|
I doubt that adaptability could have such significant effect on game performance. I think these personality ratings affect morale (and other things like contract demands), which in turn can affect performance slightly.
I believe the 5 player morale measures can have different importance to overall morale for different players. For example, a player with 0 desire for winning seems to be unaffected by the team record. This could be bad for overall morale if there is some other type of morale factor that is low, which would be counteracted to some extent if the player cared about winning, even if the team were just playing at a .500 record.
I did a little testing in the editor, and saw of course that Desire for Winner affects how much team record morale affects overall morale. But interestingly, greed was the determining factor of how much a player cared about his own performance. Players with 0 greed didn't care at all about their performance morale level. Everything else I tested didn't seem to change the effects of overall morale.
I think Handle Success/Failure affects how winning and losing influences their team chemistry level. If you have a poor chemistry team after losing a lot, you'll see the notices about the reasons on the team chemistry page stating that many players are upset because they don't handle losing well. Perhaps Handle Critics works similarly, affecting how a player's personal performance influences their team chemistry, like a guy in a slump getting all pissy in the dugout.
As an example of this, you can see in your data that Wallace has gained quite a bit more positive team chemistry numbers than Escamilla, despite Wallace seeming to perform worse according to his expectations as can be seen by his greater drop in performance morale. So I would attribute that to his much greater ability to handle critics (though he is also has a greater ability to handle losing, but your team seems to be not losing very much at all).
Adaptability, though, I really have no idea about what it might do.
|