Building a team chemistry model

Most sports management games handle chemistry through a hidden variable. There's a leadership attribute on a star, a morale meter somewhere, opaque rules adjusting numbers behind the scenes. The game tells you culture matters and then asks you to take its word for it.

I lived with this for a long time. Coaching high school tennis for the last several seasons reframed it for me. The good culture years versus the hard ones come down to specific players occupying specific roles in a locker room — the ones who set the standard, the ones who hold things together when the standard-setters push too hard, the ones whose presence quietly raises everyone's floor. The hard years usually trace back to a missing role, a player in the wrong slot, or a coach who couldn't read which kid needed which kind of attention.

Chemistry is a composition problem. Here's the design I'm building for Viperball.

Attributes that evolve

A player isn't a leader the way they're a left-handed pitcher. They become one over time, and they can stop being one. A young star plays his way into voice over three or four seasons. A former leader whose body has gone holds credibility or loses it depending on what comes next. A bench guy stays in the role tier his whole career, regardless of what kind of person he is.

So every player carries a chemistry profile with six attributes on a 25-95 scale, evolving over a career based on four inputs: playing time, situation, coaching, and how their performance matches the role they're being asked to fill.

The four stable attributes — the ones that move season to season:

Voice — the willingness and ability to set the team's standard publicly

Glue — the ability to absorb friction and keep teammates connected

Pull — how much weight a player's words and behavior carry, independent of voice

Reach — receptiveness to coaching; how much the coach can actually move them

Voice is what an alpha brings. Pull is what a beloved role player brings — the personality hire who's been with the team for eight years and everybody listens to. The young superstar everyone respects but who hasn't earned the right to lecture anyone yet has high voice ceiling and low current pull.

Glue is the load-bearing one. Glue is what allows voice to actually have influence. A team of three alphas with no glue runs hot and fractures the first time things go bad. A team with one alpha and strong glue distribution punches above its talent in adversity and develops young players faster.

The variable layer

Three more attributes move game to game. Each has a stable baseline, plus a current value shaped by what's happening today.

Drama — the locker-room friction this player is generating right now. Contract year plus a losing streak spikes drama. Winning streak plus a good role suppresses it.

Fit — how well current usage matches what the player does best. Recomputed every game.

Head — game-day mental state. Shaped by recent personal events, contract noise, media cycles. Multiplies whatever else the player is bringing.

This split lets the system have both a season-long arc and game-to-game texture. A drama baseline says who someone is most of the time. Drama today says what they're walking into the locker room with.

I went around on what to call the friction attribute before landing on drama. It's what actual coaches and broadcasters say. Some guys come with drama. The drama can be earned or unearned, contextual or chronic. A team can absorb a guy with high drama if the rest of the room is right. Two is a stretch. Four or five is structural dysfunction regardless of how good the coach is.

Permanent states

Some things in a career are sticky. Once earned, they're part of who the player is.

Franchise — the player who became a face of an organization. Major awards, championships, sustained elite production with one team. Capped at moderate drama even at their worst, amplifies the influence of players around them, and can't be cut without backlash.

Big stage — the player who won at the highest level on stacked rosters. You can be a big stage guy without being anyone's franchise; you've just proven you can play in a room full of stars without imploding. Rosters of big stage players soften the alpha saturation penalty.

Baggage — the inverse. Earned through repeated locker-room incidents, multiple teams in short order, public conflicts. Adds a permanent floor to drama. Partially recoverable under the right coach over multiple low-drama seasons.

These are flags. You either have them or you don't. They're earned through what happens.

The composition problem

Team chemistry is a distribution. Three things drive the math.

Voice saturation. A team can run two alphas productively. Past two, additional voices stop amplifying and start competing for the room. The yield curve rises with the first one or two and declines from there. Roster glue shifts the saturation point — high-glue rosters absorb a third alpha; low-glue rosters can't even absorb a second. Big stage flags soften the penalty because those players have already shared rooms with stars.

Glue dependency. Glue acts as a multiplier on the productive yield of voice and pull across the roster. With it, even modest voice profiles produce a coherent team identity. Without it, the alphas talk past each other.

Drama tolerance. The roster has a tolerance for drama derived from total glue plus the head coach's communication ability. One high-drama player on a high-tolerance roster is a non-event. Pull amplifies whatever a player carries — a high-pull, high-drama player is the worst case because they propagate. A high-pull, high-glue, low-drama player is the team stabilizer who lets a coach take chances elsewhere.

This is the puzzle. You're constructing a room.

The coach matters, archetype-first

The head coach has three sub-scores that combine into a coach rating: message (clarity of standards and feedback), standard (the coach's own credibility), and growth (ability to develop players).

The bigger lever is archetype. A players' coach manages drama through suppression and warmth — the best general fit for chemistry-driven team building. A disciplinarian manages drama through confrontation, which works when player talent justifies the friction and fails when high-drama players' talent doesn't match. A mentor accelerates young player development and prevents drama from forming in the first place.

Hiring a coach is a roster-fit decision. The disciplinarian who won a championship with one franchise can fail with a roster full of mismatched-talent high-drama players. The players' coach who built a great culture with a young roster can underperform with a room full of established big stage veterans who don't need the warmth.

There's a coach that fits this roster.

Spine

The full effect of chemistry should stay quiet in normal play. If your team is up by 20 against an inferior opponent, culture isn't doing much. The modifier sits around 5%.

The major lever is adversity. Trailing in the fourth quarter, on the road, after a key injury, after a turnover. Teams with strong glue, healthy voice distribution, and a franchise player playing through a tough moment have something to draw on. Teams with high drama and high tilt risk crumble.

The system models this with a resilience pool — spine — sized by team chemistry at game start and depleted through adversity moments. Late-game adversity hits harder than early-game adversity for everyone; high-spine teams hold the line where low-spine teams give it up.

What the coach sees

Everything is visible. The player card shows current values, drift direction, and innate ranges:

ALEX MORGAN | RB | Age 27 | Y4 with team
[FRANCHISE] [BIG STAGE]
─────────────────────────────────────────
Voice 78 ↑ rising (range: 60-85)
Glue 65 → stable (range: 45-75)
Pull 72 ↑ rising (range: 50-80)
Reach 70 → stable (range: 55-85)
Drama (base) 32 → stable (range: 25-55)
today 28
Fit 81 → stable
today 79
Head (today) 74

The team chemistry view shows the composition outputs: tone (voice yield after saturation), fabric (cohesion), drag (drama load), tilt risk, spine, pipeline (rising young players who could carry leader-tier weight).

If chemistry breaks, the coach can trace why. Your second-best alpha lost playing time, his drama spiked, your only high-glue veteran retired, and your new coach is a disciplinarian who doesn't fit the room you built. That's a problem you can solve.

The thing I'm trying to make true

A player who builds a great culture in this game should be doing something that maps to building a great culture in real life. Thinking about who's on the roster, who they are at this point in their careers, what each person needs to thrive, and which coach can actually lead the room you've assembled.

If the design works, succession planning becomes a real puzzle. You can see your franchise guy aging out and have to ask whether anyone in your pipeline can carry that weight in three years. You can see your roster has too many alphas and decide whether to trade one or hire a coach who can hold them together. You can take a chance on a baggage-flagged guy because you have the glue and the right coach to absorb him.

That's the game I want to play.