I am not "unconcerned" that my tanks will get bogged down, I simply consider it the driver's responsibility to ensure he doesn't. Which, in reality, is the AI's job actually. If I tell my tank to go from A to B, and along the way, unknown to me, there is boggy ground, is it unrealistic if the driver fails to spot it, as happens in reality? Or should my alter-ego general persona go out onto the battlefield and walk every meter personally and give a detailed map to the driver?
This is the micro-management I talk of...thinking it possible to avert every possible detrimental outcome if only enough time is expended on every single turn. All it does, in fact, is turn a simulation of reality into a Hollywood script. The AI makes mistakes. So do real people. Incredible ones, absurd ones, and especially so in the heat of battle, under fire or with too little sleep between moves.
No real general got to ponder for 30 minutes between each one-minute period of action. Sure, you can excuse such a style of play by declaring that you are playing the general, the colonel, the captains and the Lts. And even the sergeants too. Personally I choose to play the general overall and the captains and Lts only when an obvious disaster is about to strike. It makes for a much more realistic experience in my opinion. And prevents the mind-numbing tedium of wiping arses and blowing noses.
As for your thoughts on the new game, and disrespect to the old...the old was good, just like a VW was good. Until the Porsche came along. The VW is still a VW, still good, but a Porsche is better. I loved the VW, but I stopped driving it after its constant breakdowns became too much for me to endure. Now the Porsche is doing the same, but this time around it looks like somebody A) admits there's a problem and gives a damn.
I don't think anyone can "prove" anything to you though, I think you'll have to suck it and see for yourself. That's what demos are for I guess. Soon as I got mine running smooth and tried it properly I was hooked.