This is NOT a historical simulation
I sure wish I had read this before my purchase. Sure, the game has great graphics and so many historic connections to give it great flavor. I appreciate the time effort put into those areas. But they are just icing on the cake and they can't compensate for Risk-like game engine. The "keep rolling until their dead" kills me in a game with so much historic promise. To see a battle unfold where the adject enemy unit attacks, withdraws, then the next enemy unit moves into position, attacks, withdraws, and a third unit, now remember we are dealing with at least division size units, move into place and attack is so ahistorical it just ruins the game for us history nuts.
I am glad there are so many people who enjoy the game and I wish Fury continuing success.
Sorry to hear that, but your description of the gamemechanic has been changed for this game, in the predecessors one could not do what you described, the units could either march and attack, or attack and then march.
Although I see your point, I feel this to be necessary, since with the ectended numbers of forces, scale and limited damage by inf.-units it is not very easy to destroy enemy units. Usually it takes several attacks to destroy a unit, this presupposes a combined armed warfare strategy.
I guess without these changes in gamemechanics, it would be more of a WWI-style combat, with little gains and nearly equal losses. So for my part, I highly appreciate those changes.
Maybe it would help to give you some hints improving your ability to defend more efficiently?