Squad competition bonuses sometimes pointless?

As QPR, newly promoted to the Prem I'm expected to survive in the league. This is the statement I've confirmed to the board.

When you have to select squad competition bonuses which only appear to cover winning the league and the other for winning cup competitions, what is the point in selecting anything other than the max? I dont expect to win the league and as for a cup... highly unlikely but you never know. I didnt expect to in the Championship in my first season.

Why wouldnt I put both on max? Any negatives?

Ideally whoever implemented/designed this feature would have allowed for the bonuses to take into account the clubs aim for the season (in my case avoid relegation). I think it'd be more sensible paying out for that then setting a league win bonus... I know the league bonus is scaled, meaning the better they finish the more money they get but its a bit of a weak 'get out clause' in terms of the feature design. It'd work better if there was a bonus for club objective.

i think the squad payout takes into account your position at the end of the league or cup and adjust the payout to suit your final position

Bertliak is correct. The bonuses are paid out depending on the position you finish, but they are paid out.

For example, if you said 100k bonus for finishing first, you might pay out 95k for second, 90k for third, etc.

Same with a Cup bonus. You might pay out 100k for winning the competition, but 90k for runner-up, 80k for semifainalist, 70k for quarterfinalist, etc.

I think it probably depends on your aspirations for a season; as a relegation battler I always put "high" for the league position, because you want the lads motivated to avoid relegation.

Some countries have too many Cup competitions, and remember you're going to pay out that bonus for each (in other words, you'd pay out your 100k for winning the Charity Shield, just as you would for winning the F.A. Cup), so you might want Normal or even Low bonuses for Cups.

If you're not expecting to win the League, but might be able to sneak into Europe by winning a Cup competition, you might opt for Normal league bonus, but High Cup bonus, especially as an English club who is only in the League Cup and F.A. Cup.

I seem to remember, back when they first came in (08? 07?), someone from SI said that setting bonuses to max means players are more likely to become demoralised if they don't think they're going to get the bonus - eg being knocked out of a cup, or doing badly in the league. Not 100% certin on this though.

bertilak & Amaroq - Sorry, I buried this towards the end of the OP:

"... I know the league bonus is scaled, meaning the better they finish the more money they get but..."

PhroX - that would be interesting, that'd at least provide some reasoning (if only a little) for offering your squad differing levels of bonus.

I do know that if you offer low bonuses it will cause a few players to become upset for as long as 4-5 months. Happened to me and I will never lower my bonuses again unless i absolutely need to.

T4RG4 - yeah, sorry, only saw that after posting, and I thought I'd read your message carefully. Musta been decaff coffee this morning.

I was thinking a bit more along the line of varying "targets" per competition, maybe you pick the squad's target and its bonus for reaching that target, but it winds up sounding like a lot of micro-management to me when I type it out (e.g., as several paragraphs instead of one) so I don't think it contributes to "fun".

More worrisome to me is that the bonuses are so low that they rarely make a difference to me. For example, as York City in the Blue Square Premier, I think my bonus options were High (50k), Medium (40k), and Low (30k). Knowing that that's pro-rated for position .. the swing between low and high is fairly minimal. High isn't going to break the bank .. so why wouldn't I agree to it every year?

I have yet to see a Bonus set-up in which the financial assistance of achieving a high target doesn't outweigh the cost of the bonus .. the only decision I'm making is between Normal and High, and since there seems to be no downside to High .. it fails the design test of "Present the user with interesting decisions."

Amaroq - yes, there seems to be little decision making required here. I'm not saying it needs to be complicated (you're right to say is it worthwhile extending this area for fear of overcomplication) but it might work better if the options presented reflected your clubs situation.

i.e. if you havent got much money you'd be reminded. Offering a high bonus would cheer up the squad but bring some media and/or board attention?

An option to match your chosen objective (avoid relegation/mid-table/challenger/title etc.)

Thing is, it only needs to be worked through once a season, so it could be extended ever so slightly (or at the minimum, increased in scope to handle your clubs scenario).

Yes, I think you're right and that it is based on position.

Agreed, T4RG4.

My concern was just, I've been working in game development for years, so if my attempt at designing an improvement for an area fails out as "over-designed" twice in two attempts (Literally - have deleted such a response twice in this thread) then it isn't a trivial improvement.

Would you like a challenge?

Take a day, and design this feature out the way you'd want to see it.

Take into account:

- the Manchester Uniteds and Barcelonas of the world, for whom a League Cup is a "meaningless" runout for the youngsters.

- Celtic and Rangers, for whom third is unacceptable, but whose season is judged on Europe

- A club like Man City, whose ambition exceeds ability on the pitch

- A club like Bolton, who would love to qualify for Europe via F.A. Cup or League Cup

- Q.P.R., newly promoted to the Prem and battling relegation

- York City, struggling through another Blue Square Premier league

Then come back and post it.

If you can come up with a strong design, we can debate it and eventually ask SI to adopt it .. I'm not sure how to do it well but keep it simple enough for a new user.

- Celtic and Rangers, for whom third is unacceptable, but whose season is judged on Europe

Realistically 2nd is unacceptable!

Part of the problem 'in game' for me as Celtic is that in FM08 the board expected every domestic trophy and very little in Champions League, usually group stages etc. So I had to set all my bonuses to high as I HAD to win every domestic competition and also wanted to progress in Champions league.

In 09 it is pretty much the same, except the board see the League cup as unimportant. So again I need to set all bonuses to high as I need to win the league and the scottish cup and do as well as I can in europe.

Not sure on 09 yet, but in 08 I was paying out 700k more in bonuses than I earned for winning the league. Similar situation for League cup. Scottish Cup was the only competiton where the High bonus was less than the prize money. In fact even the normal league bonus was more than the 1st place prize.

Do you want a feature that's user-friendly, or a feature that's realistic?

In real-life a players' representative sits down with the club at the start of each season and agrees bonuses, fines etc.

Bonuses are arranged on the basis of where you finish in the league. So FM09 has it exactly right.

Effectively, if cups don't matter to your ambitions, set that bonus low.

If you're not aiming for anything more than mid-table, set the bonus to middling.