I have noticed that choosing the player bonuses for winning leagues, cups etc makes no difference at all to performance..
For example i could offer my squad the lowest bonuses for winning league etc, and they will still win every game...
I won the champions league, winning every game. However, in the league cup playing my strongest side I was beaten in the quarter finals by a championship side
Have other people noticed this?
Its coming up to the time when I need to offer my bonuses for the season, and i'm thinking of offering the minimum lowest amounts possible.
Do you think this will make me less likely to do well, and my players to perform as well?
At the moment i don't think this decision is even factored into the game, the decision is simply used to calculate how much you pay at the end of the season. It dosen't effect the players morale, dertermination, performance in big games etc
Thanks for your comments and thoughts guys
Alternatively, I have offered maximum bonuses for all competitions only to lose and play poorly.
I am talking about managing the same team.
Has anyone else noticed this? You might as well just offer your squad the minimum bonus for all competitions entered as this decision has no effect on the performance whatsoever.
I hace read that offering higher season bonuses for certain competitions makes you more likely to perform better. This is simply not true.
Simiarly, it dosen't work in priorotising which trophy you want to win most. I tried as an experiment to offer the minimum bonus for champions league, and the maximum bonus for the league cup