Location: A changed 19th-century America
Contact:

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#8 Post by John »

I have to say, I really am enjoying watching the Board introduce a new dynamic into the league. It doesn't just keep things fresh for the GMs; it makes observing a whole lot more fun, too. This is another new tweak that I'm digging. Can't wait to see how it plays out.
John Rodriguez
Hard at work...
Steel Dragons

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#9 Post by Steel Dragons »

I agree , Us small time teams can still do great even if we have a bad season. I had 10% more fans this year and came close matching our fan attendance. Our cash o0n hand saved us but the fans are coming in droves and that is after I just added 5k seats.
User avatar
Matt
VIP
VIP
Posts: 6453
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:21 pm

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#10 Post by Matt »

Borealis wrote:Can we get some breakdown on the math involved and what those numbers mean? Some context? What does a 19 mean for Kentucky v. a 10 for Aurora and SA? What's the max possible?

I won't give the nuts and bolts of the system in use. That's sort of a PEBA tradition that what's under the hood stays under the hood.

What I can say is that the score is based on expectations. Aurora and San Antonio both received scores of 10, but the teams had different expectations. We both exceeded our expectations by exactly the same amount, but the expectations were different. It's a bit of a sliding scale.

Kentucky, with a small market, and Yuma, with a fine history of....um....*cough*.....losing....,both had much lesser expectations, so when they made a run into the playoffs it really catapulted them to the top. With expectations so low, it was much easier to achieve.

I misspoke earlier about how a teams expectations are arrived at. The teams expectations are based on Budget, Media Revenue, 5 Yr Win Loss Record, Avg finish in division last 5 years, playoff appearances last ten years. Budget and media revenue are reflective of market size, though they often trail the increases in market size by several years. Teams are then graded with the criteria mentioned earlier.

For teams at the top, it is going to be tougher to achieve a market size or fan loyalty increase. But it's not impossible. I ran several tests of the methodology used, and teams in the top tier can score enough points to get a boost. It's just harder. Some of it depends on how well the rest of the league does. If several teams from the lower tiers hadn't made runs for the playoffs this year, it's possible that Aurora's score would have been higher and maybe would have qualified for a loyalty increase. It all becomes *sort of* relative. In that vein, it's possible that Aurora makes the playoffs next year, doesn't win a championship, and still finishes with a higher score than this year. Each year will be a bit different, the variables (such as how other teams do against there own expectations) will be a bit different, the results a bit different. Teams will go through winning and losing cycles in which expectations increase or decrease.

We went to this system for a couple of reasons. One, the OOTP season scores are biased towards the good teams. You could be a team making steady progress and improving each year, but unless you make the playoffs and win 100 games OOTP really doesn't care. (And beyond that, no one even knows what the secret sauce is for those season scores.) The new system rewards teams making progress, and penalizes teams who slip. A second thing to look at is we took away the randomness of the change. Consider the case of Tempe, who went to the playoffs three straight years, won a championship, and didn't net anything under the old system. In this system, if Tempe does the near impossible, they get rewarded for it.

Evas wrote:I like the new system. Adding some dynamism should be great.

I think it will also help keep successful clubs that were built from humble beginnings successful.

I also like the disincentive at the bottom of the league. That ups the cost of tanking for picks in a big way.
I don't know so much that we were really thinking about tanking for picks when we created the disincentive as much as we just want to encourage teams to put the best product on the field that they can. Combined with the fact that falling to the bottom could get you a market size hit, I think the additional disincentive should do the job in encouraging teams to try to at least stay somewhat competitive, even during a rebuild.
User avatar
Robert_Ogden
Single-A
Single-A
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:57 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#11 Post by Robert_Ogden »

I was going to say something like "I think I like that, but can you explain some things," but your last post covered that.

It is a nice snapshot of the league.

Could we get a reprint of the scores with a
(+1)
(0)
(-1)
next to the scores so that we can see all adjustments or does that not make sense because this is a recent change, or perhaps you don't want to give away that info. I just figured, if you post this again after the next season, we would all see the changes if we cared to look it up.
User avatar
Alleghenies
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
Posts: 1163
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#12 Post by Alleghenies »

WV is +4. I guess that's good. I'm hoping we could increase that next season.
Gregory Abcarian
General Manager
West Virginia
User avatar
Evas
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 3294
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:37 am

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#13 Post by Evas »

Without getting in to the nuts and bolts of how the score are generated, I do have a few general questions:

1. How is it determined which teams get affected?
It looks like rank for Market Size.
Is it a range for Loyalty or is it also a ranking?

2. Can teams experience both a Loyalty and Market size Increase/Decrease from this rule? Or is it either or?
Kevin V. - GM of the Shin Seiki Evas.
User avatar
Rory
Triple-A
Triple-A
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:55 am

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#14 Post by Rory »

This is pretty kool.
Does our choice of win now-rebuild-neutral have any effect on expectations?
Does owner's expectation and whether we meet that expectation effect this as well?
User avatar
Matt
VIP
VIP
Posts: 6453
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:21 pm

Re: Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Changes (PEBA)

#15 Post by Matt »

Fishermen wrote:I was going to say something like "I think I like that, but can you explain some things," but your last post covered that.

It is a nice snapshot of the league.

Could we get a reprint of the scores with a
(+1)
(0)
(-1)
next to the scores so that we can see all adjustments or does that not make sense because this is a recent change, or perhaps you don't want to give away that info. I just figured, if you post this again after the next season, we would all see the changes if we cared to look it up.
You wouldn't really be seeing an apples to apples comparison year over year, because some teams will see their expectations increase/decrease based on this season. So a team could have a slightly better season next year, but increased expectations might net them a slightly lower score next season. Not a fair comparison.
Evas wrote:Without getting in to the nuts and bolts of how the score are generated, I do have a few general questions:

1. How is it determined which teams get affected?
It looks like rank for Market Size.
Is it a range for Loyalty or is it also a ranking?

2. Can teams experience both a Loyalty and Market size Increase/Decrease from this rule? Or is it either or?
Simply, in PEBA, the team with the highest score (in this case a tie, so two teams, KY and YUM), gets a market size increase. The next 4 get a Fan Loyalty increase. Market size is much more stable, while fan loyalty can be more fickle. At the bottom end of the scale, the worst score takes a market hit, while the next 4 take a fan loyalty hit (again, there was a tie making 5 teams eligible for the hit).

In the the LRS, it will be the top team getting the market increase, the bottom team the hit. For fan loyalty, it will be the next two teams, respectively.

You can't get both in one season. But for instance, a team that had a market increase this year would be eligible for a fan loyalty increase the next year provided their score qualified. For instance, Kentucky makes a return to the playoffs, scores high enough to finish 3rd in the rankings, and they get a fan loyalty increase.
Knights wrote:This is pretty kool.
Does our choice of win now-rebuild-neutral have any effect on expectations?
Does owner's expectation and whether we meet that expectation effect this as well?
Win Now -rebuild - neutral is purely cosmetic in online leagues. In solo play, this setting is primarily used to tell the AI what type of trades you might be interested in. Owners expectation is not a factor. That's between you and the boss. :grin:
Post Reply

Return to “Performance Based Market/Fan Loyalty Adjustments Archive”