I was thinking tonight of a more succinct way to describe the philosophy different. I'd say War of Magic was designed to be a lot more abstract. That's why so many people found it bland I think. The details of the soldiers and magic were not considered core to the game design because ultimately it was about which civilization was able to acquire the most powerful weapons and spells rather than any real concern over how well those weapons and spells were used. The blandess was a "feature" not a bug. But in hindsight, not a good idea ... The problem with WOM in its current state is that it still tries to be too many things at once.
Sigh. I didn't want to read that. I think you're giving us one way of thinking here; that of the developer. I can see why you would say that, that you think the original game is too broad and abstract, with a lot of the focus on the game still in the "theoretical" phase. But look at how a gamer might see this.
You mention that some things are bland in the game because it tries to do too many things at once. I think it's bland because none of the implemented features are all that fun to use. Yes, the scope of the game can be colossal; there's a lot of possibility in this game. However, there's not that one really cool thing that makes we want to keep playing it; that is why I consider it bland, not because it's trying too much. So what, you tried to do many things, but if they were just fun to use, then there wouldn't be a problem.
I can't think of a better example, it's too late and I'm too tired, but take Doom 2 for instance. The first pistol sucked, and then you got a decent shotgun, and THEN you got that double barrel. Now that was a weapon. So if the ENTIRE rest of the game was trash (which it wasn't, it was an awesome game), I'd STILL play it because of that amazing weapon. I know there's other games out there that I played just because SOMETHING in it kept me playing, even though I didn't like the rest. Conversely in Elemental, if the battle system was fun, or if negotiating was fun, or if the spells were fun (heck, I'd like the game a lot more if you copy/pasted Magic Vortex from MoM, now that was a imbalanced/fun spell to play around with; that would make the battles and spells more fun to mess around with), or the discovery and role-playing was more fun, then there would at least be something, for myself, to keep playing for.
Sorry, I don't mean to be rude about it, and I don't want to harp on what has already happened, but what you said makes me wonder if the same mistake will be made in the future. Just because it had a big scope doesn't mean that THAT'S why the game was bland; it just means the game was bland, period. Those same features, sparse and scattered as they might be because of the enormous scope of the game, could have easily just been fun if they were implemented for that purpose, and not to feel like a broad outline for things to come. Conversely, if the game WASN'T given such a big scope, the game could STILL be bland and boring if the features that are implemented are just not that fun to use. I'd give up 90% of the spells, for example, if it would mean the remaining 10% were similar to fun spells in other similar fantasy strategy games.
Hence, one of the first changes I put into v1.3 of WOM is the elimination of individual formations and instead starting with 4 and going up from there.
I like some of the ideas that you have for FE (making it a more "personalized" game) and some of what is happening with Elemental, but for the latter ... I don't think "redesign" is what is needed for the game. Some things don't work and so you need to fix them, but keep that long term; add spells, add units, add quests; just add fun features that can help a person keep playing it.
In the mean time, I'll be cautiously awaiting FE; as Vallu751 said above, if FE is head and shoulders above War of Magic then that's the game I'll play. I won't look back, because I don't think there's anything currently in WoM that will bring me back; and that's a bit sad.
