Obviously tactial combat is abstracted.  It is 10 times better than what it was before I can I see that wiht some tweaking it will be great.  I vote no for overhaul.

We've talked so much about all of this since before the beta of WoM. There are threads with hundreds of posts like this that are two years old. They are obviously not going to redesign TC at this point in development.

* We have squares instead of hexes because Brad likes squares better. And he will not code a new game engine.

* There were all kinds of fuckups in WoM because they tried to support older systems. Pixel shaders etc...

* I think tactical combat should be left as is for now. Sure, I'd prefer a more fleshed out combat system as well, but it is not going to happen. Both Brad and Derek have said they want TC to be quick and that is what we have right now. Also, the initiative system is way better than the train wreck TC we had in WoM.

Focus now should be on fixing champ/army balance, city development and Tech trees.

YES.

The main issue I have with tactical combat is how bad the AI is. I've only seen wolf packs show any signs of intelligence. They like to go after your weakest unit. Why can't more armies use specialized tactics like focus fire or target weakest or target strongest enemy?

One note in regard to your performance comment, I've tried running .77 with a small map on a 3 year old laptop with integrated graphics and it runs just fine.  Only have turned off a few options but not running cloth only.  No crashes even.

I think they can find a way to make them still quick but introduce some tactics.  within the current framework.  

I think we have to wait ´til we have some tactical AI ingame. The battles are (even now) way more fun then in WoM. But that was not a big deal.

Sure, everything that improves the tactical battles i will welcome. But they don´t have to be deep and "wargame like" like some guys wanna see it. I really don´t want to play...lets say more then 5min tac. battle in late game. If i want something like that, i play other games. So...no overhaul needed.  

Yes, it needs redesigning.

During tactical combat, I want to have to think about position of units.

I want to have to work to get my units to attack without being attacked back, or so that my tough units are the ones in the way. I want melee counterattacks when being attacked; it makes ranged more meaningful.

I would like to see terrain that means something - cover, different movement costs, elevation.

I would like to see defensive combat in cities with the city being involved.

I would like to see combat mechanics for attack and defence more easily visable in the UI. Just seeing what the maximum damage that a unit can do isnt enough; seeing the calculations would be good, and the randomisation distributions.

It would be nice to see some general type abilities - such as forcing movement on enemies, letting other units move or attack sooner. I think that attacking should use up the same sort of resource as movement; you should be able to move further if you dont attack, or attack more if you dont need to move. That would also allow some units to move and attack as a charge action.

We have zone of control, moving next to another unit will end your movement phase. A trait that allows you to arrange your units at the start would be cool.

Brad has mentioned that he hasn't even really started on the tactical AI yet, but will be getting to it. Expect major progress in this area soon.

I think the system is pretty good and will shine when the balance stuff gets worked out. I agree that the map is a little small and if it's possible should be made larger. I would also like to see more tactical stuff like defense boosting squares, rough movement slowing terrain, and choke points. All of which would be pretty simple to add I imagine. They have confirmed multiple rimes that sieges with destructible walls won't be in FE.

Heres some Simplish ways to make tactical cobat worth it

Territory & Tactics

The first Reason Tactical combat is boring is that it involves absolutely no tactics worth mentioning. Controlling tiles in is a huge part of tactical combat in turn based games. In FE strategy is just running to mid and hitting first or pummeling with spells. The AI should just be waiting for the chance to pounce on your mage or archers, even to the point of keeping cavalry in reserve. To help prevent this many games use a system where units cant move next to enemy units without having to stop there. In FE zone of control is made usless because everyone dies in aprox two blows and some units have 10+ movement and initiative, also Terrain is too open. Chokepoints and defensible locations to move archers too are another thing that is completely absent. How about battling across a river with two bridges or something? Easy Simple fixes

Classes & Talents

Champion classes beyond the warrior and mage are horrible simply because the game is so simple. You cant specialize a warrior at all, a lv 15 warrior is exactly the same as any other and the stats system make Assassins pointless because theres nothing to specialize in. Defenders be useless becuase defense is pointless in a game where  you exchange like 2 blows of 60 dmg(Also see tactics above). The Assassin specialization is pointless because they tried to make them specialize in dext, which is just as useless as int. Crit strike is flawed if warriors are defined by only their strength stat and weapons deal dmg based on strength. Talents needs to be made more complex to even allow the classes we have. The Simplest way to revive fun champions is weapon specialization talents. For Example daggers as they stand just suck, but how about a talent that lets Assassins always strike twice with daggers? Or a Talent that gives Assassins a Dext based dmg bonus when using a bow? This fixes Assasins and makes champions more interesting. Defenders could get an improved defend talent for shields or a multi turn resistible stun for maces. There should be multiple abilities for every weapon and class in the game.

Units and Monsters

There are multiple types of dmg in FE, why are they never used beyond champion armor? Rock Spiders should laugh at cutting weapons. Cavalry should be afraid of whatever it is spears do. Also higher lv spears would be nice. There should be units in the game that are almost impossible to kill unless you have their weakness, be it fire or hammers. Instead every unit and monster in the game is just X hp, X dmg, X Init with a face. If it's got four legs it's fast and if it's got eight it's poisonous.

Unit stacks are underpowered again due to their simplicity, their just normal units with a weakness. The interaction between monsters, champions and stacks should be made more interesting. Unless using a special ability or talent, champions or monsters shouldn't be able to kill more than 1 unit in a stack per turn. Inversely their should be a limit to how many guys in a stack can attack, maybe just the front row (Unless they have spears? or a Spearwall talent?). Just think about how much this actually adds to the game. It makes initiative more important if you want to kill stacks or strength more important to kill monsters. Plus abilities for warrior champions would become more specialized, allowing you to build warrior champions more than just one way. Sword/Shield Duelist to fight other champions? GreatSword wielding monster slayer? Mace wielding stack slaughterer?

I disagree.  As it is currently setup, once I get passed very early game my strategy for tactical battles never changes.  Never.  Not once.  No matter the opponent.  Same strategy for the last fight of the master quest as the strongest enemy sovereign as the strongest enemy army as the strongest wildlands packs as the weakest mobs I don't bother autoresolving.  

The skeleton of tactical battles is fine.  The overall systems and gameplay rules work.  They just need to be fleshed out and augmented.  Right now there is nothing tactical about it at all, except for the fact that I have to move the units into position and tell them who to kill.  Actual tactics are irrelevant.  I'm never forced to adapt my strategy.  Where I move my units is largely irrelevant.  Tactical strategy never allows me to win a fight that I shouldn't, nor does it cause me to lose a fight I should win.  

Until actual tactics can make that difference, between winning and losing, tactical battles need work.  I agree with others that tactical battles need more subsystems.  Above all, they need DIFFICULT choices.