I and many gamers LOVE
charts and detail and crunch. That's whats wonderful about the spectrum of gamers - you have Speed Demons who want to roll a handful of dice and resolve everything immediately. You have your chess players who analyze every unit
profile and tactic and then you have the PHD guys who want to know what manufacturing plant made those Forcewall Grenades. Instead of saying "hate it" I think "I don't normally like to play that way but I think xyz would be a great option.
The goal is to tailor the game to give all the player types OPTIONS. In the gaming world, if you don't continue to release new options, new units, new expansions your game dies no matter what level of tactical brilliance it may offer.
For example. I (like a million other gamers) am building my own set of rules
Base Rules: Alternating Actions based on initiative with 3 actions per round
Advanced Rules: Alternating Actions with reactions (out of sequence reactions called Counters)
Option rules: Alternating Actions with Counters and Heroic Actions (Counters that cant be countered except by another Heroic Action)
My group has been play-testing it a lot in the last 6 months and some HATE heroic actions but provide excellent input, about why they hate it. Others love it and provide great feedback on why they like it. Its great for me because I can take information from both sides and try to find that common ground. Perhaps heroic is ONLY optional. Perhaps its critical to turning the tide in games, saving your ass or just crushing your opponent. Perhaps it belongs in an RPG only
In the end input from all sides makes the game better...