Yeah, in that case, I do agree that Civ's tactical nature over the whole series breaks people's immersion. But personally, I don't think Civ should be completely non-tactical or completely tactical. I think the community of gamers settled on Civ in part because it's somewhere in between - it has a little bit of combat, a little bit of empire building, a little bit of roleplaying, etc. It's what makes the game appealing to a mainstream (gasp!) audience. However, a side effect of the popularity and uniqueness of Civ is that a lot of gamers play Civ despite preferring something more extreme just because it's popularity means that more people know about it than other games or because those "ideal" games don't exist and wouldn't be economically feasible to make.