X-Com 1 and 2 (new versions) are great games, even if they moved away from the large squad slaughter that was Enemy Unknown, terror from the deep and partially Apocalypse. I personally really enjoyed looking at black sections of the map and thinking "that will cost 3 rookies to explore"
Everyone is aware of the "95% to hit meme" around X-Com, and if you've played Phoenix Point, the difference is especially jarring. If you haven't, aiming in that game is purely a probability cone, so standing point blank next to an alien means something. In X-Com it doesn't mean diddly squat.
I finally figured out what the problem with X-Com is, and why it's always uniquely frustrating. With it's pod based mechanics, fake stealth and drip fed enemies. What you are seeing on screen has no relevance and only serves as a distraction. Being right next to an Alien and missing is irrelevant because where the character and alien are on screen do not correlate with the game.
X-Com is, for all intents and purposes a very fun card battle game. If it were a Dos prompt game, with exactly 0 visuals, nothing would be lost.
Try it next time you play, completely ignore the visuals and imagine your character as a card drawing a dice based attack against another card.
In addition to what Adam said about hit chances, positioning affects line of sight, which affects the stealth and pod activation (which definitely have problems, but not to the degree that I’d call them “fake”). Positioning also affects AoE, availability of cover, ability to reach objectives, some environmental hazards, and the effective range of many abilities. To call it all fake and say it’s actually a card battle game is so strange that I can only assume you’ve either never played the game, completely failed to communicate your idea, or are reaching so hard to say something revelatory that you’ve diverted your point into retarded.
It's a risk management game.
It could be described that way, yes. That doesn't mean that it's a card game, and it also doesn't mean that positioning and terrain isn't a big part of managing that risk.
I agree with everything you say. 100% you manage that risk on both layers. One of the creators said something like "losing to random numbers" about hard difficulty. And that he loses 1/3 of his games. The big picture of the game is not losing to random numbers.
We may die, but la Resistance lives on.