Team Chemistry versus Card Value...

[HRBaker]

To start, I love the Team Chemistry concept. It borders on complexity, but it's obvious it has an effect on team performance. I've spent the week playing with the process and have seen results if I increase chemistry.

That said, HOWEVER, there is a balance between team chemistry and card values. I have a team with 6 Perfect cards (2 LIVE) and their contribution to team chemistry is horrendous. I have to play them, however, because I don't have sufficient replacements in card value.

Thus, there seems to be a definite "balance" one has to be aware of. Too high chemistry and too low card value could also mean worse results - as will too high card value and too low chemistry. The problem comes in trying to find that sweet-spot without sacrificing a season to do it.

The more I think about it, it provides another angle to roster building and variance of roster lineups - which I'm sure was OOTP's intent - and it certainly appears to work.

PS: I still don't like the Combinators (in case you were wondering).

[Kushiel]

The Team Chemistry is a new thing that I find intriguing. I like new things added that actually offer something for everybody, not just the elites that are able to cruise control to 110-win seasons.

[daves]

Your question is valid. I purchased a highly rated NEL card with 0% chemistry. I had to resell later to get a better chemistry rating. Make me Leary of future NEL cards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LeeD]

Originally Posted by daves

Your question is valid. I purchased a highly rated NEL card with 0% chemistry. I had to resell later to get a better chemistry rating. Make me Leary of future NEL cards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dishnet said somewhere that they're aware of this problem and will do something about it...but what? The Negro Leagues couldn't be described as stable or well-structured (obviously not their fault and not for lack of trying), and a lot of their action involved putting together All-Star teams for barnstorming (unofficial and not well-documented). The players were also in different leagues in different countries, so team chemistry would not be an obvious 1-2-3 thing like year, team, and teammates.

edit to add: the best solution would be to hire or otherwise retain an expert on the Negro Leagues and players, but that would be an additional expense.

[daves]

So what is team chemistry? same team ? Same year or decade? Same state? Same type of card? What is the most important?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LeeD]

Long-term teammates is a huge boost. Griffey Jr. and Edgar are worth north of 400 chemistry points each when on the same roster. I have a Phillies theme team with all of the Whiz Kids running over 95 percent.

[Tinkerman]

I'm stubbornly ignoring chemistry in order to play whoever I want. What I see is RNG, same as ever. I've had some great seasons from zero chemistry players, and vice versa.

I wonder if what people are seeing as the affect of chemistry is actually more to do with the meta that is created by so many SEs being used?

[HRBaker]

Initially I thought there was a "significant" boost in performance due to chemistry, but after a few weeks now, I'm not so sure. I also think the rating is misleading because it suggests a 100% boost in performance at the upper end of the scale - what does that mean... your team is going to play twice as good?

In an option like this, the details of what chemistry is and what it does is sorely needed. Otherwise it's just guess.

[LeeD]

Originally Posted by HRBaker

Initially I thought there was a "significant" boost in performance due to chemistry, but after a few weeks now, I'm not so sure. I also think the rating is misleading because it suggests a 100% boost in performance at the upper end of the scale - what does that mean... your team is going to play twice as good?

In an option like this, the details of what chemistry is and what it does is sorely needed. Otherwise it's just guess.

It is just a guess, of course, but I'm seeing a definite boost to team record when running high-chemistry rosters. My San Diego Sharks are definitely not the best team in Diamond, but I made the playoffs six of seven times before dropping team chemistry by adding a bunch of low-chemistry pitchers last week.

My observation is that keeping team chemistry in the blue (75% or more) has definite benefits. Like everything else OOTP, it's a balancing act. You still want to choose the best roster, but given a choice between two or three players, one of whom is high chemistry, choose the high-chemistry player even if he's not the best of the bunch. Not to say you put Molitor or John Knight or Nicky Lopez on the active roster just because they're worth 250 or 350 chemistry points, but choose them over other Gold utility infielders who add zero or near-zero to team chemistry.