Terrain modifiers are not among my priorities. Talking of priorities, I thought since the game is called Elemental they could give more strategic depth to elemental shards. Fell free to contribute with your thoughts/ideas on this discussion I created a couple of days ago https://forums.elementalgame.com/429318

I will be honest, I probably would not take the effort to delete even one element of XML from a purchased product.  My own projects demand too much of that from me

I would probably buy a tactical battle DLC; not out of any deep need for tactical battles, but out of a compulsive need to have the whole game

Good examples of games that get battles right:

• Endless Space (just pick three tactics and hope you've appropiately assessed your enemy's capabilities, and have designed your ships to counter)
• Any Paradox grand-strategy title, ever (just let me develop the infrastructure to field a potent force, and AI algorithms can do the rest)

I like not having control in tactical.  It's kind of a test of my analysis of the opponent.  A human can ordinarily trounce an AI anyway, so why have the exercise of actually moving.and.ordering.every.unit?

Just my two cents, full of contradictions.  Yes, I would buy the DLC.  But then again I'd buy just about any DLC for this game if it keeps development alive.  Okay, no more from me, I've probably said too much

While I personally love tactical combat (and I treasure games such as Final Fantasy tactics, Age of Wonders, the Disgaea series, etc), I can't help but agree with you on the strategic planning aspect of some of those games.

The only caveat I have is that the game has to get preparation and reconnaissance "right" in order to make strategic planning feel fleshed out. Here's what I mean:

• Unit counters need to be properly balanced.
• Logistics must exist in the game (ie. weapons, utility items,  supply or some other strategic concern)
• Reconnaissance must exist as a system that promotes scouting and provides valuable information on the enemy
• Reconnaissance must be worthwhile (from a logistics and unit counter perspective)

For example, in some tactical RPGs, you are not given a list of enemy units prior to your next battle. This forces you to create a diverse and highly capable reserve force that can handle numerous situations. The only consideration then is your tactics on the battlefield as the planning stage can only be successfully accomplished via one way: grind to a perfect, adaptable party.

Right now, FE is far better than most tactical RPGs in this regard, but the unit counter aspect needs balancing (leather, plate and chain need better balancing and so do the weapons). Also, reconnaissance needs a boost with higher tier scout unit types (ie. scouts that are invisible, stronger and/or serve as counters to specific unit types or load-outs). 

Still, I prefer some tactical combat over none. The reason: even if the AI is top-notch, I would still feel that a "loss" is not my fault in a system that does not have complete player control. In a tactical combat system, I am at fault if I lose.

The tatical 'mods' that I was thinking of, I think, are along your lines of being tatical your recommended obsticales.

Here's what I've been stewing over:

If a road exists on the tile, then if you entered combat on that tile, a road should exist on the tatical map. Just like the road improved your movement by +1 on the tile, in combat, it should improve your movement by +1 if your units are travelling along the road.

If a hill exists on the tile, then if you entered combat on that tile, a hill (or clump of hills) should exist on the tatical map. Remember, the tile is a representation of what is there...so there could be a few hills in the combat map). Just like the hill would/could reduce your movement by -1 on the tile, in combat, it should reduce your movement by -1 should your units travel past one.

If a forest exists on the tile, then if you entered combat on that tile, a forest (or a few forests) should exist on the tatical map. Remember, the tile is a representation of what is there...so there could be a few forests in the combat map). The forest could block line of sight for ranged attacks.

If a river exists on the tile, then it should also exist in the combat map. Two types of river could exist. Either, a shallow river that is fordable, at a -1 movement penalty, to cross.....or.....a non-fordable with a bridge or two. Remember, as a representation, there are peasants all over the place in this world....or ruins from the world before the great cataclysm.....bridges could be relatively abundant.

Bodies of water are relatively simple, as are mountains. They should be impassable. In both cases, should the battle start on a water edge or the side of a mountain, these elements could be represented on the combat map by reduced combat space with graphics showning the obstruction. Especially for water...there could be lake graphics and coast graphics. Maybe there is a %chance at having a cave along the mountain side...or a tunnel to outflank your opponent.

Walls, Moats with bridges, Firewalls, Walls of darkness, Walls of Arrow deflection, etc, should all exist to help defending cities and there armies (should you be within city limits). There should always be a mundane way though these obsticles and always a magical way as well.

I think that covers the basics. I believe this would benefit the game in the following ways:

First, it adds a tatical dimension to the game. No longer is it 'I've got the bigger stick", whether that be weapons or magic; the enviroment can be used to help your win battles that you might have otherwise lost.

Second, it adds an addition dimension to placing your cities and outposts. No longer are they 'resource gathering mechanics'. Now, they also must be used strategically to strengthen and defendn your empire. Decisions would have to be made: do you build the outpost in the open plains to gain access to all the resources nearby? or do you give one up in exchange for a more defensible positon on the nearby hill?

Third, it adds depth to the narrative aspect of the game. Not all stories are words. One thing I really loved about the game 'betratal at krondor' was the fact that some cities had unique layouts. It added graphical depth that pushed the story along. The same can be said for adding enviromental obsticales to battles. They become more real. They emmerse the player into the story of the game...

Lastly, I know tatical battles may not be high on Stardocks list due to all the other stuff that needs to be done to the game yet, not to painfully mention the added complexity to the AI that would be required. I just want to say, that if Derek, Frogboy & Co (I think I saw that somewhere ), pull it off....there will be ALOT of really happy people playing this game. 

Regardless of what happens, FE is turning out to be a fantastic game and I'm really looking forward to putting in some time for beta 4.

Amen!

My vision is in line with yours however I think it's only really feasible for the tile you are directly on to decide your tactical map. If your on a forest tile then you fight on a forest map. Same deal with river, swamp, hill, road, and desert tiles. Same as currently really except with river and road tiles.

Also if we get tactical terrain I would love to see basic sieges. Nothing complicated or hard to implement just a good defensive position for the defender with some walls to create choke-points and fortification tiles that boost dodge and accuracy.

It would be nice to have city battles use a map that is chosen based on what level fortifications the city has. The better the fortifications, the more favorable the map is to the defender. 

Titan.

Agreed,

1. Build a moat and the battle field has a moat & a drawbridge that the defender can use to reduce the number of attacking units.
2. Build a castle and you have walls behind which you can place archers or catapults.
3. Surround your city with a forest preserve and the maximum attack range for all missle and ranged attacks is reduced to 4 tiles. 

Update:

Here's a 40 minute video walkthrough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65rtyTNRrjQ

Thanks for the updated and LONG 2nd video.

I guess I don't feel so bad that the AI utterly thrashed me in every conceivable way in my 2nd game last night.  I got overrun so early.  The AIs out expand, out produce, somehow have units coming out of every direction...on normal.  I'm sure I must be doing something(s) very wrong.

I've waited a while before checking FE out and finally took the plunge.

I'm barely getting started but I like what I've seen and experienced.  I can definitely see improvements all around.

Looking forward to beta 4 and a bright future for this game.