Expanded personalities

frangipard · 03-20-2015, 10:58 PM

Those of you who have peeked into the editor know that one of the undersold features this year is a pretty dramatic expansion to the player personalities. All players now have ratings for:

- adaptability
- controversy
- handle success
- handle failure
- handle critics

This is a very interesting addition. Anyone seeing any effects of the new ratings?

Avindian · 03-20-2015, 11:34 PM

That is awesome! I hope we can also get this information to display (if it's relevant) without the editor, since it would be handy for online leagues where not everyone owns the game (and nobody has commish access except me.

)

sbailey85 · 03-20-2015, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frangipard

This is a very interesting addition. Anyone seeing any effects of the new ratings?

I will let you know.. I just got this e-mail after releasing someone .

I just got an e-mail after releasing a 1 star guy letting me know that the players were upset and it could hurt the current vibe of the team.

daveawrit · 03-20-2015, 11:50 PM

Holy cow, awesome. Sometimes the features that they don't tell us about before release are even better than all the things they have told us.

sbailey85 · 03-20-2015, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbailey85

I will let you know.. I just got this e-mail after releasing someone .

I just got an e-mail after releasing a 1 star guy letting me know that the players were upset and it could hurt the current vibe of the team.

My guess would be it just lets you know of certain changes that have always happened under the hood. Regardless getting the e-mail was awesome and adds a really nice touch.

Matt Arnold · 03-21-2015, 03:57 AM

The team chemistry aspect is new. The ratings above were in the game before but unused. They have now been folded into the new team chemistry system, and are used to decide player personalities and see how they adjust to situations (how much morale goes up and down with wins and losses, for example).

So if you let a good leader go, players may be upset. It likely won't be a big effect, but if he was the only leader on the team, you might see some players become increasingly unhappy.

Anemic_royaltea · 03-21-2015, 02:23 PM

I've been tinkering with personalities all morning, figuring out if it's possible to make a Baseball-playing Muhammad Ali/Dennis Rodman/Terrel Owens level personality/monster.

Edmonde · 03-21-2015, 03:40 PM

Got half way through my first season and the Bench Coach sent me an email telling me of the team chemistry. Good way to keep an eye on trouble makers to trade at the deadline or drop.

Nice touch!

BusterKing · 03-21-2015, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edmonde

Got half way through my first season and the Bench Coach sent me an email telling me of the team chemistry. Good way to keep an eye on trouble makers to trade at the deadline or drop.

Nice touch!

In manager mode you are stuck with the bad seeds. This is why with the new manager mode only it is a must that the manager has the option to request that the GM trade so and so for the betterment of the team. I'm sure Markus can program that feature in a patch. Just a trigger that would make the GM trade the unwanted player. Let the manager have a say in some extreme circumstances.

Edmonde · 03-21-2015, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BusterKing

In manager mode you are stuck with the bad seeds. This is why with the new manager mode only it is a must that the manager has the option to request that the GM trade so and so for the betterment of the team. I'm sure Markus can program that feature in a patch. Just a trigger that would make the GM trade the unwanted player. Let the manager have a say in some extreme circumstances.

Adding a "request you trade this guy" feature to Manager mode would be an awesome idea.

Would be awesome too, since I play GM only mode, that the Manager requests trades for/of players as well.

Nice Idea!!!

Arc Flash · 04-03-2015, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edmonde

Adding a "request you trade this guy" feature to Manager mode would be an awesome idea.

Would be awesome too, since I play GM only mode, that the Manager requests trades for/of players as well.

Nice Idea!!!

What would even be nicer is if the manager could also request that the GM try to make a trade for a specific type of player, i.e. A Third Baseman with great defense and an above average hitter, as opposed to the one I have now who is an average hitter with above average power with a lousy arm and making error after error game in and game out.

swoboda · 04-03-2015, 12:20 PM

how about adding sense of humor? couldn't hurt.

sandman2575 · 04-03-2015, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

The team chemistry aspect is new. The ratings above were in the game before but unused. They have now been folded into the new team chemistry system, and are used to decide player personalities and see how they adjust to situations (how much morale goes up and down with wins and losses, for example).

So if you let a good leader go, players may be upset. It likely won't be a big effect, but if he was the only leader on the team, you might see some players become increasingly unhappy.

Love all the flavor this adds, but it's not really clear to me what tangible effect morale etc. has on the game (or has had even in past versions).

Do unhappy players necessarily perform below their optimum level? Or is there just a chance they will? And is there a chance there's no performance hit at all?

frangipard · 04-03-2015, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandman2575

Love all the flavor this adds, but it's not really clear to me what tangible effect morale etc. has on the game (or has had even in past versions).

Do unhappy players necessarily perform below their optimum level? Or is there just a chance they will? And is there a chance there's no performance hit at all?

See my thread about manager/coach test results. TLDR: yes, a positive working environment generally leads to better results.

I doubt Matt & Markus are going to break it down for you at the level you (and I) want.

sandman2575 · 04-03-2015, 03:01 PM

Well, I don't really want it broken down in detail. I just wonder how much of chemistry/morale is cosmetic -- i.e. mostly meant to give flavor to the game (which is fine) -- and how much is actually impactful on player and team performance.

Can a team have bad chemistry and still be a winning team? Presumably yes, like some dysfunctional but successful Billy Martin skippered squad from the 70s.

Also, losing in the first place is apt to generate bad morale and raise tensions between players or between players and management. Does it then feed on itself, losing --> bad chemistry --> more losing? Again, I assume yes, but hard to know to what degree...

SodoMojo · 04-03-2015, 04:00 PM

For clarity sake I assume the following on the 200 point scale:

adaptability (higher is better)
controversy (lower is better)
handle success (higher is better)
handle failure (higher is better)
handle critics (higher is better)

Also what does adaptability really mean?...isn't that covered in more detail by handle success, failure, critics? Is it if the player is traded he transitions better?

frangipard · 04-03-2015, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandman2575

Well, I don't really want it broken down in detail. I just wonder how much of chemistry/morale is cosmetic -- i.e. mostly meant to give flavor to the game (which is fine) -- and how much is actually impactful on player and team performance.

Oh, I think it's definitely impactful ... we just don't usually know how or why.

Quote:

Can a team have bad chemistry and still be a winning team? Presumably yes, like some dysfunctional but successful Billy Martin skippered squad from the 70s.

I think you may want to reconsider what "bad chemistry" means ... if Billy Martin yells and screams and pisses people off so much that they go out there and knock the cover off the ball, maybe that's good chemistry.

What I suspect is happening under the hood is that certain manager & player traits interact in certain ways. Maybe young players respond better to a fiery, Tempermental coach, while vets just roll their eyes; maybe an Easygoing type will have success with a team that has good player leadership, but not with a team full of malcontents.

I love that the system's in the game ... I hate that we don't know what it's doing. I really wish we had 1) a way to ask our bench coach, at any time, how things are going, 2) who the leaders/slackers are ... I've twice been told after the fact that I just let the team captain leave town 3) WHY players are happy/sad. If a guy is angry because he's hitting .225, there's nothing I can do about it. If he's angry because he's in the bullpen instead of starting, that's another issue. If he's angry because he thinks his manager is an ass, that's something else. Is he just pissed himself, or is he spreading it around? As GM I should be able to get that info.

Quote:

Also, losing in the first place is apt to generate bad morale and raise tensions between players or between players and management. Does it then feed on itself, losing --> bad chemistry --> more losing? Again, I assume yes, but hard to know to what degree...

Agree.

frangipard · 04-03-2015, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SodoMojo

For clarity sake I assume the following on the 200 point scale:

adaptability (higher is better)
controversy (lower is better)
handle success (higher is better)
handle failure (higher is better)
handle critics (higher is better)

Also what does adaptability really mean...isn't that covered in more detail by handle success, failure, critics? Is it if the player is traded he transitions better?

And A-Rod is 0 for controversy. And "Extremely popular."

Dr.K · 04-03-2015, 04:40 PM

It really adds something to managing or the GM aspect of the game, this season my Astros 1983 are bottom of the division, all season long I've ignored the complaints from various players in the clubhouse about team chemistry.

When I took a look the player with the worse personality was pitcher Len Barker. The problem was that I had signed Barker as a free agent for a juicy 7 year contract and he was 18 - 13 with a 3.31 era. The team was 75-87 and bottom of the division at the end of the season. I had tried to shop him and had no takers.

Now it's a big problem going into 1984...if the owner does not fire me, really good addition to a great game.

Anyone · 04-03-2015, 05:32 PM

I love it, but I definitely wish we knew what it all meant. What is bad "Handle Success," for example? Just that the player doesn't benefit from it as much as others, or that the player becomes egotistical? Also the effect of "Adaptability" is not clear.

The others are more obvious, but it would really be nice to know more about what everything's effect is.

03-20-2015, 10:58 PM	#1
frangipard OOTP Roster Team Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 750	Expanded personalities Those of you who have peeked into the editor know that one of the undersold features this year is a pretty dramatic expansion to the player personalities. All players now have ratings for: - adaptability - controversy - handle success - handle failure - handle critics This is a very interesting addition. Anyone seeing any effects of the new ratings?

04-03-2015, 12:20 PM	#12
swoboda All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Guarding The Line Posts: 1,220	how about adding sense of humor? couldn't hurt. __________________ "...If you want to look ahead to the bottom of the ninth, the Mets will be sending up Buddy Harrelson, Jerry Buchek , and Don Bosch, we'll be right back after this word from Rheingold Beer" The late great Lindsey Nelson

04-03-2015, 04:00 PM	#16
SodoMojo Minors (Double A) Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 136	For clarity sake I assume the following on the 200 point scale: adaptability (higher is better) controversy (lower is better) handle success (higher is better) handle failure (higher is better) handle critics (higher is better) Also what does adaptability really mean?...isn't that covered in more detail by handle success, failure, critics? Is it if the player is traded he transitions better? Last edited by SodoMojo; 04-03-2015 at 05:57 PM.

03-20-2015, 11:34 PM	#2
Avindian Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 274	That is awesome! I hope we can also get this information to display (if it's relevant) without the editor, since it would be handy for online leagues where not everyone owns the game (and nobody has commish access except me. )

03-20-2015, 11:50 PM	#4
daveawrit Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: California Posts: 329	Holy cow, awesome. Sometimes the features that they don't tell us about before release are even better than all the things they have told us.

03-21-2015, 03:57 AM	#6
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 15,736	The team chemistry aspect is new. The ratings above were in the game before but unused. They have now been folded into the new team chemistry system, and are used to decide player personalities and see how they adjust to situations (how much morale goes up and down with wins and losses, for example). So if you let a good leader go, players may be upset. It likely won't be a big effect, but if he was the only leader on the team, you might see some players become increasingly unhappy.

03-21-2015, 02:23 PM	#7
Anemic_royaltea Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Vancouver Posts: 38	I've been tinkering with personalities all morning, figuring out if it's possible to make a Baseball-playing Muhammad Ali/Dennis Rodman/Terrel Owens level personality/monster.

03-21-2015, 03:40 PM	#8
Edmonde Bat Boy Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 8	Got half way through my first season and the Bench Coach sent me an email telling me of the team chemistry. Good way to keep an eye on trouble makers to trade at the deadline or drop. Nice touch!

04-03-2015, 03:01 PM	#15
sandman2575 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Cambridge, MA Posts: 255	Well, I don't really want it broken down in detail. I just wonder how much of chemistry/morale is cosmetic -- i.e. mostly meant to give flavor to the game (which is fine) -- and how much is actually impactful on player and team performance. Can a team have bad chemistry and still be a winning team? Presumably yes, like some dysfunctional but successful Billy Martin skippered squad from the 70s. Also, losing in the first place is apt to generate bad morale and raise tensions between players or between players and management. Does it then feed on itself, losing --> bad chemistry --> more losing? Again, I assume yes, but hard to know to what degree...

04-03-2015, 04:40 PM	#19
Dr.K Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: UK Posts: 368	It really adds something to managing or the GM aspect of the game, this season my Astros 1983 are bottom of the division, all season long I've ignored the complaints from various players in the clubhouse about team chemistry. When I took a look the player with the worse personality was pitcher Len Barker. The problem was that I had signed Barker as a free agent for a juicy 7 year contract and he was 18 - 13 with a 3.31 era. The team was 75-87 and bottom of the division at the end of the season. I had tried to shop him and had no takers. Now it's a big problem going into 1984...if the owner does not fire me, really good addition to a great game.

04-03-2015, 05:32 PM	#20
Anyone Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 405	I love it, but I definitely wish we knew what it all meant. What is bad "Handle Success," for example? Just that the player doesn't benefit from it as much as others, or that the player becomes egotistical? Also the effect of "Adaptability" is not clear. The others are more obvious, but it would really be nice to know more about what everything's effect is.