I dunno man.
I do agree that some roles on players are super annoying. I've been using TOTY Roberto Carlos for a while now at LB, and have always been semi annoyed that he didn't have Fullback++. Don't get me wrong he's great on Wingback++, but with some formations I really just wanted to use him defensively. That was until recently when they released the FB++ evo. But anyway, while roles can be annoying I do think it's a better system than what they had previously.
It's EA's way of fixing a lot of in game balance issues. It was dumb in the old Fifa's that you could place a player in a position but then just move that player in game to a position they don't play but have them be good at it because of the chem and stats regardless of if that player actually knows what to do in that role. That makes no sense. It allowed for super annoying meta's. At least with roles it provides a sense of realism as to how that player plays IRL.
I get that Ronaldinho is a great player with amazing stats, but dude spent 95% of his career as a an attacking midfielder/left wing, why should EA let him play at Striker just because?
The old system was stupid anyway, needing players to connect for chem. It forced you, especially early game, for you to place players into bad positions just so you could get other players on chem, or to use a bad formation to get players on chem, to then have to go and manually change that formation to select in game, that you'd then have to switch to and wait for 10-15 in game minutes for players to sort their AI out. This system is far better and simpler.
Agree with what you are saying to some extent, Ronaldinho at ST is not really reallistic however he should be able to play inside forward LW/LM as it was one of his main role IRL, we shouldnt have to wait for an evo to use him that way, especially because we can only use this evo on one player only.
I think we can agree that forcing a player to play his position is fine (meaning if Ronaldinho has LW/CAM he can only play at his full potential there) but EA should let us use whatever role we want.
So going back to what I was complaining about, the middle ground could be to remove roles from player, it should only be a formation setting (just like "come back in defense" or "stay wide" in previous years) but a player has to stick to his position. That way we can still have some form a realism without being completely restricted by the roles that are attributed to a card.
I agree man 100%. These roles do complicate and limit you too much. I get why they put it in, but I don't think it's helpful. It eliminates you from playing potentially great cards because they're forcing you to use that card in a way that isn't ideal in game. Especially when they've made a game that is so meta forced it's almost impossible for 90% of the player base to not use the same tactics that everyone else is using.
I think by removing the role specific aspect from players, it'd actually free up the game to be more fluid and less meta based.
Good call bro.
