Tactical familiarity - Does 'Position/Role/Duty' familiarity do anything?

[ryandormer]

I'm currently playing Jesus as a DLF(S) in my tactic, but I have him training the attributes for CF(s). As such, his 'Position/Role/Duty' familiarity appears to be really bad. Does this actually make a difference in game? I haven't noticed him performing especially badly, but the game tells me that he is having a negative impact on tactical cohesion. 

Does anybody know if this is actually a problem, or if it can be safely ignored?

[Jack722]

I'm sure it affects your resutls negatively somehow, whether that's a one point difference or 15 - I honestly have no idea. 

Although personally for realism sake I put in a lot of effort to max it out. In real life there's no use having a great tactic if you don't coach your team to play it well and have everyone well drilled and knowing exactly what they need to do. Also I think the position/role/duty should be the most important of the familiarity bars. When I play footy or any other sport, It's quite easy for the team to slow down or speed up the tempo on demand without practice, based on the demands of the game and whatever your manager yells at you. Same with width. But being asked to change from being a static poacher up top all game to participating in buildup and linking up with teammates as a DLF will be a lot more difficult to build chemistry with your team and know when to drop / stay up, or hold up the ball / dribble if you've never played that way in training before. And also for your teammates, suddenly having different passing options, and perhaps fewer runs in behind. 

Not just roles but positions and therefore formation, defending in a back 5 would be different to a 4, with CB's in a 5 likely having to step up more and be more aggresive. These are things that take a lot of time for players to get used to playing with each other. This should really be worked on in training every week with position/role/duty training. I see lots of people do what you do and train people in roles that hit most attributes, but play them as something completely different in games. But what is going on there in theory is that your team does tactical sessions and match practice where strikers are told to roam about all over the place as Complete forwards while fullbacks are bombing forward with freedom as Complete wingbacks, only for in the pre-match briefing before the game, you say "oh and btw I actually want you to be a poacher and stick to your position, and I want you at fullback to stay deep and narrow to protect against the counter.. good luck"

Also I believe that role training has very little impact on player development. For example, training someone as a target man won't make them big and strong and good at heading and holdup play by itself. If you want your striker to improve their physicals and aerial play, you're better off using the general training sessions and inidividual focus. Do lots of strength/resistance sessions, attacking wide and attacking direct. 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Jack722

[CARRERA]

11 hours ago, ryandormer said:

Does anybody know if this is actually a problem, or if it can be safely ignored?

Yes, it matters. The player himself won’t be any worse, but the role will be carried out insufficiently and may be disconnected from the rest of the squad as they expect the player to move and position like role X.

However, it is just one of many aspects. If you really rate Training higher over the players effectiveness on the pitch you might get away with it. 

I personally like to train the role that is actually played by the player 

[phnompenhandy]

It's definitely the case that the game can rate a player unable to perform a certain role+duty, yet he has the attributes and if you play him in the inadvised role he does perfectly well. So if your eye test and results are saying there's no problem, there's no problem!

[drhay53]

From my own personal experience I would say it plays enough of a role that I always max it out. One tip; if you have a player you want to play multiple positions in your tactic you can usually rotate their training every two weeks and they'll be maxed or nearly so in the two different roles you rotate between.

[ryandormer]

That all makes a lot of sense, thanks guys. I changed the striker's training so that it matched his role, and he seemed to start performing much better. He was ok originally, but it looks like there's been a big improvement (unless it's coincidence, or just confirmation bias). I'll be looking to match the training to the role used in the tactic from now on

[mikcheck]

So, the only way to make that position/role/duty bar fluid (or at least not awkward) is to train the player with the same role he plays?

[CARRERA]

7 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

So, the only way to make that position/role/duty bar fluid (or at least not awkward) is to train the player with the same role he plays?

yes

[mikcheck]

7 horas atrás, CARRERA disse:

yes

Is it something that you do? And if you do it, is it only with the purpose of keep the bar out from awkard?

Edit: Sorry I've  already read that it's something you do yes, but what about the 2nd question?

Edited November 20, 2022 by mikcheck

[CARRERA]

27 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

And if you do it, is it only with the purpose of keep the bar out from awkard?

I think I explained it a few posts earlier. I do it with the purpose of better team cohesion and the player to carry out the role as expected.

[frukox]

On 15.11.2022 at 15:19, ryandormer said:

I'm currently playing Jesus as a DLF(S) in my tactic, but I have him training the attributes for CF(s). As such, his 'Position/Role/Duty' familiarity appears to be really bad. Does this actually make a difference in game? I haven't noticed him performing especially badly, but the game tells me that he is having a negative impact on tactical cohesion. 

Does anybody know if this is actually a problem, or if it can be safely ignored?

I personally totally ignore it but my training schedules are designed to max the rest of them and team cohesion out in the early months of the season which helps my team play more fluidly and do what I want from them better. So the results start to come earlier naturally especially if I have a good tactic:)

[b2khn]

The pos/rol/dut familiarity is only a small part of the tactical familiarity, what matters far more is the positional familiarity - Or let's frame it the other way, as long as a player knows the position and you don't change all the things, you can change his role and don't experience significant negative impact.

Changing up the training role every other week will make the bar go green, but it will also hinder attribute growth. And Attributes will ultmately be more important to player performance as a selected playing role.

You make this practical compromise, at the start of season, you will make the playing role and training role identical, until it is maxed out.

After it is maxed out you will change the training role to the most concentrated attribute growth role (like poacher, when training finishing) and disregard the little green bar for the rest of the season.