Multi-layered troop formations/logisitics

That's basically what tactical battles are. I am around 80% sure they will be included.

That's not quite true. For example, what Fenhiro suggested isn't really possible to do in a game like HoMM, or MoM. Yeah, some units will synergize quite well with others, but that's just the tip of the potential iceberg. I personally would actually be very happy if SD implemented Total War-like tactical combat, but I don't expect them to (Frogboy said the whole game will be TBS). But whatever continuous-turn combat system they end up with, hopefully position, terrain, formation and all that kind of stuff will matter - and hopefully we won't be limited to "this group is on this tile and that group is on that tile" - in other words, I hope the battlefield isn't divided into discrete blocks, each occupied by just one group/squad/whatever - total freedom, even positional mixing, should be allowed in order for things like the OP's suggestion to work.

TBS and TC are NOT mutually exclusive, remember.....

Yeah, but I've never seen turn-based tactical combat that allows for situations like the one mentioned in the OP. Really the only games with tactical combat that do allow it are RTS's and Total War - Total War's tactical combat being fully real-time.

Maybe Stardock's mysterious continuos-turn tactical combat will manage to bridge the gap, though. I hope so

Me too. Despite my hard-core anti-RT"S" leanings, I would be happy with a real-time tactical battle as well, provided that there is a pause button that still allows you to issue orders and observe the map.

I want turn based, even though in general I wouldn't be opposed to real time.

personally, I want the tactical combat to be pretty simple.   Have units, they fight other guys.

Same here. Except for the part about simple. That word is the second greatest bane of my existance.

the bane of your existance?   never heard of "keep it simple stupid" (or "keep it super simple" if you don't want to insult the person to whom you are talking)   Its something that Sonic Team should learn (you don't need some stupid mechanic, or 300 characters to make a story interesting)

Real-Time-"Strategy". I realise that that is three words, but the hyphen strings them together.

huh... I don't know why, but I was solidly under the impression we were going to have real time battles.  Looking back though, I cant really find where that idea came from...  My best guess is that they kept talking about how, even if you were letting your generals command for you, watching the battles could be "breathtaking," etc.  I can't see how *watching* turn-based combat play out could be "breathtaking," but I may just be crazy.

Also...

What do you have against RTS?  Sure it's harder to actually use tactics, but you can't use them at all in games like Civilization.  I mean, since when did Civilization, etc, give bonuses for flanking your enemy, or other manuevers?

1. I play on a laptop with a very small touchpad: it takes about two seconds just to move my cursor across the SCREEN.
2. I generally do other things like surf the forums and eat snacks while playing: if the action happens while I'm reading or chewing or whatever, I can't save and reload every single 5-second pause.
3. I like to think through all of my moves, somtimes up to 5 turns ahead. That's just not possible with RTS.
4. Even with automation and UI tricks, I have to selectively ignore portions of my acivity because there is no time to handle them.
5. Seems like a lot of people dumb down the AI's decision-making processes in order to compensate for its ability to do things effectively instantly.

I realise a "pause" button fixes a lot of these, but that is rarely included and even less often is it done well.

Multi-Layered...  let's take even a deeper look at possible strategic elements if the battlefield could even be more multi-layered.  I'm talking about not only ground units, but flying units and burrowing units.  The amount of strategic options would triple if a group of flying units could exist on the battlefield above a group of ground units and burrowing units under the ground units or slightly in front.  There could be weapons and spells specific for attacking units under the ground, on top of the ground or in the air.  

While I do not think we'll see this level of battlefield depth it would definitely be interesting. 

What exactly are you talking about?

@KellenDunk:  I find that often the best solution is the most simple.  You could have very complex combat and tactics mechanics and have them be fun for a number of hardcore players.  However, the best mechanics might be some very simple mechanics with only something like 5 basic easy to understand stats. 

I feel that the base game should be easy to pick up and play.   So the world development and such can be very complex, but the 'surface features' should look simple and easy to understand.   A place where I can see over complication hurting the base-game for 1st time players is the tactical combat if its made ovely complex.  I'd love to see things like terrain and weather and such playing an effect, but I personally would think it best to avoid things like regiment formations and such unless its fairly simple (there are like 3 formations in Total War, so its pretty easy to understand when you 1st sit down and play)

If you're asking about my shot at the sonic team.  I'm just upset at them using the sonic franchise (which has a lot of room for some great gameplay) and ruining their games by either adding more annoying and/or useless characters (rouge, silver, cream, that fairy thing in unleashed) that could have had their role in the story easily filled with an existing character, or by adding some game mechanic that breaks what might have been an otherwise decent game (team mechanic in heroes, werehog in unleshed, guns in shadow the hedgehog), because the sonic team keeps thinking they need to add something to make a game sell.   Likely not the place for me to make pot-shots at sonic team, but it seemed to fit since the reason for my harsh words is a mistake I hope to avoid in games like Elemental.

KISS can be turned around.

Simple, being a mimicry of life.  Complicated, being an attempt to make life simple by abstracting things in an unrealistic manner, leading to balance problems and artificial limitations.

Custom formations using multiple troop types for synergistic combat were common place in war.

The end result of such a simplication is more complicated tactical combat requirements.  Instead of formation design leading to archer blocks with front line defenders, you have to micromanage them to flee back through your lines when charged, so that your waiting shock troops take the hit instead.

The simplication takes work out of creating formations, and puts work into managing combat.  The only thing you've lost is a layer of creativity.

Edit: Bah, Psychoak ninja'd my joke. But yeah, I'm with Landi.

We'll have real-time battles. That you can pause, to give orders.
As for watching turn-based combat play out, I can only advice you to play Dominions 3. While the graphics are horrible and the UI a constant stab in the eye, just try to *imagine* it with the Elemental engine. It could be epic.

I'd say that this is a latter development of the RTS genre, however.

Also, in defense of Civilization, there are merits to flanking, although entirely outside the context of instant battle.

Ok, so you would have been implicated in my views.  The stupid part still works though, right?

i'm with you guys, i'm quite curious as to how the battle time system will work out. will it be:

1.) similar to Worms 3D where it is turn based/real time combat where you a set amount of time to make your move.

2.) Similar to the Total war series in that the combat is in real time but you can pause to make quick and complex battle manuevers.

3.) an over glorified game of chess (Purely turn base).

4.) Purely real time but pausing wont allow you to issue out commands.

5.) a hybrid combination of 2 and 3.

Then we have to ask ourselves how will the terrain be mapped out:

1.) grid system (units are confined to their own individual grid square/hexagon/octogon) (ideal for turn-based where moves are of concern)

2.) Gridless System (units can move more freely and can easily overlap) (more practical for Real time)

3.) A hybrid of the two

And Finally how or will troop formations be implented (if yes will they offer bonuses for certain tactic situations) and which kinds:

1.) Solid Formation

2.) Loose Formation

3.) Phalanxe/Pike formation

4.) Wedge

5.) Hedgehog

6.) Shieldwall

7.) Testudo

8.) a hybrid formation like "Testudo Phalanxe" or Shieldwall Wedge"

Heck, There could be an entire tech tree branch oriented around troop formations (maybe even group 'em with training tech).