Originally posted by mark johnson:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The sugar daddy tick box makes a lot of difference.
I've ran a similar experiment. Created a new club and put them in the Conference North.
Add some knowledgeable (business) board members, no coaching staff and also added some goldie oldie player that didn't have a contract anywhere else to the playing roster. gave about 15 million in the bank and a decent portion of that for wages and transfers. This all based on the 7.0.2 database.
Ran this a few times on holiday mode on a quad G5 ppc. (The game seems to crash come jan 2028)
The only difference being that sugar daddy was ticked or wasn't ticked.
During the times that it wasn't ticked the club didn't get any higher than league 2, also the quality manager hired was not very good.
With sugar daddy ticked, the club got as far as the Championship with their stadium extended by 10.000 seats (from a 1000 with 100 seated), although this took about 12-13 years.
the quality of staff was much higher. This club with sugar daddy managed to obtain the services of Carlos Queiroz in the first season. This happened both times i ran this test.
So i would imagine if Kipfizh's experiment was run the same but with sugar daddy ticked (which he hadn't judging from his post on page 6)the Bandits would fare much better.
Bookmarks