The is a Great Idea, Climber. Should this be "The Way" we go with Tactical battles at launch? Honestly...I'm not sure. I've seen some other ideas ( and can think of a few my-self ) that I like just as much as this one.

However...

I DEFINITELY would Like to see a system as the one you describe above to Implemented at Some Time. Either as a game-play feature "type of play" I.E. how Unreal Tourney has Dethmatch - Team Deathmatch - Capture The Flag -...etc etc , you get the point.

Excellent Post and Excellent Idea. Keep up the great work, brother.

I played a game loooong time ago : UMS. Universal Military Simulator. You gave orders to your units, and the comp would do the job. And that was a real blast to play. That worked really well and I didn't feel at all effects you describe (like being unable to think if you don't see upfront what your units are doing). Yes, it need a little time to get the hang of it, but the outcome is so great. You add some "mindreading" to the game, instead of just playing advanced chess.

I want to see it before totally committing one way or the other. Sim turn sounded solid, but the Dev have seen the other end.

What I would like to see, even in the Turn/Tile-based Tactical Combat, is not have the Grid actually visible. Just present the player with arrows, on the ground, that indicate when the max move distance has been consumed.

Once we hit the Tac map, time would have to be adjusted accordingly.... If a Large engagemant lasted 4-5 day that would be considered a major Battle in my eyes.

Well what i mean is, that if you initiated combat.  then the battle took its allotted time then returned you to the world map.  when you pressed end turn, that would be a supposed year passed. then you would go back to the battle again.

You know I guess it is an immersion thing, But I can say that I never ever really associated a real time frame with turns in any TB games I played unless they put in seasonal effects.

Combat taking place over multiple turns wouldn't bug me, in fact I love the idea. I just have trouble understanding not doing it becuase some pre defined 1 turn = 1 year thing.

Personal thing but I would hate to see an idea as good as multiple turn combat go out the window because of something like this.

If a 'turn' is a year then it's hard to envision battles lasting >1 turn.  That doesn't preclude 'reinforcements' however, which is what I think is the main gist of what folks are proposing (tho I could be wrong...).  Reinforcements would arrive later because either they are too far distant to arrive at battles start but close enough to arrive before battle's end, or because they're deliberately held back for tactical reasons.  Squad Leader made good use of reinforcements in various scenarios, where the turn they arrived was predetermined (their scenarios were historical so they used what happened in the RL battles to determine this) but where they entered was only roughly specified (and sometimes the entry areas were fairly well separated for the 'fog-of-war' effect).  Blitzkrieg is another old Avalon Hill wargame that makes good use of reinforcements.  Reinforcements add a lot to Strategy&Tactics.

If there's decent 'fog-of-war' in Elemental then deliberately delayed reinforcements could be quite effective.

Regarding simultaneous turns (wego in today's vernacular) it's been around a long time for TBS games.  We used it in Diplomacy games 40 years ago.  Diplomacy is like chess in that it's simple (risk-like board with few pieces and few rules) yet complex (in the application).  There are 2 turns/year (spring and autumn).  Each turn has 2 phases.  During the first phase diplomacy is conducted, and orders planned and written down in secret.  In the second phase the orders are simultaneously revealed then adjudicated to determine who moves where/etc. That ends the spring turn.  This repeats for the autumn turn, then at year's end units are gained or disbanded depending on the number of held supply centers (if you lost a SC you lose a unit, if you gain 2 SCs you gain 2 units, etc.).  No dice, no randomness, just cut-throat diplomacy (and back-stabbing, as any promises made during negotiations are not enforced, all that matters is what orders were written down in secret), and all simultaneous.

Knowing what your written and committed-to orders were, and what others promised they'd do, while waiting to see the simultaneous revealing of what other players actually did do, adds a whole new level of excitement to the game that non-simultaneous TBS games lack.

Multi-turn battles, regardless of the combat system, would be pretty nifty. But, at the same time, I'm also wary of arbitrary time or turn limitations to battles. I suppose they could get around that by giving an option at world creation for "# of combat turns per strategic turn." That'd at least give players the ability to choose, but it would also be harder to get the AI to function well with it for any random # of turns a player might choose.

I Agree that Battles spanning multiple strategic turns could be epic... Especially with the possibility of Reinforcements. Even if this isn't in Vanilla. It's gotta be modded in or something. Then again I think 1 turn equaling a year is a bit extreme to start with. So it takes 5 years to build a school? 3 years to build a hut? Honestly? I mean I know they don't have bulldozers and heavy machinery but that's still just ridiculous.

A turn should be 1/4 of a year maximum IMO.

I mean this is the type of game I'd play with a massive map for 1000+ turns...

Even half a year per turn seems a tad extreme. One tile is a house. the next tile over is the center square...

I can move one space per turn... So basically it'll take me a years worth of travel to visit the neighbors...lol!

The logic jumps are pretty funny... I know they are probably necessary though, just fun to think about.

I'll stop rambling now.

Thanks everyone for liking WE-GO, and your support!  IF it will be become the default mode of combat & getting offical support, it will be awesome.  

The true advantage of a reinforcement system is that it would allow scouting to start a battle, i.e. the avant guard, and then surrounding forces could join in over the course of the battle, culminating in a massive exhchange. This assumes that a turn is a year and the units can walk or there with the movement points they have left. That way an army would function in a more logical fashion and IMO create some really interesting multiplayer subversion tactics.

One would essentially need to decide the worth of a location and how many forces are needed to proctect the area. If a battle started each player would have to continually decide how many men that position is worth and as in real battles at the Sov level it would become a matter of bidding for the territory, as well as creating a strategy that gives you the upper hand without using your whole army.

So, assuming release is similar to beta so far, waiting 80 turns for progeny to mature is not unreasonable.

Heck, if 1 turn = 1 year, then offspring/Champions wouldn't last very long (unless imbuing them with essence greatly increased their life span...).