Without adding another layer of work for the player to do, I would like to see combat events have a bigger effect on combat, as well as have leader skill and army doctrine determine when those events would trigger.
I would also love to see leader skill and doctrine determine just how fiercely a unit would fight in a given situation. Not all battles should be fought until one side hits 0% org... Defenders who lose should have one of 3 things happen: Fighting withdraw, Organized retreat, or a Rout. A fighting withdraw allows the unit to re-org as they retreat, while routs would cause the unit to take strength damage as it flees, and retreat slower, potentially being overrun.
Defence in Depth doctrines should improve the chances of favourable retreates for the defenders, while and emphasis on standing ground ("not one step backwards!") should allow defenders to fight a little longer, with increased chances of devastating results should they lose. The skill difference of the opposing commanders would influence the result, as should terrain, weather etc etc.
Perhaps even air superiority and interdiction attacks could play a part... Which would have the added bonus of making CAS and TAC bombers as useful as they were historically without having them deal massive amounts of unrealistic damage and bombing entire divisions to oblivion within days all on their own.
Things like this would go a long way towards making combat feel much more dynamic, while still leaving all the work under the hood. There wouldn't be any added layer of micromanagement, but choose the right doctrines, appoint the right leaders, and support your units properly and you'll notice the difference.
I would also love to see leader skill and doctrine determine just how fiercely a unit would fight in a given situation. Not all battles should be fought until one side hits 0% org... Defenders who lose should have one of 3 things happen: Fighting withdraw, Organized retreat, or a Rout. A fighting withdraw allows the unit to re-org as they retreat, while routs would cause the unit to take strength damage as it flees, and retreat slower, potentially being overrun.
Defence in Depth doctrines should improve the chances of favourable retreates for the defenders, while and emphasis on standing ground ("not one step backwards!") should allow defenders to fight a little longer, with increased chances of devastating results should they lose. The skill difference of the opposing commanders would influence the result, as should terrain, weather etc etc.
Perhaps even air superiority and interdiction attacks could play a part... Which would have the added bonus of making CAS and TAC bombers as useful as they were historically without having them deal massive amounts of unrealistic damage and bombing entire divisions to oblivion within days all on their own.
Things like this would go a long way towards making combat feel much more dynamic, while still leaving all the work under the hood. There wouldn't be any added layer of micromanagement, but choose the right doctrines, appoint the right leaders, and support your units properly and you'll notice the difference.