Similar roles

[Henearkrxe]

Hi everybody,
I had a question on building tactics: how do you choose between two similar roles. For example, how do you choose between a DLP and a regista ? Or between a full back / attack and a wing back / support ? Or again between a wing back / attack and a complete wing back / support ?

 

[WJ]

Hi everybody,
I had a question on building tactics: how do you choose between two similar roles. For example, how do you choose between a DLP and a regista ? Or between a full back / attack and a wing back / support ? Or again between a wing back / attack and a complete wing back / support ?

While the two playmakers are similar, the others you mention are very different - mostly because of the different duties.

For me, it depends on the player's Attributes and also my tactic. A DLP is not as aggressive, particularly at getting forward as a Regista, so it will depend on what suits my tactic better.

 

[Henearkrxe]

While the two playmakers are similar, the others you mention are very different - mostly because of the different duties.

For me, it depends on the player's Attributes and also my tactic. A DLP is not as aggressive, particularly at getting forward as a Regista, so it will depend on what suits my tactic better.

Thanks, so if I need an offensive left back with a support duty, I'd better use a complete wing back in order to give more freedom. And if I need one with an attacking duty, I'll use a wing back or even a full back to provide more cover in defensive positions, that right ?

 

[WJ]

Thanks, so if I need an offensive left back with a support duty, I'd better use a complete wing back in order to give more freedom.

If you want a fairly aggressive supporting player, then select a wingback or complete wingback. If you want more creative freedom, then you select the complete wingback.

But these roles aren't all that similar as the complete wingback has a lot of locked PIs, so take it into account. The role will play out differently because the instructions are different and make sure your player is capable.

And if I need one with an attacking duty, I'll use a wing back or even a full back to provide more cover in defensive positions, that right ?

All attack duties bomb forward though, so you're not going to gain very much in defensive stability. It's more what your player is capable of. I wouldn't put my fullback who is useless at running at defenders in a CWB/A role because it does rely on dribbling ability among other things.

 

[Henearkrxe]

If you want a fairly aggressive supporting player, then select a wingback or complete wingback. If you want more creative freedom, then you select the complete wingback.

But these roles aren't all that similar as the complete wingback has a lot of locked PIs, so take it into account. The role will play out differently because the instructions are different and make sure your player is capable.

So the main difference between CWB/S and WB/A is that the CWB will have more creative freedom but the WB will be pushing higher up ?

All attack duties bomb forward though, so you're not going to gain very much in defensive stability. It's more what your player is capable of. I wouldn't put my fullback who is useless at running at defenders in a CWB/A role because it does rely on dribbling ability among other things.

ok, so playing Lyon and it's 3 very different right backs, i'd better set personnal instructions (CWB for Rafael and WB for Dubois for example) rather than trying to fing something that applies for the three of them

 

[WJ]

but the WB will be pushing higher up ?

Not sure where you got this? I said the PIs are the biggest differences. Look at the description, the highlighted attributes and the PIs.

 

[Henearkrxe]

Not sure where you got this? I said the PIs are the biggest differences. Look at the description, the highlighted attributes and the PIs.

from when you said that all attacking duties would be bombing forward

Anyway, thanks ! I'll go and have a look at the PIs

 

[WJ]

Because all attacking duties would. Roles were not mentioned.