Having to leave out items or mechanics usable in Tactics bothers me. Tactics runs a very simple interface that allows rules to work well without many extra complications.
If Warfare is adding to complexity to give more depth, what is in Tactics that could not be handled by an initial release of Warfare?
Warfare should not be stepping back to something as minimal as the original Core Set rules. Nothing currently in Tactics is an overly complicated concept, or anything any other open tabletop game doesn't have to deal with on an initial release. While some skills would need minor tweaks to fit the reactive mechanic, I don't see any of them as being a difficult shift to make while retaining a reasonable parity in utility or basic design.
Someone else stated that point values, abilities, and stats from the Tactics unit cards were not valid for Warfare, so it's confusing to hear you say they were policed to remain similar, though what constitutes being similar could vary heavily between different observers.
If core mechanics remain similar, and changes due to the reactive mechanic impact all units, then point values should retain validity.
If combat mechanics remain similar as shown in earlier demonstrations, there is no reason to change combat stat values.
Some abilities would not function the same in the reactive mechanic (ex: Artillery Strike would not pre-empt the normal alternating activation sequence), but there is no need for radical shifts to make them fit (ex: Artillery Strike could simply take both actions of a unit in the phase they fire indirectly for a net same effect per turn).
We may well not know what changes actually exist until the book is actually released, but I'll keep hoping for an 'enhanced Tactics' instead of a completely different game from Warfare until I find out for sure. I'd like to be able to retain the interest to be able to play both games as interesting counterpoints depending on how much time I have to invest in gaming.
Radical changes simply to be different hold very little interest for me. Any changes should enhance what is already there, rather than reinvent the wheel to fix what isn't broken.
Not sure if i have misled you and I am restricted by NDA : But......
There were not any mechanics left out of DW that are currently present in DT.
There is nothing you cannot do in DW that you currently can do in DT.
From my personal perspective the design process was as follows:
DT contains some basic concepts / core mechanics that would sucessfully translate to the tabletop with simple stat conversion from squares to inches etc, .
You need to clarify such things as Terrain, LOS, Template effect weapons, cover etc that obviously change in the conversion.
Now that could simply be as far as it goes, however the opportunity was taken in DW to take the game beyond the DT mechanic that one player activates a unit, then his opponent activates a unit etc.... (this is I may say no the only change/enhancement in DW - Suppression mechanics for example.)
As Andy pointed out some aspects of his designs are influenced by certain classic boardgames, Squad Leader possibly being the most obvious here
SL works on the basis that a player moves all his units before his opponent, but his opponent does have the option to opportunity fire/react during that movement . (there is a similar but limited option in DT - but the mechanic in DW is much more far reaching).
In DW there is a cost to reacting in that it can limit your actions when it is your turn to be the Moving player so hard choices need to be made.
The concept of Command points/Command phase also gives you the option to perform actions without fear of reaction, however there may not be many of these CP's available so they need to be used wisely.
As I said earlier there were little if any changes to the Combat stat values that I saw.....
Some units may have gained additional or new traits which are currently specific to DW.
Some points values may have been changed, but that is just a natural evolution ,(quite how a Ludwig and a Pounder have similar points when the Firepower is mostly the same, whilst the Pounder has an additional HMG and the Jump capability is beyond me.... but that is a personal view).
Even without DW, I'm pretty sure as the DT game matured we would see additional points value changes for balance.
Some people will be happy with the results and others will not, a lot will be based on preconceptions of what or what not DW is expected to be.
Again if the final version resemble what I saw and playtested I think the responses will be favourable.
All the best