I agree, somewhat.
In Master of Magic, which we reference SO OFTEN... combat takes place like this.
Swordsmen Attacks Spearmen in melee, both take damage at the same time.
Archer attacks Spearmen from ranged, Spearmen take damage only.
Archer attacks Spearmen from melee, Spearmen take damage only. OR Spearmen Attacks Archer in Melee, only Archer takes damage.
Samurai with First Strike attacks Spearmen, Spearmen take damage.
Other strategy tactical games use this idea of simultaneous damage. It's a smart idea and I think it would fix my issues with tactical combat. I think tact. combat got A LOT better with the maps and AI, but working it like this would make unit design a lot more interesting. Right now, all you need is init and damage and you can own anything. Doing this, your melee troops are at risk on the offensive, which is how it should be. No more glass cannons.
Init should still determine movement and all that, for the use of ranged attacks, spell casting, special abilities. Perks like First Strike would prevent a unit from Counter Striking. A perk like Counterstrike may allow the unit to attack again after the initial fight between units. Hopefully the devs look at it because, despite how much fun creating new units are and can be, I've found that an army of Archers on Horses with Init and no armor is an all win group. I've killed heroes, monsters, and just about anything with just 2 Squad sized units of these archer riders. Before them, it was about spearmen with enough movement to cover the field and the +10 init on turn 1. As long as I one spearmen per unit, I would one shot most enemies.
EDIT: It just occured to me that Archers LACKING the ability to attack back if being attacked would be a great weakness to balance out their ranged superiority.