In class 2 potentials, the cross terms lead to a more convoluted optimization surface due to the cross terms. As such, the glyme parameters were trained independently. Details of the class 2 glyme training can be found in Supporting Information Section S1.4. These glyme parameters were then combined with TFSI covalent parameters reported by France-Lanord et al. The four compared IPs are a) FL, which is exactly the IP reported by France-Lanord IP MD as well, as seen in Supporting Information Section 4. Thus, force and energy parity with respect to DFT cannot be used to explain the performance of simulations using these IP parameterizations to compute solvation and kinetic properties, in agreement with prior literature. 32