I think the general issue for TGs is the “profession” of civs, depending what major line they support the best.
As a flank civ ot’s basically required to play Archers as only ranged units can somehow defend when being doubled. You can try to use towers, but towers are of limited use against scouts and you can’t move them. So even if they can work in defending, you have nothing to get your own damage done on the opponent. But imo the bigger issue is currently their comparably low utility agaonst scouts.
Skirms currently just don’t work in TGs. They are even less effective against scouts. Maybe with some specific civs like Byzantines, but even there they usually don’t work.
For me, I can see some changes to towers like a small bonus damage against cavalry. But I can also see a newly added archer unit like the bowman which has bonus against archers and extra range, which could be used as a defensive skirmish tool. Even if it doesn’t excel against scouts, the extra range can possibly be used to stay out of the range of the opponent archers.
A third option would be feudal Mangonels that have only 3-4 Pierce Armor, 5 Range and also greatly reduced damage. They would be kinda useless agressively cause they would just die from TCs and Towers. But defensively they can possibly be useful against being doubled.
Vice versa archer civs are often hold back by their low mobility as pocket. This could quite easily be solved by making CA available from feudal. But ofc stat adjusted so it doesn#t make much sense to use them in 1v1s. They already have low accuracy, so mainly by jsut reducing the damage (possibly even just 4 damage like archers) they should be chose over archers when the mobility is key like as a TG pocket.
When something like this kind of stuff is implemented, all civs would be able to be played as either pocket or flank - at least in the early game. Ofc the traditional positions would still be benefitial, but it wouldn’t be essential to pick civs for the positions as all should be kinda “playable”.