that guy clearly doesn't like RTSes in general, which is kinda a prerequisite (no offense intended). Besides: Obviously enough people like "complexity for it's own sake" to buy it! 
None taken.
I do however second the recommendations of the first review -- offering players a smaller, faster paced gameplay where small squads and even individual units can shine would be a worthy goal to add for a future game!
Could be, yeah -- though, things have been gravitating in that direction in general, honestly. With the addition of the 10-planet maps, plus handicaps, plus multi-planets starts, plus fast & dangerous mode, plus the humans-have-faster-ships... if you want a blazing fast fight to the finish, the options are there to configure one in a variety of ways. I bet you could play a 10-planet map with an 8-planet start in under an hour in a blaze of glory if you wanted to. I've not tried it, but it would certainly be a very different campaign from the norm with AI War.
The third review is more or less me, i just can't seem to find a map and settings i like and moreover get into the campaign far enough that i don't just chuck it after a couple hours worth. Though the small "tutorial" campaign would fit the bill for what that guy wanted. And, as a result, we don't get to see your awesome AI 
The third review, where the guy gives up due to the complexity is you? Wow, I had no idea -- that's kind of shocking to me, honestly, given that you're such a regular and have been for so long. You've had a ton of suggestions and comments and so forth for a really long time. What's causing you to chuck it? Are you constantly getting stalemated, or does it just become to easy? If you're stalemating, I'd suggest a lower difficulty level. If it's becoming too easy, I'd suggest pressing on a bit further into at least one campaign; it gets a lot harder as the AIP goes up, after all, and there's a big jump after you kill the first AI. Perhaps all the new capturables, and/or the new minor factions, might make for scenarios that are more likely to hold your attention. I'm not sure, but then again I'm not sure exactly what the problem is that you're facing, given how longtime of a player you've been here.
In short: You've made an awesome game which is doing great in it's niche, but in order to break out into the main market you'll need some sort of ramp for those not willing or able to scale the massive barrier to entry.
Here's the real crux of the matter, though: do I really
want to break out into the larger market? Or rather, what is the "larger market?" There are a ton of people who play 4X-type games, or other hardcore strategy games, and I'm very interested in them. But I think that trying to bend this game into a "4X for beginners" direction would just wind up not really bearing very good fruit.
The best example I can think of is Magic: The Gathering. I used to be very into that game, and it is very complex. It's certainly not for everybody (even moreso because of its collectible nature, but also because of the ruthless, constant -- sometimes mean-spirited when it comes to card denial and such -- combat.). My wife hates it. I plan to surreptitiously indoctrinate our future kids with it when they're old enough.
But I digress. The best example I can think of is how Magic: The Gathering tried to make a variant called Portal. It was basically Easy MTG, with larger print, simpler explanations, and a whole lot less complexity in general. A few of the simplifications were good, and eventually made it back into larger MTG design (the giant mana symbols in the description area of land cards, for instance). But, by and large Portal flopped -- there simply wasn't a market for "a hardcore-seeming CCG that isn't hardcore."
In the case of AI War, there are tons of other games out there offering the "simple RTS" model, and doing a better job of it than I ever could. Why? Because I don't play those games for simplicity. I don't know anyone who does. I can't effectively design or test it. And I'm not sure there's a market for it. What I'm more interested in doing is capturing more of the hardcore strategy market, which we've hardly tapped despite what success we've had there. That's the Target Market in a business sense. Trying to muddy that by making the design so broad that it covers Everything And The Kitchen Sink generally leads to products that are too generalized to appeal to anyone. I've had experience with that in the past, incidentally, in past business endeavors.
So with AI War, my goal was to target one specific audience and do so really well. I think I've mostly succeeded. Other products from us will have vastly different target audiences in many respects -- they may sell better, we'll see. Not that I'm complaining overmuch about the sales of AI War anyway, but it's certainly not at AAA levels or even something like World of Goo. But we're in the upper echelon for indie-developed games on the PC, which I think is worth noting. I'd rather spend development time on continuing to attract more customers from that key 4X/hardcore strategy market for AI War (via DLC and expansions), and then court other markets with other products.
Granted, I know where you're coming from, and I do try to make AI War as accessible as possible when it comes to easing players into what it is. Hence all the tutorials and other material, and the ongoing tweaks to the gameplay to make things simpler on the surface while more complex in the scenarios being simulated. That's definitely a trend that will also continue. But even if I wanted to, I'd never be able to compete with the C&C's and the Starcrafts -- those games are finely tuned for short pvp (which I don't play), and have absolutely gorgeous, amazing production values. They're also hugely established brands, and primarily sold at retail. AI War could never go head-to-head with those in a million years, so instead I do business in the niche that I've designed it for. I'm gradually trying to chisel away at that niche to make it a bit broader and wider, but still the niche is what it is, and it's where this specific game will stay for all the reasons mentioned above.
Future Arcen titles, of course, are an entirely different matter -- I like games that make me think, but strategy games are uniquely hardcore out of the games that I enjoy. My goal with future titles is probably a lot more mainstream, namely to make easy-to-learn but hard-to-master games with an appealing, simple surface and decidedly deep underlying mechanics for those who are interested. It's that same sort of design philosophy that makes me love Nintendo, PixelJunk, and a number of other such brands. Of course, I'd aim for more depth than those often have, but I am convinced that there is a sweet spot where it will satisfy my more hardcore-thinking-game urges while not being so surface-complex as AI War.
Anywho, thanks for the comments -- interesting discussion.
