Adaptability

Cobby · 05-19-2016, 12:08 AM

I just finished a disastrous season where my talented team got into a death spiral of bickering, poor morale and losing. I never could get to the bottom of it. It was a young team and when I got the first "bickering in the clubhouse" report I immediately traded for veteran leadership. I also looked at the personality reports and didn't find anyone awful. In general it's a good group - mostly normal and lots of hard workers. Bringing in the veterans didn't seem to help. When I looked at the moral section, most were just saying "doesn't handle losing well" and not complaining about other players. Nevertheless, it was the team chemistry with the "very unhappy" frowny face and not team record.

This got me curious so I went to commissioner mode and looked at the personality ratings and morale ratings. The thing that really stood out was that no one on my 25-man roster had an adaptability rating greater than 10 (on a 1-200 scale)! Further curious, I looked at the league as a whole. In general adaptability ratings are very low. Not as low as on my team, but I only found a handful of players with adaptability greater than 100. A large majority of players are under 20.

My question: is this a bug or a feature? I ask because it feels to me that the morale system has more of an effect on game results in this version than in 16. (could be just my particular young team though) But, I'm wondering if this might be due to a bug in generating the adaptability ratings. Or maybe the designers decided to increase the effects of morale and decided that lowering adaptability overall was a way to accomplish this. Or maybe it doesn't have much to do with anything at all. (by the way I'm the GM and manager - not sure what my ratings are - but the bench coach is conventional and normal)

Are others seeing the same thing? Is this different from 16 or have the adaptability ratings always been on the low side?

grmagne · 05-19-2016, 07:56 AM

You did a lot more research than I normally do. If I can't find the clubhouse cancer then I usually just fire the manager and hope for the best. Those death spirals are tough, though.

Bluenoser · 05-19-2016, 08:03 AM

Adaptability - 0 = perfect - 200 = very bad

For whatever reason, the numbers for those ratings work in reverse - the lower the #, the better they are at it.

Matt Arnold · 05-19-2016, 10:04 AM

No, higher adaptability is better, but that rating doesn't really come in to play too much.

Keep in mind that the chemistry stuff is a "bucket", so if you've added some veteran leadership, it won't immediately shift everyone into the happy camp. They basically have to build it up. But yeah, in general, losing sucks, and it will just take time to get people happy again.

Bluenoser · 05-19-2016, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

No, higher adaptability is better, but that rating doesn't really come in to play too much.

Keep in mind that the chemistry stuff is a "bucket", so if you've added some veteran leadership, it won't immediately shift everyone into the happy camp. They basically have to build it up. But yeah, in general, losing sucks, and it will just take time to get people happy again.

Ok, I was sure you had mentioned during Beta that a low number was good, bad old memory

Matt Arnold · 05-19-2016, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

Ok, I was sure you had mentioned during Beta that a low number was good, bad old memory

Some of them are "backwards" - controversy, maybe? I have to double check every time for each of them.

NoOne · 05-19-2016, 05:28 PM

Inverse Traits:

selfish
greed
controversy

and OP, don't attribute more to the situation than what it is... if you trust they are accurately rated, stick with them.

Cobby · 05-20-2016, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoOne

and OP, don't attribute more to the situation than what it is... if you trust they are accurately rated, stick with them.

Yep, sticking with them... The core group has returned, now a year older (and wiser?). I traded a couple more players with questionable personalities (no true cancers though). I signed another veteran free agent with strong leadership skills - he's not the most talented player in the world so he's now my mop-up reliever. I promoted another more effective reliever, also with strong leadership skills.

Now at mid-season, we're in second place, 3 1/2 games out, and the bench coach is reporting no problems in the clubhouse and telling me that we have a "fantastic leadership group" on the team. Smiley faces now for all 25 players. Yay!

MrBojangles · 05-20-2016, 01:26 AM

Good to hear about the turnaround for your team. Doesn't happen overnight, but it does happen.

jpeters1734 · 05-25-2016, 10:33 AM

It may be obvious, but what does adaptability do? Shouldn't there be higher ratings? If it does what I think it does, it should be called resilience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoOne

Inverse Traits:

selfish
greed
controversy

and OP, don't attribute more to the situation than what it is... if you trust they are accurately rated, stick with them.

You're saying that a 200 in greed and controversy means a very low rating? And what do you mean by selfish?

NoOne · 05-25-2016, 11:52 AM

yeah, those are the "backward" ones that matt arnold mentioned above. it could be done either way with equal ease, so we defintiely need the confirmation - which is in the forums in at least 2 different threads that i can remember off the top of my head. this is definitely one of those things you should only take the word of a ootp rep about.

i can only guess on adaptability, like you. i'd assume the dictionary definition applies, but i don't think a real solid answer has ever been given in the forums and definitely not in the manual. fyi, i have made no extra effort to look, and i have not read all threads in the entire forum to begin with.

i'd assume it's things like: effects of being traded, changing or playing out of position, how they act with other personality types of players and managers, etc etc. AND all relating back to overall morale (the bucket reference above), of course.

it's not something you'll ever make a dicisions soley on, but it is something that might require consideration along with other things... i've never really considered it much, to be honest. so, very little observation as to what it affects.

JaBurns · 05-25-2016, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

Some of them are "backwards" - controversy, maybe? I have to double check every time for each of them.

Could we get a list of the "backwards" traits so we are no chasing our tails?
Looks like controversy is one which makes sense lower number less controversial.
Or is it in the manual?

Anyone · 05-25-2016, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaBurns

Could we get a list of the "backwards" traits so we are no chasing our tails?
Looks like controversy is one which makes sense lower number less controversial.
Or is it in the manual?

Obviously, greed is a "backwards" one: One prefers a less greedy player, for obvious reasons.

Matt Arnold · 05-25-2016, 01:52 PM

And yeah, a lot of this talk about "backwards" ones are relative to what you want. So 200 greed is obviously more greedy than 0 greed, but most people would rather their players be less greedy.

Controversy I believe is set up so that high controversy = more likely to be involved in controversy. So a guy like Bautista would have a high controversy rating.

Pretty sure the rest of them are read fairly logically, so, for example, a high "handle critics" means that the player is very good at handling critics/criticism. How that impacts them on the whole, I don't think we need to reveal that, but they all essentially flow together to create the player's individual personality. Some of those ratings come into play more than others, as well, so I wouldn't necessarily read too much into most of them.

jpeters1734 · 05-25-2016, 01:54 PM

ok i get what you guys are saying about backwards. it's not actually backwards. a 200 in greed is very greedy. 200 in controversy is very controversial.

Edit: lol I was typing this as matt responded

jpeters1734 · 05-25-2016, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

And yeah, a lot of this talk about "backwards" ones are relative to what you want. So 200 greed is obviously more greedy than 0 greed, but most people would rather their players be less greedy.

Controversy I believe is set up so that high controversy = more likely to be involved in controversy. So a guy like Bautista would have a high controversy rating.

Pretty sure the rest of them are read fairly logically, so, for example, a high "handle critics" means that the player is very good at handling critics/criticism. How that impacts them on the whole, I don't think we need to reveal that, but they all essentially flow together to create the player's individual personality. Some of those ratings come into play more than others, as well, so I wouldn't necessarily read too much into most of them.

so what is adaptability?

NoOne · 05-25-2016, 02:32 PM

i misread. yeah, just that higher is worse for you = backward relative to all other personality traits.

just those 3.

05-19-2016, 12:08 AM	#1
Cobby Minors (Triple A) Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 252	Adaptability I just finished a disastrous season where my talented team got into a death spiral of bickering, poor morale and losing. I never could get to the bottom of it. It was a young team and when I got the first "bickering in the clubhouse" report I immediately traded for veteran leadership. I also looked at the personality reports and didn't find anyone awful. In general it's a good group - mostly normal and lots of hard workers. Bringing in the veterans didn't seem to help. When I looked at the moral section, most were just saying "doesn't handle losing well" and not complaining about other players. Nevertheless, it was the team chemistry with the "very unhappy" frowny face and not team record. This got me curious so I went to commissioner mode and looked at the personality ratings and morale ratings. The thing that really stood out was that no one on my 25-man roster had an adaptability rating greater than 10 (on a 1-200 scale)! Further curious, I looked at the league as a whole. In general adaptability ratings are very low. Not as low as on my team, but I only found a handful of players with adaptability greater than 100. A large majority of players are under 20. My question: is this a bug or a feature? I ask because it feels to me that the morale system has more of an effect on game results in this version than in 16. (could be just my particular young team though) But, I'm wondering if this might be due to a bug in generating the adaptability ratings. Or maybe the designers decided to increase the effects of morale and decided that lowering adaptability overall was a way to accomplish this. Or maybe it doesn't have much to do with anything at all. (by the way I'm the GM and manager - not sure what my ratings are - but the bench coach is conventional and normal) Are others seeing the same thing? Is this different from 16 or have the adaptability ratings always been on the low side?

05-19-2016, 07:56 AM	#2
grmagne Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: Toronto Posts: 271	You did a lot more research than I normally do. If I can't find the clubhouse cancer then I usually just fire the manager and hope for the best. Those death spirals are tough, though. Last edited by grmagne; 05-19-2016 at 07:58 AM.

05-19-2016, 05:28 PM	#7
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	Inverse Traits: selfish greed controversy and OP, don't attribute more to the situation than what it is... if you trust they are accurately rated, stick with them. Last edited by NoOne; 05-19-2016 at 05:29 PM.

05-25-2016, 11:52 AM	#11
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	yeah, those are the "backward" ones that matt arnold mentioned above. it could be done either way with equal ease, so we defintiely need the confirmation - which is in the forums in at least 2 different threads that i can remember off the top of my head. this is definitely one of those things you should only take the word of a ootp rep about. i can only guess on adaptability, like you. i'd assume the dictionary definition applies, but i don't think a real solid answer has ever been given in the forums and definitely not in the manual. fyi, i have made no extra effort to look, and i have not read all threads in the entire forum to begin with. i'd assume it's things like: effects of being traded, changing or playing out of position, how they act with other personality types of players and managers, etc etc. AND all relating back to overall morale (the bucket reference above), of course. it's not something you'll ever make a dicisions soley on, but it is something that might require consideration along with other things... i've never really considered it much, to be honest. so, very little observation as to what it affects. Last edited by NoOne; 05-25-2016 at 11:56 AM.

05-25-2016, 01:54 PM	#15
jpeters1734 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Juust a bit outside... Posts: 6,289	ok i get what you guys are saying about backwards. it's not actually backwards. a 200 in greed is very greedy. 200 in controversy is very controversial. Edit: lol I was typing this as matt responded __________________ "Cannonball Coming!" Go Bucs!! Founder and League Caretaker of the Professional Baseball Circuit, www.probaseballcircuit.com An Un-Official Guide to Minor League Management in OOTP 21 Ratings Scale Conversion Cross-Reference Cheat Sheet

05-19-2016, 08:03 AM	#3
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 14,483	Adaptability - 0 = perfect - 200 = very bad For whatever reason, the numbers for those ratings work in reverse - the lower the #, the better they are at it.

05-19-2016, 10:04 AM	#4
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 16,232	No, higher adaptability is better, but that rating doesn't really come in to play too much. Keep in mind that the chemistry stuff is a "bucket", so if you've added some veteran leadership, it won't immediately shift everyone into the happy camp. They basically have to build it up. But yeah, in general, losing sucks, and it will just take time to get people happy again.

05-20-2016, 01:26 AM	#9
MrBojangles All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: low and inside Posts: 568	Good to hear about the turnaround for your team. Doesn't happen overnight, but it does happen.

05-25-2016, 01:52 PM	#14
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 16,232	And yeah, a lot of this talk about "backwards" ones are relative to what you want. So 200 greed is obviously more greedy than 0 greed, but most people would rather their players be less greedy. Controversy I believe is set up so that high controversy = more likely to be involved in controversy. So a guy like Bautista would have a high controversy rating. Pretty sure the rest of them are read fairly logically, so, for example, a high "handle critics" means that the player is very good at handling critics/criticism. How that impacts them on the whole, I don't think we need to reveal that, but they all essentially flow together to create the player's individual personality. Some of those ratings come into play more than others, as well, so I wouldn't necessarily read too much into most of them.

05-25-2016, 02:32 PM	#17
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	i misread. yeah, just that higher is worse for you = backward relative to all other personality traits. just those 3.