One second, in first sentence you're saying that area is quite narrow and you can't move your soldiers much (there are actually quite large map later in the game) therefore xcom2 isnt a tactical game, and in second part you're saying that disciple series IS a tactical game - where you actually CANT move any of 6 charaters at all
Like I said, area May be large but moving soldiers is useless since there is huge risk of waking up more enemies and then battle is lost. Movement is supposed to be big part of XCOM 2 tactics but since tactical movement is too dangerous, there is almost nothing left. With so long experience on tactical games, I don't consider XCOM 2 tactical game.
IIRC Disciples III allows movement. Also it matters if movement is meant to be big part of game or not. Game like King's bounty would be very tactical even without movement.
Xcom, like most of the other games you've mentioned, is a tactical game. Definitely have more tactical variables than mentioned Disciples or Homm (which are overcomplicated rock-paper-scisors, and I really loved Disciples 1 and 2). Hoever it is not a strategy game, nor a cRPG with tactical element.
And I get that you don't like it, it's not my prefered game either, but it ticks all the checkoxec for a tactical game genre.
Most of XCOM series tactics come from movement from cover to cover. But because every time you move there is risk of waking up more enemies, on higher difficulties best course of action is not to move but just stand and fight. But if opponent has better equipment/skills, what you can do? Basically nothing. So much about tactics.
Disciples series overall I don't have that much experience, other mentioned I have played a lot.
It still does not. That waking up enemies moving too far is essentially game breaking design flaw that make very big part of tactical side (movement) useless and therefore it takes out major part of tactics. That's more than valid argument not to consider XCOM as tactical game.
I've been killing Sectoids, Aquatoids and their brethren since the late '90. Not only in the original two games, but also the Apocalypse and most of the spin-offs. My addiction was so strong at that time that it urged me to invest in programming skills, so that I can work on tools dealing with game assets like sprites, palettes, strings, etc.
All this didn't stop me to enjoy the modern XCOM games, not at all. They are different, but enjoyable and a lot of people do appreciate them. As you can see, even Julian Gollop is having hard time making a modern X-COM (Phoenix Point) that can make both hardcore fans and causal gamers happy.
The way I see it, these times will never be back.
Don't let nostalgia and unrealistic expectations hamper your experience.
Modern players prefer so much casual that it's not surprise Gollop tries to please majority of players. Still haven't played Phoenix point, perhaps soon. Luckily we have other games, Xenonauts 2 hopefully delivers.
Like said previously, major design flaw can make game unplayable or destroy most of it's tactical side. And that's exactly what XCOM-series "wake up enemies and give them free moves to cover" -feature do. Movement is Supposed to be big part of tactics but because of design flaw, it's not. So much about tactics and XCOM being tactical game. Imagine that kind of "feature" to X-COM and, well, too horrible to imagine to be truthful...
