"I know that this would be a substantial amount of extra development work, and I consider it worthwhile to propel Dominions to a greater level of diversity, immersion, and combat-mechanical realism. But if the devs felt it was too much work, I would understand a reluctance on their part to implement it. However, reluctance on the part of players for the combat model to become more realistic, without making it more difficult to use, really blows my mind. I'm not trying to be rude, but I'm just extremely surprised."
You do realize that by saying your not trying to be rude only makes it appear more likely that you are being rude? It doesn't bother me though, whether or not you are rude is a non issue since you can articulate your arguements quite clearly
Anyway, it is a matter of personal taste to be sure. I really don't give two (well you know whats) how well the combat system models reality. All I care about is how well the combat system works as a game mechanic. Often times I have found that the most well meaning suggestions and critiques that focus on improving this area of immersion in the game by 'improving' some game mechanic by making it more 'realistic' only serve to add more complexity and create more division than they are worth.
I suppose my real gripe with a system like this is that it caters more to the power gamer crowd. It adds a new level of complexity (diversity as well, but its not the only way to add diversity to the units, weapons, or armor) that only makes the game more difficult and less approachable to the average or novice gamer. (I should note that this system won't affect my enjoyment of the game at all, it may in fact improve it, but I do like playing devil's advocate, especially when it comes to adding complexity). Given that Dom is already quite complex this addition may be nothing more than another drop in the bucket, but it could also be the straw that breaks the camels back (gotta love those idioms eh?
)
Now to look at your three main reasons for wanting to add this system:
Diversity: Yes, if done correctly it should add to diversity, I don't think there would be any more or less issues with balance than with any other system, if the system is implemented correctly. (further note below)
Immersion: This is a matter of personal opinion, the system wouldn't increase my immersion in the game, and for some people it might be too much, for some people it probably wouldn't be enough.
Combat-mechanical Realism: Well it would improve that, but again, not everyone cares about how realistic the combat mechanics are (assuming the existing mechanics are not flawed, which they are not), and you can start down a slippery slope if you make this too much of an important aspect of the game. Next you'll need to redo arrow flights, charging impacts, formations, facings, ... Basically you start down the slope of trying to make every aspect of combat as realistic as possible, and that's a lose lose situation I think. Of course it is possible to only implement small systems, or systems that only look at one (or a few) aspects of this, but the trend can become dangerous.
Some further notes about diversity and the implementation of this system. Firstly, will all nations have equal access to all weapon types and armors? If not, then some are seriously weakend with respect to others. This in and of itself isn't so much of an issue as completely balanced nations would be pretty boring (AoW suffers from this somewhat), however, lest we want to create a situation where some nations are superior to others based on this system (not hard to imagine I think) great care needs to be taken to balance this system appropriately. I'm not saying that can't be done, just that its not going to be a simple process. Furthermore, if some nations (or indeed all nations) are forced to look for independants to recruit to fill their holes, then, outside of scripted maps, there will be even more 'luck' involved in starting postions. Again, that's not necessarilly a bad thing, but it depends on your point of view.
Finally (cuz this post is getting too long) let me say that I'm not against your idea, I'm more looking to make sure that all aspects of it have been thought out, and those aspects are not limited just to the technical details of its implementation, but also the effect it could have on players of all ilks. Like I said, I wouldn't have a problem coping with the added complexity, but some certainly would, and for what this idea adds to the game, I'm not sure that its really worth it. There are simpler methods to improve unit, weapon, and armor diversity (basically changing the existing values, expanding the ranges that they encompass, and tweeking the effects of length and other things) without adding a completely new mechanic. The simpler methods may not give you exactly what you want from the combat realism point of view, but they should be able to addaquately create more diversity among any races set of units.
And no, I'm not taking this discussion to heart, I've been in the minority many times on discussions like this, all I want to do is present an opposing view point, and get everyone to think about the best way to effect a change (assuming the change is needed or desired). Heh, for you AoWers I was a staunch proponent of surrender (with some tweeks), so maybe that will explain something