I would like to second this. 

Everyone in this thread (and the developers as well, if they're reading) needs to try this strategy to truly understand how the first strike melee system is broken in the current beta:

Strategy taken from this thread: https://forums.elementalgame.com/418617

1. Create a new unit called "Fodder." Equip the unit with clubs and select the traits "weak" and "conscripted" (yes, both negative traits).

2. This unit has a low production cost and has a very low wage (~0.3 - 0.7 gildar per turn). 

3. Create an army of them to the maximum army size you can manage.

4. While in tactical battles, wait beyond the AI's maximum reach. Since your units can get first strike, you can whittle down your opponent's health. Even though your units have terrible traits and just clubs, their numbers enable them to deal a fair amount of damage.

5. You will have a constant attrition of units, but given their low cost and low upkeep, keep spamming them. 

6. This strategy works from turn 1 to the final stage of the game, as the AI always underestimates your army strength and increased squad sizes scale well with the damage of your "Fodder" units.

If melee combat always resulted in "counter attacks" between units, this strategy would not be feasible in the late-game. 

I've been devoting some thought to this too. What if only the *first* counter-attack was a given. That is, every unit starts with a free counter-attack ability that is either used on their first counter attack or lost if they attack another unit first. IMHO, after the first clash, the first strike system ceases to be as much of a problem. The AI only really drops the soap when they let you have all or almost all of the first strikes.

Also, this one-counter-attack-given could be removed with certain equipment, like a shield, which already has the defend ability and is a resonable guard against first strikes. It might also be removed with a labor-saving trait-- don't know what you'd call it.

Bwuh...?  That's so odd. I guess I was due.

While I'm on a roll then, I think that it's a bad idea for units to be "locked" in combat in general, for every unit to be able to counterattack, or every unit to be able to tie up other units.  However, I do like the idea of being able to deliberately build tank like units capable of tying other units up through the trait system.

The problem is, the tactical grid map in this game is probably not sophisticated enough to really pull off advanced tactical calculations like flanking or movement based Attacks of Opportunity. All that kind of stuff has to be modeled through unit abilities.  But lord knows, we need more exciting traits for the unit designer, and a reason to build different types of units.

Consider traits like these, that bestowed actual battle abilities, rather than passive bonuses, that you could use to build a tank, or someone capable of running down and stunning an archer. Standard cooldowns apply.

Shield Bash

Requires Shield. Range, any adjacent square.  Inflicts "Staggered" condition, duration 1 turn.  Staggered Unit  move speed drops to 1 square.

Shield Spin

Requires Shield. Requires Shield Bash trait. Inflicts "Staggered" trait in all adjacent squares for 1 turn. Casting unit receives "Dizzy" condition:-10 to Accuracy for 1 round.

Taunt

All Allied Units receive +100% dodge for 1 turn. Taunting unit receives -100% dodge for 3 turns.  Better pack some armor. (This one requires the AI to actually notice things like dodge bonuses for best results.  It would be effective when used against the player, though.)

Bull Rush

Unit immediately regains that turn's movement points. Loses all dodge until next turn.

Counterattack I

Unit gets one Counter attack per round upon successfully dodging a melee attack.

Counterattack II

Requires Counter Attack I.  Unit gets one free counter attack.

Counterattack III

Requires Counter Attack II. Unit gets two free counter attacks per round.

Some of those or abilities like them would be powerful when used with teamwork, or combos.  A pair of "Tanks"  in the skinny part of the tac map would be a formidable barrier.  Tac maps may actually need to be adjusted.

Just ideas. But I think we're much more likely to see traits and special abilities , than we are to see fundamental changes to the combat system now.  I do expect weapon damages to be adjusted so squads attacking first aren't so overpowering in the early game.

Neither invisible nor flying units could attack without counter. Invisibile units imposed a penalty to hit to attackers and defenders. Invisible units were immune to attacks until a unit moved adjacent. Flying units suffered the full damage from defenders, but were not subject to attacks from non-flying, non-ranged units.

That said I'm all for the counterattacks being added back in, but not before my melee units suffering instant death from all attacks is addressed. I'm of the mindset that -most- weapons should come with counterracks automatically. Perhaps slow weapons such as two-handed axes or mauls should not, and would give a reason to remove their initiative penalties. Ranged weapons should also have no counterattacks. Some weapons could have multiples (like staves), and traits could be added to increase the number of counterattacks available.

First strike and no-counter could be added as weapon properties to increase the variety and function of army units.