I think your request needs more clarification. By the letter, Total War (tactical level) would qualify since combat at least nominally happens soldier-by-soldier, but the player has control over larger groups of soldiers only. But I don't think this is quite what you're looking for. The player is still freely able to order units to take action and they will at least attempt to obey instantly, albeit fallibly due to mechanics like momentum, close engagement with the enemy on one or more sides, or routing. In fact I think TW is an anti-example because the units having failed to obey an immediate directive cannot be made to accomplish a general goal without repeated direct commands.
There's also something like Gratuitous Space Battles (or worse, Stellaris' combat mechanics) where the player has no combat control at all, but it also doesn't seem quite right.
I fear the formula may simply not be very fun. GSB may push the envelope on how much you can take the player out of the loop without losing the plot, but even there I suspect it borrows quite a lot from strategic games like Stellaris (or any Paradox grand strategy) where the tactical layer exists solely to validate or falsify the players' strategic decisions in a slightly more dynamic way than "bigger number wins".
There's also something like Gratuitous Space Battles (or worse, Stellaris' combat mechanics) where the player has no combat control at all, but it also doesn't seem quite right.
I fear the formula may simply not be very fun. GSB may push the envelope on how much you can take the player out of the loop without losing the plot, but even there I suspect it borrows quite a lot from strategic games like Stellaris (or any Paradox grand strategy) where the tactical layer exists solely to validate or falsify the players' strategic decisions in a slightly more dynamic way than "bigger number wins".