Over the years, I noticed that some games produce a very 'trench warfare' or 'shooting gallery' kind of feel. The 'trench warfare' variant is where once a combat starts, nobody really cares about manoeuvring much, and at best runs for the nearest cover and stays there. The 'shooting gallery' variant is even more radical, where nobody even bothers to get to cover, usually because the effort:benefit ratio is too high. GURPS Spaceships and generally TL7+ GURPS firefights are like that; my experience with AD&D, D20 Modern (3e or 3½e equivalent, I think), and FATE games seems to put them into this category too.
I've also seen some games that aren't like that, where the positioning game has at least moderate importance. Rogue Trader spaceship fights and some mêlée combats in GURPS gave me such an impression. It's also the impression I've had from TTRPGs' older sister - tabletop wargames like Infinity.
But I have a hard time recalling any TTRPGs where the positioning part of the game is of strong importance, and where fire-and-manoeuvre is essential to winning. The examples of a strong positioning game I can think of fall outside TTRPGs - instead they come from old table games like Baduk or Chess and CRPGs like Divinity Original Sin. (Maybe I'm somehow just missing the right RPG examples.)
So it makes me wonder:
What design decisions produce (or can produce, or are more likely to produce) RPGs with a good, strong positioning game in combats? Preferably of the sort that's easy to learn but hard to master or 'solve'.
(At first I thought that it's a matter of attack range to movement rate per turn, but as noted above, some counterexamples with high movement-rate-to-engagement-range ratios seem to undermine that position.)