The More Adaptable Team-

Will always be the better one for a long period of time until they decide to stop grinding as hard as they did to win their first trophy for whatever reason.
The reason behind this is how common Meta changes are in Valorant.

Technically, a team consisting of 5 players, in which each individual can play multiple roles perfectly while all of them doing it collectively as a team, along a big period of time and in different metas will be at the top in that period of time.
But does and can a realistic roster forever exist like this?

Also,

I think about more then 5 people rosters a lot.
Especially, in a case in which a certain role on a certain map is needed by an individual but they are struggling to keep their form on it because of a specific meta change that affected them directly. Why not introduce a 6th player for the roster?
Why isn't it done already? Why is not viable?

Thoughts?

I think 6 man rosters tend to not work because of personal reasons, often a player may feel left out and players may focus their game to secure their spot within the starting players and not for the benefit of the team. Of course, if the players were machines with no emotions it would 100% work out but there’s a human side to everything

sentinels

I mean that sounds nice, but APAC teams have done this already with playing multiple roles and what that does is just makes everyone kinda average at what they do, rather than allowing them to get really good in a niche role or playstyle.
I do agree their needs to be some flexibility with reason, but playing all over the place is too much
This sounds good in theory, but its already shown they will always just be average if they keep role switching.
As for 6 mans DRX did this and they just couldn't take advantage of great players such as lakia

GLN321 [#2]

I think 6 man rosters tend to not work because of personal reasons, often a player may feel left out and players may focus their game to secure their spot within the starting players and not for the benefit of the team. Of course, if the players were machines with no emotions it would 100% work out but there’s a human side to everything

So basically, personal incentives are the downfall?
Much understandable.

Mjtchell [#4]

I mean that sounds nice, but APAC teams have done this already with playing multiple roles and what that does is just makes everyone kinda average at what they do, rather than allowing them to get really good in a niche role or playstyle.
I do agree their needs to be some flexibility with reason, but playing all over the place is too much
This sounds good in theory, but its already shown they will always just be average if they keep role switching.
As for 6 mans DRX did this and they just couldn't take advantage of great players such as lakia

Well, you do agree certain agents are better then others in different metas, right? Lets say a sudden certain meta change causes a need for a certain agent which is just too good in that meta. Let's say Kay/O. The flex player should play Kay/O, yes? What if they are not comfortable on it and they just dumb down to average all of a sudden? But they have to work around it because Kay/O is just too good to leave or others will have advantage over you. An other player on the roster plays Kay/O? What if there is no one on the whole team who is comfortable on Kay/O? An issue, no?
That's why I said technically and asked does and can a team like this exist which always works around it?

I mean you can say "fuck it, we think Kay/O is not working for us at all let's go back to our original comp". Boom, their comes an underdog team or even any other team which includes players perfect for the changed meta and start dominating out of a sudden even though they were doing average before.
That's also why we see new rosters come up in a new meta and die down in a different one if they are late to find their footing for example The Guard

Also, the DRX 6th man roster was a total flop but I do think it was not implemented in a good way by any means.

JustEnjoying [#6]

Well, you do agree certain agents are better then others in different metas, right? Lets say a sudden certain meta change causes a need for a certain agent which is just too good in that meta. Let's say Kay/O. The flex player should play Kay/O, yes? What if they are not comfortable on it and they just dumb down to average all of a sudden? But they have to work around it because Kay/O is just too good to leave or others will have advantage over you. An other player on the roster plays Kay/O? What if there is no one on the whole team who is comfortable on Kay/O? An issue, no?
That's why I said technically and asked does and can a team like this exist which always works around it?

I mean you can say "fuck it, we think Kay/O is not working for us at all let's go back to our original comp". Boom, their comes an underdog team or even any other team which includes players perfect for the changed meta and start dominating out of a sudden even though they were doing average before.
That's also why we see new rosters come up in a new meta and die down in a different one if they are late to find their footing for example The Guard

Also, the DRX 6th man roster was a total flop but I do think it was not implemented in a good way by any means.

All fair points

The 6 person roster doesn't work too well because it doesn't allow everyone to build synergy as well as if it was just 5 people working with each other all the time in scrims and such.

Any team that is not from EU