I know it's a super quality of life thing, (And I'm really enjoying the game, you've knocked it outta the park with this one!) But tactics games like this usually have a save feature, allowing you to savestate your progress every now and again. I get that some people don't like the idea of it, because they know people will save the game and try over and over until they get the perfect turn, every turn, but even if you limited it to every, say, 5 turns, it would be a great help. In some campaign missions, when I wiped on say, turn 23, I'd need to spend 15 braindead and disengaged minutes going through the first 20 turns that I'd already done efficiently, and hadn't noticed any changes. The first time I had to do it wasn't so bad, The second and third times where a little more painful, especially after the 100-to-0 move the AI had pulled on my commander. (But that's my fault for not being better at the game!)
This is a good idea! Fire Emblem did this via the "Suspend Game" feature, and some games even had "Save squares" on harder levels/lower difficulties where you could great an advance save point to start from in the level in case things went wrong.
I think both Fire Emblem solutions sound like they perfectly reduce the issues while not supporting turn-restarting (which is perfect imo)
It looked to me more like they didn't really care on fire emblem since you get elevated to the title screen after saving. It was meant so be an suspension save, without actually discarding the save. I'm all ears for some sort of compromise, but to allow reloading every turn is like allowing to cheating on purpose. Since you can earn stars in the main campaign and there are sliders to easen the difficulty, quick-saves would allow you to earn stars by not decreasing the difficulty at all. So it would be better they put the same restrictions in by using quick-saves. The idea to limit the possibilites of saving is an honorable too, but in my opinion 5 times are way to much. You would consider "savestating" only when it really gets rough, on every mission there may be 1 or 2 climaxes where it's the matter of one turn to make the right decision. I would rather recommend to allow a maximum of one checkpoint inside the mission, alone that would be sufficient since one checkpoint is enough to lessen the progress loss by a half. If someone really gets frustrated and stuck they can still just lower the difficulty with the sliders in that case, it doesn't matter how you skip the challenge. Games like that should be at least have some edges otherwise they turn into sandbox experiences, where unlockables or achievments will lose their value. At least I would say it not possible to satisfy every viewpoint by allowing quicksaves and believing it would be just another option of many. What options you include and what not can also be an important factor on game-design. At least that's what I'm thinking. So please allow us still to overcome exclusive challenges, intensic motivation doesn't work for me that much.
