FM19 new player roles?

[goqs06]

What would be some suggestions for new player roles in FM19?

[kandersson]

The only new roles I'd really want are generic roles for AMR/L and STC positions.

[Cleon]

I honestly don't think they'll be any next year. If I was a betting man I'd put all my money on massive training changes based on all the coaches/managers they've been having in the offices lately.

But if there were changes to roles I wouldn't want new roles, instead I'd want some current ones refining.

There's far too many fullback/wingback roles that all do the same thing.

Carrilero should only be selectable when you don't use ML/R/AML/AMR's. This has already been feature requested. The reason why is simple, it's a role that is supposed to function in a system without wide players so doesn't make sense in its current form that you can select them.

Ball Playing defender should be renamed or reworked to actually be a centreback who plays the ball out from the back and build up play via him linking with the midfield. At the minute all the role is, is a centreback who tries to hit long through balls.

Sweeper/Libero should be able to be selected from the DC positions.

I could go on and name a lot more.

[zeus77]

Libero!

[Atarin]

I'd like to see the Travail de Bouteille introduced. Then we can finally get a tactical recreation of Arsene Wenger's Arsenal.

[craiigman]

14 minutes ago, Atarin said:

I'd like to see the Travail de Bouteille introduced. Then we can finally get a tactical recreation of Arsene Wenger's Arsenal.

A what now? Which player is one of those?

[goqs06]

17 minutes ago, Atarin said:

I'd like to see the Travail de Bouteille introduced. Then we can finally get a tactical recreation of Arsene Wenger's Arsenal.

What's that? 

[warlock]

39 minutes ago, Atarin said:

Travail de Bouteille

A phrase so obscure that Google has never heard of it?

[yonko]

3 hours ago, goqs06 said:

What would be some suggestions for new player roles in FM19?

I don't think we need new roles. 

3 hours ago, kandersson said:

The only new roles I'd really want are generic roles for AMR/L and STC positions.

AF and DLF are generic enough for STs.

What would those generic roles be called anyway?

2 hours ago, Cleon said:

I honestly don't think they'll be any next year. If I was a betting man I'd put all my money on massive training changes based on all the coaches/managers they've been having in the offices lately.

But if there were changes to roles I wouldn't want new roles, instead I'd want some current ones refining.

There's far too many fullback/wingback roles that all do the same thing.

Carrilero should only be selectable when you don't use ML/R/AML/AMR's. This has already been feature requested. The reason why is simple, it's a role that is supposed to function in a system without wide players so doesn't make sense in its current form that you can select them.

Ball Playing defender should be renamed or reworked to actually be a centreback who plays the ball out from the back and build up play via him linking with the midfield. At the minute all the role is, is a centreback who tries to hit long through balls.

Sweeper/Libero should be able to be selected from the DC positions.

I could go on and name a lot more.

I agree about refining some roles. Specifically the False 9 role. It shoots too much and it shouldn't move into channels IMO. It should be just a role that comes into midfield, links play and then surges into the box. 

Which fullback/wingback roles do the same thing? I think the variety is ok.

I agree about the Carrileros.

Ball Playing Defender should be Playmaking Defender. In addition to that, I think that Play Out Of Defense instruction should have an effect on the behavior of the GK, Defenders and Defensive Midfielders in terms of spreading out their shape and picking out their passes from the back.

 

[FlairRA]

3 minutes ago, yonko said:

AF and DLF are generic enough for STs.

AF has move into channels, DLF has hold the ball up and more risky passes. It would be nice to have a generic role that doesn't have limitations, ex. wanting to play an (A) role without move into channels but also without the limitations of a Poacher!

[yonko]

5 minutes ago, FlairRA said:

AF has move into channels, DLF has hold the ball up and more risky passes. It would be nice to have a generic role that doesn't have limitations, ex. wanting to play an (A) role without move into channels but also without the limitations of a Poacher!

What would this role be called and what would it do that other roles don't do already? Not every position needs a generic role.

[FlairRA]

Just now, yonko said:

What would this role be called and what would it do that other roles don't do already? Not every position needs a generic role.

I've got no idea what it would be called, that's not on up to me anyways. And I just described in my example what I feel it could do, it would be nice to have a simple customizable role like a CM(S) that you can can change how you want, without the limitations that some of the other roles have. it wouldn't make too much of a difference but would be nice nonetheless!

[Keyzer Soze]

To be honest I would like a AMR/L generic role, in the same way we have the CM. 

This would allow, for example to have a player to stay wide and to run wide with ball but without the PI to cross more. Or have a player to cut inside but without the make more risky passes PI. 

I have a question to @Cleonabout what he said about the carrillero role, and that should one be available for tactics that didn't have any player in the MR/L position. Do you think that the same should happen to the Mezzala role, in relation with tactics that have players in the AMR/L position? 

[kandersson]

@yonko it's very simple, I'd like to have generic roles for STC position for both supporting and attacking duties. AF without 'dribble more' and 'move into channels' PI for example would do, I'd still call that AF fwiw. I don't understand why a generic striker role should have those mandatory instructions, especially when other ST roles on 'attack' also have very specific instructions hardcoded (CF basically has every instruction, DLF holds up ball, P is not fully customizable).

 

[Atarin]

3 hours ago, craiigman said:

A what now? Which player is one of those?

 

2 hours ago, goqs06 said:

What's that? 

 

2 hours ago, warlock said:

A phrase so obscure that Google has never heard of it?

 

Here, let me help you.

Bouteille is French for Bottle and Travail is French for Job...

[Margent2]

4 minutes ago, Atarin said:

Here, let me help you.

Bouteille is French for Bottle and Travail is French for Job...

this would be hilarious but as a spurs fan i reckon you should google irony instead.

[Tyrinko]

1 hour ago, Atarin said:

 

 

 

Here, let me help you.

Bouteille is French for Bottle and Travail is French for Job...

So the position is "water carrier"?? Isn't it something like Anchor man which is introduced??

[wkdsoul]

Peps sitting inside fullbacks was my first though.  sitting narrow wing backs just doesn't really do it justice.  

[TheJanitor]

6 hours ago, Cleon said:

I honestly don't think they'll be any next year. If I was a betting man I'd put all my money on massive training changes based on all the coaches/managers they've been having in the offices lately.

But if there were changes to roles I wouldn't want new roles, instead I'd want some current ones refining.

There's far too many fullback/wingback roles that all do the same thing.

Carrilero should only be selectable when you don't use ML/R/AML/AMR's. This has already been feature requested. The reason why is simple, it's a role that is supposed to function in a system without wide players so doesn't make sense in its current form that you can select them.

Ball Playing defender should be renamed or reworked to actually be a centreback who plays the ball out from the back and build up play via him linking with the midfield. At the minute all the role is, is a centreback who tries to hit long through balls.

Sweeper/Libero should be able to be selected from the DC positions.

I could go on and name a lot more.

Agree with everything bar the bold part. Isn't the thing that seperate the BPD from the standard CD is the fact that he is given a license to take risiker passes? If you want a central defender who builds up play from the back then you just need the right combination of attributes, PPMs and instructions - both for the player and the team - playing the CD role.

Which is why I feel like there are way too many roles and if anything, I hope some will be removed. A role like Inverted Wing Back or Mezzala, that is coded to behave in a very specific function, or the various Playmaker/Target Man roles that attract the ball are fundemental, but I feel like the players themselves and the team instructions should drive how certain roles should play.

I do agree that a Libero role from CD would be amazing. How do you see the Sweeper role performing differently from CD cover though?

Oh, and Automatic duties should have been removed like 6 years ago.

[juusal]

New roles? They are missing so many basic behaviours of players they need to fix first. I'll just list a few things:

- Mentioned already by @Cleon, a ball playing center back who does't try to pass it long, instead looks to play passes in between the lines, trying to find strikers and advanced midfielders with passes along the ground.

- Center backs should be given the option to step into the midfield with or without the ball. There is a PPM for the former but training that PPM is incredibly hard (I have not managed to train that to any of my players so far, I guess you need an extremely good player for that which should not be that strict of a requirement), and no other way of doing this, but the latter is non existent. especially in three man defences I would like my outside center backs to take a step forward and be available for a pass. Center backs just stay out of the game all the time. Neither can I get the central center back to drop deeper when your team has the ball, instead they tend to stay in one line.

- Center backs covering wide areas. Why cannot we instruct our center backs to position themselves wider, especially when fullbacks are high up the pitch, or when you are playing a three man defence and would like your wingbacks to close down aggressively. Generally speaking, there are waaay too few ways to actually control how your players position when defending and these options should not be that hard to add to the game. Now our players position in a way that SI thinks they should position, but I'm the manager and I'm taken away the possibility to affect one of the most tactical aspects of the game.

- Sweeper keepers are still way too passive, they should be ready to come off their line quicker and position themselves a bit higher. I'd say that sweeper keepers don't even sweep as much as the more traditional goalkeepers in real life.

- Attacking duties on wide players (AML/R and MR/L) always defend wide, while support duties come inside. Why can't I have a player who makes aggressive forward runs and stretches the play on the ball and off the ball comes inside to squeeze the space? Basic footballing concept that is again not possible in FM. Having get further forward on an inside forward on support does not really do the trick for example.

- Closing down. The whole closing down system is badly implemented. I'd like to concentrate on the off the ball positioning of my players but we have very few tools for this (and the ones we have affect everything else in the game as well). Instead, I often see fullbacks leaving their position and man to close down opposition fullback, leaving their winger or STCR/CL wide open out wide, leaving your whole defence exposed. And the fullback doesn't even close down trying to cut down the passing lane, just directly runs at the player! This happens in other parts of the pitch as well, but the FB position is the worst.

Pretty sure I have so many more but just can't remember them. Generally speaking, there are so many roles and options for attacking players and attacking movement, and the defensive aspect is minimal and the way defenders, especially center backs work is just abysmal. 

 

edit. Oh and I find all this especially ridiculous considering that we have roles like inverted wingback even though there is basically one manager who ever uses these the same way as they work in FM and even then only sporadically. Fullbacks coming a bit inside, or going for the underlap is not that uncommon, but even Bielsa's wingbacks work more this way rather than being inverted wingbacks who basically become midfielders. That is not to say that having the role is bad, although there are problems with it (for example, I don't think they should already start in midfield positions from goal kicks), but as there are so many basics lacking in the game they should fix those first and leave this fanciness for later.

[blackdevil]

I'd like the generic roles that would allow us to customise the instructions like the CMs does.  For the wide AM's they could be called "wide forwards" and center forward it could be called "center forward".

More choice is always nice.  In that vein I'd actually prefer to get rid of roles and just have the position with def/sup/att options to effect mentality and allow player instructions to modify their behaviour.  Obviously the available instructions would need to be improved to allow us to tailor the behaviour for all aspects of play.

[yonko]

7 hours ago, FlairRA said:

I've got no idea what it would be called, that's not on up to me anyways. And I just described in my example what I feel it could do, it would be nice to have a simple customizable role like a CM(S) that you can can change how you want, without the limitations that some of the other roles have. it wouldn't make too much of a difference but would be nice nonetheless!

 

6 hours ago, kandersson said:

@yonko it's very simple, I'd like to have generic roles for STC position for both supporting and attacking duties. AF without 'dribble more' and 'move into channels' PI for example would do, I'd still call that AF fwiw. I don't understand why a generic striker role should have those mandatory instructions, especially when other ST roles on 'attack' also have very specific instructions hardcoded (CF basically has every instruction, DLF holds up ball, P is not fully customizable).

 

I just don't see the need for it in the game. You can't even think of a name for the role, let alone what purpose it will serve. Like I said, not every position needs a vanilla role just because your want to customize everything.

[ajsr1982]

I'd like the Defensive Winger to be available in the AM R/L positions again. 

I'd also like six position slots across the pitch, rather than five, to enable this kind of thing: https://spielverlagerung.com/2015/12/06/the-3-6-1-a-logical-step/

 

[Jean0987654321]

1 hour ago, ajsr1982 said:

I'd like the Defensive Winger to be available in the AM R/L positions again. 

I'd also like six position slots across the pitch, rather than five, to enable this kind of thing: https://spielverlagerung.com/2015/12/06/the-3-6-1-a-logical-step/

 

All of that and the Tornate role in the game. Also, the option to tick "Move Into Channels" when you use a WM

[warlock]

Just a thought, but it seems like many of these ideas - good though they are - are overlooking one thing: the AI needs to be able to use them to the same effect as human managers. Many of them seem like straightforward requests, but programming an AI to take advantage to the same degree as a human manager is a much bigger task. To take just one example, a striker role with no preset instructions. Of course, this would be brilliant for human managers - it's almost infinitely customisable. But how do you program an AI to work with an infinitely-customisable role? How do you begin to allow for every possible combination of vertical position, horizontal position, moving into channels vs dropping deep, pass-seeking vs goal-seeking, and much more?

If you want the game to be challenging and realistic, you have to start with a game that, as much as possible, levels the playing field for humans and AI.

[Gegenklaus]

All I want is to be able to instruct my centerbacks to split - like almost all sides do - regardless of what type of fullbacks I use.

[goqs06]

13 hours ago, Cleon said:

Sweeper/Libero should be able to be selected from the DC positions.

I don't mind them being in the SW positions, however SI should add more players to be natural in those positions.

[goqs06]

6 hours ago, TheJanitor said:

Oh, and Automatic duties should have been removed like 6 years ago.

Why so?

[FlairRA]

3 hours ago, yonko said:

I just don't see the need for it in the game. You can't even think of a name for the role, let alone what purpose it will serve. Like I said, not every position needs a vanilla role just because your want to customize everything.

I'm not sure how naming a role has anything to do with it, but I suppose we could go for something like "Central Forward" as we've got Defensive Forward, Advanced Forward and DLF. And I've already said what purpose it would serve... read the previous posts. 

 

[FlairRA]

2 hours ago, warlock said:

Just a thought, but it seems like many of these ideas - good though they are - are overlooking one thing: the AI needs to be able to use them to the same effect as human managers. Many of them seem like straightforward requests, but programming an AI to take advantage to the same degree as a human manager is a much bigger task. To take just one example, a striker role with no preset instructions. Of course, this would be brilliant for human managers - it's almost infinitely customisable. But how do you program an AI to work with an infinitely-customisable role? How do you begin to allow for every possible combination of vertical position, horizontal position, moving into channels vs dropping deep, pass-seeking vs goal-seeking, and much more?

If you want the game to be challenging and realistic, you have to start with a game that, as much as possible, levels the playing field for humans and AI.

Well Central Midfielder's are also infinitely customizable and are already in the game, surely we could have that for ST position as well? I agree that more should be done to level the playing field though.

[yonko]

2 hours ago, FlairRA said:

I'm not sure how naming a role has anything to do with it, but I suppose we could go for something like "Central Forward" as we've got Defensive Forward, Advanced Forward and DLF. And I've already said what purpose it would serve... read the previous posts. 

 

Well SI will have to name something this new role, right? We have all these different roles because they all serve purpose and do specific jobs. We do not need vanilla role just because someone wants to customize it. How do you envision this role playing on the field within the ME? What duty will it be?

[FlairRA]

18 minutes ago, yonko said:

Well SI will have to name something this new role, right? We have all these different roles because they all serve purpose and do specific jobs. We do not need vanilla role just because someone wants to customize it. How do you envision this role playing on the field within the ME? What duty will it be?

I feel as if it would work like a Central Midfielder role does, but as a striker, call it a Central Striker/Forward? If I have a player who loves to dribble but isn't the best at picking out a pass or being creative in general, and I want him to stay central without moving out to the flanks, this role could come in handy. A DLF won't work because it holds up ball, F9 picks out risky passes, and a Poacher doesn't have the 'Dribble More' option, plus I may want him to be on a (S) duty. It's useful to customize the role just like you can customize the CM to suit the player like my example, if it works for a CM I don't see why it won't work up front. Great debate! 

[Cleon]

10 hours ago, TheJanitor said:

Agree with everything bar the bold part. Isn't the thing that seperate the BPD from the standard CD is the fact that he is given a license to take risiker passes? If you want a central defender who builds up play from the back then you just need the right combination of attributes, PPMs and instructions - both for the player and the team - playing the CD role.

Which is why I feel like there are way too many roles and if anything, I hope some will be removed. A role like Inverted Wing Back or Mezzala, that is coded to behave in a very specific function, or the various Playmaker/Target Man roles that attract the ball are fundemental, but I feel like the players themselves and the team instructions should drive how certain roles should play.

I do agree that a Libero role from CD would be amazing. How do you see the Sweeper role performing differently from CD cover though?

Oh, and Automatic duties should have been removed like 6 years ago.

I know how you can manipulate the game via PPM's and instructions to give us behaviour we need, I've wrote hundreds of guides on the subject over the years. However I feel you miss the point. Just because you can get behaviour via those methods doesn't mean it's right or perfect. If we follow your logic, we can apply this for every single role, so why even have a variety of roles? Also the PPM's needed to make him a true ball player was only added this year. The brings ball out of defence PPM shouldn't be a PPM, it should be a tactical instructions. However you can't achieve a proper ball playing defender with a combination of PPM's, instructions and the right player. As some of the PPM's needed are restricted because they don't work in the areas the player plays in.

No-one and I mean absolutely no-one thinks of a ball playing defender as someone who hits the ball long constantly. You only have to look at the hundreds of threads on this forum to see that people see the name ball playing defender and then immediately think it does something it doesn't, it's misleading and is the role that causes the most issues due to this.

If you want a defender to hit risky passes then this should be an option for the CD role and not be a role on its own like it is now. A proper ball playing defender is needed and judging by all the feature request for one over the past 3 years, I think the majority of people agree.

 

Quote

I have a question to @Cleonabout what he said about the carrillero role, and that should one be available for tactics that didn't have any player in the MR/L position. Do you think that the same should happen to the Mezzala role, in relation with tactics that have players in the AMR/L position? 

No as that does work. However carrilero role only exists because its a role that is supposed to work due to not having wide players both in the real world and the game. So doesn't make any sense whatsoever to be available with wide players currently. It makes the role behave incorrectly, which defeats the purpose of the role in the first place.

Quote

 Also, the option to tick "Move Into Channels" when you use a WM

imo moves into channels should only be selectable for central players and not on wide players at all. It makes no sense as the wide players are already in the channel/close to channels. The role you use should determine how narrow the player plays automatically. It shouldn't be an option the user has to make.

Quote

I don't mind them being in the SW positions, however SI should add more players to be natural in those positions.

It's outdated. Teams irl use sweepers in a 2 man defence. There is no benefit at all from SI keeping them at the SW position. 

Quote

Just a thought, but it seems like many of these ideas - good though they are - are overlooking one thing: the AI needs to be able to use them to the same effect as human managers. Many of them seem like straightforward requests, but programming an AI to take advantage to the same degree as a human manager is a much bigger task. To take just one example, a striker role with no preset instructions. Of course, this would be brilliant for human managers - it's almost infinitely customisable. But how do you program an AI to work with an infinitely-customisable role? How do you begin to allow for every possible combination of vertical position, horizontal position, moving into channels vs dropping deep, pass-seeking vs goal-seeking, and much more?

If you want the game to be challenging and realistic, you have to start with a game that, as much as possible, levels the playing field for humans and AI.

This already happens though, so not sure the point you're trying to make?

[yonko]

1 hour ago, FlairRA said:

I feel as if it would work like a Central Midfielder role does, but as a striker, call it a Central Striker/Forward? If I have a player who loves to dribble but isn't the best at picking out a pass or being creative in general, and I want him to stay central without moving out to the flanks, this role could come in handy. A DLF won't work because it holds up ball, F9 picks out risky passes, and a Poacher doesn't have the 'Dribble More' option, plus I may want him to be on a (S) duty. It's useful to customize the role just like you can customize the CM to suit the player like my example, if it works for a CM I don't see why it won't work up front. Great debate! 

If you have a player who loves to dribble (I will assume he has Runs with ball often PPM), he will do that no matter the role. Why would Hold the Ball up on the DLF interfere with dribbling? He's dribbling and holding the ball anyway.

I understand that you want the customization part but I just don't see how it will play out on the field and what it would add compared to the other roles we already have.

[FlairRA]

4 minutes ago, yonko said:

If you have a player who loves to dribble (I will assume he has Runs with ball often PPM), he will do that no matter the role. Why would Hold the Ball up on the DLF interfere with dribbling? He's dribbling and holding the ball anyway.

I understand that you want the customization part but I just don't see how it will play out on the field and what it would add compared to the other roles we already have.

Hold the Ball up, imo, would be dropping deep, keeping the ball and waiting for onrushing midfielders/wingers to pass to, I believe? I'd prefer for him to immediately, when he gets the ball start running at the defense (with a high dribbling stat, not the PPM), like an F9 but with an (A) duty. I'm not completely sure how it would play out, but we have a WM role out wide and a CM role in midfield, so I felt that it would be useful for adding minor adjustments to suit the player!

[Jean0987654321]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

I know how you can manipulate the game via PPM's and instructions to give us behaviour we need, I've wrote hundreds of guides on the subject over the years. However I feel you miss the point. Just because you can get behaviour via those methods doesn't mean it's right or perfect. If we follow your logic, we can apply this for every single role, so why even have a variety of roles? Also the PPM's needed to make him a true ball player was only added this year. The brings ball out of defence PPM shouldn't be a PPM, it should be a tactical instructions. However you can't achieve a proper ball playing defender with a combination of PPM's, instructions and the right player. As some of the PPM's needed are restricted because they don't work in the areas the player plays in.

No-one and I mean absolutely no-one thinks of a ball playing defender as someone who hits the ball long constantly. You only have to look at the hundreds of threads on this forum to see that people see the name ball playing defender and then immediately think it does something it doesn't, it's misleading and is the role that causes the most issues due to this.

If you want a defender to hit risky passes then this should be an option for the CD role and not be a role on its own like it is now. A proper ball playing defender is needed and judging by all the feature request for one over the past 3 years, I think the majority of people agree.

 

No as that does work. However carrilero role only exists because its a role that is supposed to work due to not having wide players both in the real world and the game. So doesn't make any sense whatsoever to be available with wide players currently. It makes the role behave incorrectly, which defeats the purpose of the role in the first place.

imo moves into channels should only be selectable for central players and not on wide players at all. It makes no sense as the wide players are already in the channel/close to channels. The role you use should determine how narrow the player plays automatically. It shouldn't be an option the user has to make.

It's outdated. Teams irl use sweepers in a 2 man defence. There is no benefit at all from SI keeping them at the SW position. 

This already happens though, so not sure the point you're trying to make?

May I introduce you to Thomas Mueller or Cristiano Ronaldo?

I just want to have a Raumdeuter that tracks back a lot without hoping and praying he learns the PPM.

[Cleon]

54 minutes ago, Jean0987654321 said:

May I introduce you to Thomas Mueller or Cristiano Ronaldo?

I just want to have a Raumdeuter that tracks back a lot without hoping and praying he learns the PPM.

It’s all good and well mentioning names but don’t neglect the fact that they start in the channels to begin with majority of the time. None of what they do is down to moving into channel though. The role they’ve been tasked/players skill set  is the reason, hence why the role you select on Fm should determine exactly what someone does. 

This is why any new roles added to the game should only be added if they have specific behaviours and aren’t just existing roles with different settings. Roles need to be more unique and come with certain behaviours like the half back, segundo volante etc.

And moving into channels has zero to do with how someone tracks back.

[Jean0987654321]

31 minutes ago, Cleon said:

It’s all good and well mentioning names but don’t neglect the fact that they start in the channels to begin with majority of the time. None of what they do is down to moving into channel though. The role they’ve been tasked/players skill set  is the reason, hence why the role you select on Fm should determine exactly what someone does. 

This is why any new roles added to the game should only be added if they have specific behaviours and aren’t just existing roles with different settings. Roles need to be more unique and come with certain behaviours like the half back, segundo volante etc.

And moving into channels has zero to do with how someone tracks back.

No, no, no. I just want to recreate the Raumdeuter role for the midfield strata. The role is too far forward for my liking...

[kandersson]

11 hours ago, yonko said:

 

I just don't see the need for it in the game. You can't even think of a name for the role, let alone what purpose it will serve. Like I said, not every position needs a vanilla role just because your want to customize everything.

Oh I could think of a gazillion of names for the role, maybe something italian or spanish like 'Prima Punta' or 'Centrodelantero' to keep up with SI recent tendency. But seriously, it should just be the 'Advanced Forward' (already a generic role) without the 'dribble more' instruction. I might understand (though I'd disagree) to keep the mandatory 'move into channels' PI, but 'dribble more' hardcoded for this generic role makes no sense in my opinion.

[TheJanitor]

@Cleon never ment to "educate" you on the game, trust me I know better than that . Just wanted to get my point across, that I feel like the BPD is just a capable defender who is given license to make riskier passes when needed, rather than hoof it long everytime. Building from the back should be a matter of team instruction, rather than role.

@goqs06 what is the point of them? They are very rarely used, and could cause unbalance if you change mentality during the game. I don't feel like they serve any purpose tbh.

[Jyuan83]

I agree with @blackdevil about generic wide am being called wide forwards and generic strikers termed as centre forwards. It allows for more creativity in designing tactics without the need for roles that sound like pasta dishes like mezzala or carrilero although on a personal note, i do love the unique player roles like a true FM hipster. Regarding moving into channels i believe there is a misunderstanding on exactly what it actually means. From as far back as i believe FM11? People have been talking about moving into channels. I think what jean is trying to replicate is the tendency of ronaldo and muller to move into space between defenders to latch onto passes to score goals. Cleon was explaining that moving into channels is basically moving into wider areas which they already are in if they are in the MLR or AMLR spectrum, so there is little value in them being asked to move out wide. The raumdeuter role starts out narrow before moving out wide to look for space. So in a way it is the opposite of an IF which starts wide then comes narrow via cutting inside. So if you wish to make a wm become a raumdeuter then just roam with sit narrower should suffice or with run wide with ball.

[kingjericho]

I'd like to see the Defensive Winger back in the AMR/L slot. The logic of it can be the same as a Defensive Forward, as it used to be in previous years. I don't know why it has been removed because it fitted lots of players back in the day, e.g. Kuyt, Camoranesi, Mandzukic.

[dannysheard]

How about:

 - 'Donkey' for players like Lukaku

 - 'Mercenary' for Sanchez

 - 'Diver' for the entire Spurs front-line

[goqs06]

25 minutes ago, kingjericho said:

I'd like to see the Defensive Winger back in the AMR/L slot. The logic of it can be the same as a Defensive Forward, as it used to be in previous years. I don't know why it has been removed because it fitted lots of players back in the day, e.g. Kuyt, Camoranesi, Mandzukic.

Its a bit like Eto'o acting as a DW when defending, then returning to the striker berth when attacking during the 09/10 Inter season. That's something I'd like to see.

[Atarin]

1 hour ago, dannysheard said:

How about:

 - 'Donkey' for players like Lukaku

 - 'Mercenary' for Sanchez

 - 'Diver' for the entire Spurs front-line

Bit harsh on Kane, Son & Ericksen. Dele & Lamela I'll grant you.

Which potent frontline wasn't adept at diving though?

[Rashidi]

I think we are at least 2 generations away from new roles. I want to see AI managers use these existing roles more effectively and I want to see more options on how we can use our keepers.

Strategies on how we use our keepers to draw teams out aren’t in the game at the moment and making them work consistently is impossible. Basically I want to use my keeper the way Pep uses his.

I also think that the way researchers input is used to draw up tactical systems needs a revisit.  The average user has too many options in the game and that makes the initial learning curve very hard to manage. With all the clicking that we need to do now just to find information, this becomes even harder.

People still can’t tell the difference between a good chance and a poor chance. I just saw a screenshot from someone who was complaining about poor finishing. We had to point out that the player was facing away from goal when he took the shot, which made it a difficult attempt. So what seemed like an easy chance quickly became a technically challenging one. 

Right now a lot of people choose roles and duties poorly. If you want to drill in crosses why pick an IF?  If you create a tactic that has no width in attack, it could be down to poor role choices.

Sometimes I think people think the solution is a new role, the problem is this game has too many roles that do nearly the same thing. The slight differences are actually major swings that people fail to understand. For example, say you pick a FB over a WB in a 442, you may be ok defensively, then you change to a WB suddenly your tactic falls apart, that’s cos the WB is more likely to favour attacking transitions than defensive lines. People then complain that they are all over the place defensively, it’s the role!

Right now there are two exploitative roles in the game. And there are ways we can exploit roles further with PPMs. I feel new roles should not be introduced till the AI has caught up. And that means improving how the researchers data gets used in making tactical systems for the AI.  I think that will be the major goal moving forward and improving AI management of the players in the game.

[goqs06]

46 minutes ago, Atarin said:

Bit harsh on Kane, Son & Ericksen. Dele & Lamela I'll grant you.

Which potent frontline wasn't adept at diving though?

Well Messi is quite clean, haven't seen him dive b4....

[craiigman]

33 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

I think we are at least 2 generations away from new roles. I want to see AI managers use these existing roles more effectively and I want to see more options on how we can use our keepers.

Strategies on how we use our keepers to draw teams out aren’t in the game at the moment and making them work consistently is impossible. Basically I want to use my keeper the way Pep uses his.

I also think that the way researchers input is used to draw up tactical systems needs a revisit.  The average user has too many options in the game and that makes the initial learning curve very hard to manage. With all the clicking that we need to do now just to find information, this becomes even harder.

People still can’t tell the difference between a good chance and a poor chance. I just saw a screenshot from someone who was complaining about poor finishing. We had to point out that the player was facing away from goal when he took the shot, which made it a difficult attempt. So what seemed like an easy chance quickly became a technically challenging one. 

Right now a lot of people choose roles and duties poorly. If you want to drill in crosses why pick an IF?  If you create a tactic that has no width in attack, it could be down to poor role choices.

Sometimes I think people think the solution is a new role, the problem is this game has too many roles that do nearly the same thing. The slight differences are actually major swings that people fail to understand. For example, say you pick a FB over a WB in a 442, you may be ok defensively, then you change to a WB suddenly your tactic falls apart, that’s cos the WB is more likely to favour attacking transitions than defensive lines. People then complain that they are all over the place defensively, it’s the role!

Right now there are two exploitative roles in the game. And there are ways we can exploit roles further with PPMs. I feel new roles should not be introduced till the AI has caught up. And that means improving how the researchers data gets used in making tactical systems for the AI.  I think that will be the major goal moving forward and improving AI management of the players in the game.

Which roles are the exploits?

[FlairRA]

5 hours ago, goqs06 said:

Well Messi is quite clean, haven't seen him dive b4....

He is pretty clean, not perfectly clean though 

[yonko]

17 hours ago, FlairRA said:

Hold the Ball up, imo, would be dropping deep, keeping the ball and waiting for onrushing midfielders/wingers to pass to, I believe? I'd prefer for him to immediately, when he gets the ball start running at the defense (with a high dribbling stat, not the PPM), like an F9 but with an (A) duty. I'm not completely sure how it would play out, but we have a WM role out wide and a CM role in midfield, so I felt that it would be useful for adding minor adjustments to suit the player!

Just like I thought. You're not sure how it will play out on the field/in the ME but you want the customization. That's not enough reason, for me. Neither is the fact that we have WM and CM vanilla roles. We do not need vanilla ST role because strikers are different than midfielders.

13 hours ago, kandersson said:

Oh I could think of a gazillion of names for the role, maybe something italian or spanish like 'Prima Punta' or 'Centrodelantero' to keep up with SI recent tendency. But seriously, it should just be the 'Advanced Forward' (already a generic role) without the 'dribble more' instruction. I might understand (though I'd disagree) to keep the mandatory 'move into channels' PI, but 'dribble more' hardcoded for this generic role makes no sense in my opinion.

So basically instead of a new role, SI can just tune the AF differently and there you go. See, no need for new role. Just refine the ones we have. SI should remove some preselected instructions from the AF (dribble more, move into channels) and DLF roles (Hold the Ball, More Risky Passes), then users like you should be happy.