Has the New Tactical System Failed?

Has the New Tactical System Failed?

The "Sterile" System: Why Flexibility Was Lost :

The new tactical system, originally introduced in FC 25, feels rigid and restrictive compared to the fluidity we enjoyed in the past. Unlike the legacy system, which offered players freedom based on manual instructions, the current engine is built entirely around "Player Roles." In my opinion, this concept has fundamentally failed to deliver a realistic experience.

This system is based on the concept of Roles, which dictates player movements. I consider this a failure because if it were successful, we wouldn't find Evolutions granting Roles +/++ to players cards in their preferred position, allowing the player (myself) to use the cards in their preferred position. It's illogical for a player to be unable to play their preferred position in the first place.

It is illogical for a player to be fundamentally incompetent in their preferred position until an Role + / ++ "unlocks" their ability to perform there.

In the old system, players had the freedom to move within their positions based on the custom instructions we gave them, without these arbitrary restrictions. It was intuitive: if a player is in their preferred position, they should naturally be able to execute standard instructions.

The Logical Inconsistency of Dual Positions :

Another glaring issue appears with players who hold alternate positions ,such as RW and LW. These positions often share identical Roles, such as the "Inside Forward." It is structurally illogical for a player to excel with a Role+ or Role++ on the right wing, yet lack that same proficiency on the left, given that the tactical instructions for the role are exactly the same.

The only variable that should realistically impact a player's performance when switching flanks is their Weak Foot ability, not an arbitrary reduction in Role proficiency.

For example Phil Foden’s Gold card. His card Have both RW and LW as playable positions. However, he possesses the Inside Forward+ role when deployed at RW, yet inexplicably loses that "Role +" status when moving to LW. This creates an artificial limitation that defies football logic.

The "With & Without" Dilemma :

There is also a distinct flaw in the system regarding player instructions: the game forces a unified set of behaviors for both 'With Ball' and 'Without Ball' scenarios. Currently, these cannot be modified separately, which is fundamentally illogical.

Football is dynamic; a player’s duties during possession often differ drastically from their responsibilities when making off-the-ball runs or transitioning to defense. By coupling these instructions together, the game removes a layer of tactical depth. It is essential to have the option to customize these two distinct phases of play independently, rather than being locked into a one-dimensional setting.

Inconsistent Defensive Spacing :

I also noticed a baffling tactical anomaly regarding the positioning of Center Backs. When switching between different formations, the physical distance between the two CBs varies significantly without any logical explanation.

Tactically speaking, any formation utilizing a standard back-four should maintain consistent spacing across the defensive line. The structural integrity of the defense should not fluctuate based on the midfield setup. Yet, comparing a 4-4-2 to a 4-2-2-2, for example, reveals noticeable discrepancies in the gap between the center-backs. This arbitrary variance disrupts the defensive shape and feels disconnected from real-world football tactics, where the backline usually operates as a cohesive, fixed unit regardless of the formation ahead of them.

The Absence of Depth and Width Sliders :

The removal of manual control over Depth and Width severely handicaps your tactical potential on the pitch. This limitation was glaringly obvious at the game’s launch, where a critical defensive issue existed: the excessive spacing between the two Center Backs.

This gap was clearly visible even in the tactics menu, yet players were powerless to fix it. We were forced to wait an extended period for a Title Update to finally rectify the problem. The frustration lies in the fact that this entire ordeal could have been easily avoided; had the Width slider still been available, players could have instantly tightened the defensive shape themselves, mitigating the issue without needing to wait for a developer patch.

we need the ability to manually adjust Depth and Width restored, mirroring the flexibility of the old system. If the developers are hesitant to simply bring back the old sliders, then they must innovate a new mechanism that achieves the same result

The Diminished Impact of Substitutes :

Currently, substitutes have become significantly less influential, particularly when deployed in positions that are not their exact primary match. For example, bringing a Right Winger (RW) on as a Right Midfielder (RM) or a Striker (ST) results in a drastic and illogical drop in performance.

The fundamental purpose of a substitute is to provide a spark and change the momentum of the match. The game mechanics should reflect this intent. While I am not suggesting that an out-of-position substitute should perform with the same 100% efficiency or "Role++" mastery as they would in their natural spot, they must at least be competent.

The current mechanism needs an overhaul. A substitute should offer a baseline level of utility and impact simply by virtue of fresh energy and stats, rather than being rendered virtually useless just because they are slightly out of position.

Example of fans opinion :