Question about staff cohesion, trainers and scouts

[jpeters1734]

I'm very confused how this works.

Why do trainers and scouting directors count all staff personalities in their positive and negative traits, but their own personality doesn't seem to factor into anyone else's traits?

For example, in the attached screenshot, my team trainer and scouting director interact with others (e.g., 'personable' being a positive or negative), but their personalities are excluded when considering who works well or struggles with them. Is this intentional or a bug? If intentional, what’s the reasoning behind this mechanic?

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

I'm very confused how this works.

Why do trainers and scouting directors count all staff personalities in their positive and negative traits, but their own personality doesn't seem to factor into anyone else's traits?

For example, in the attached screenshot, my team trainer and scouting director interact with others (e.g., 'personable' being a positive or negative), but their personalities are excluded when considering who works well or struggles with them. Is this intentional or a bug? If intentional, what’s the reasoning behind this mechanic?

My only guess on this is, the others work with each other on a daily basis each and every day where the scout is off doing his job most of the time, and the team trainer mainly deals with players on a consistent basis? So, where all of the coaching staff step on each others feet constantly, the scout and trainer don't?

That's the only way I can imagine it making sense?

[eauhomme]

I'm curious about the impact in general. I've got the 2025 White Sox playing .600 ball, team chemistry 100% positive, ecstatic cohesion (maxed out), and staff cohesion "unhappy," at about 30% on the bar.

Why is my staff pissed off, and does it matter that they are?

[Vezna31]

I was always wondering why some coaches with a reputation rated as Ok actually had great teaching abilities in many categories.

So, after re-doing my coaching staff from watching a YouTube video on how to focus on coaching, I was still miffed why I didn't really see any improvement in my team over a couple of seasons. I noticed my owner kept mentioning staff cohesion, which I never focused on before, so I decided to take on the task of improving it. I got it to where only my Team trainer did not work well with the 1B Coach. Everything else was a zero or positive relationship. I was 39-38, 13 GB, right before the All-Star break when i made all the changes, and went 53-24 in the 2nd half, including winning the last 6 regular season games in a row and winning the division by 1 game. I took the LCS 3-1 and the World Series 4-2. It was pretty epic, so I felt the coaching changes made a difference.

[twins_34]

Coach Rep, from my experience, does not matter. It's just a good chance they may have been on a good team with winning records or it is just random. But I have never seen or noticed that their rep makes a difference.

Coach Cohesion matters because there is an actual setting in settings that can make it impact more or less. Good coach cohesion makes players play better when the staff gets along. I found that out in an online league where I had a team of average players that ended up winning the World Series with an ecstatic coaching staff.

In the screenshot, there is a section that says Personality, Works well with, and struggles with. If you look in the screenshot below, you wanna see numbers in your "Works well with" as in Normal (3) is good, you do not want to see Normal (4) in the "Struggles with" because that means there are conflicts and your Staff cohesion will tank.

Player relationships, now... I am not sure how much impact this has on the team, but I do try and find guys that get along with my players.

Now under Team drop down menu > Team Home Page > Team Chemistry the more people you have in the Captain, Leader, Sparkplug, and Prankster roles, the better. Less in outspoken, disruptive, etc the better.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by twins_34

Coach Rep, from my experience, does not matter. It's just a good chance they may have been on a good team with winning records or it is just random. But I have never seen or noticed that their rep makes a difference.

Coach Cohesion matters because there is an actual setting in settings that can make it impact more or less. Good coach cohesion makes players play better when the staff gets along. I found that out in an online league where I had a team of average players that ended up winning the World Series with an ecstatic coaching staff.

In the screenshot, there is a section that says Personality, Works well with, and struggles with. If you look in the screenshot below, you wanna see numbers in your "Works well with" as in Normal (3) is good, you do not want to see Normal (4) in the "Struggles with" because that means there are conflicts and your Staff cohesion will tank.

Player relationships, now... I am not sure how much impact this has on the team, but I do try and find guys that get along with my players.

Now under Team drop down menu > Team Home Page > Team Chemistry the more people you have in the Captain, Leader, Sparkplug, and Prankster roles, the better. Less in outspoken, disruptive, etc the better.

I think we’re drifting a bit off-topic here. My question wasn’t about overall staff cohesion or how coach reputation impacts performance. It was specifically about why trainers and scouting directors interact with other staff but don’t seem to have their own personalities factored in when determining who they work well or struggle with.

I’m trying to figure out if this is an intentional mechanic or just an oversight in the game design. Do you have any specific insight on that or are we just guessing?

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

I think we’re drifting a bit off-topic here. My question wasn’t about overall staff cohesion or how coach reputation impacts performance. It was specifically about why trainers and scouting directors interact with other staff but don’t seem to have their own personalities factored in when determining who they work well or struggle with.

I’m trying to figure out if this is an intentional mechanic or just an oversight in the game design. Do you have any specific insight on that or are we just guessing?

My last post was not answering you, I did that in my first post.

I was answering the past 2 posts with my last post.

Ever since I started playing, to answer your question in a bit more detail, scouts and trainers never affected the top 3 guys and then when they introduced the base coaches, they didn't have an affect on them either.

This has been around since I started in 21. So, I would say yes. It is intended since it has never been changed in the past 4 versions.