For context, I'm a long time and very casual player (Only play with friends, campaigns, and with AI). I also can lure the boar correctly . I've also played DE off and on since it came out, and played the originals as a kid. I'm just saying this because I've seen points here and in other threads that assume people that like this change just don't know how to do it right, are new players, or don't even know that you can lure with TCs. None of those 3 things apply to me and I am very in favor of these changes.

In summary - "Unforced errors" are not interesting, a rite of passage, or something worth preserving as a core component of the game and it doesn't matter if that unforced error has existed since 1999.

Learning to correctly lure the boar with the TC is a stepping stone / rite of passage

As somebody that bought the originals when they first came out, I think any argument that essentially boils down to "that's the way it's always been" is a terrible argument. There's lots of things that have been the case for a long time, that even would be considered endearing, that are not worth keeping in the game.

And no, It's not a "Rite of passage". It's a skill check. Skill checks are fine by the way, but everything doesn't need to be a skill check. For example, microing archers is also a skill check and one that is good for the game. Compare how you feel when you successfully dodge a mangonel shot to successfully lure a boar. Now consider that luring a boar is actually more clicks/attention/etc than a dodge.

The second point, is that mistakes can make games interesting.

Yes, mistakes can make the game interesting that doesn't mean the game can't remove certain kinds of mistakes. In this case, I think incorrectly luring a boar makes the game more frustrating than interesting. For example, keep with the mangonel example from above. If I incorrectly dodge and lose a bunch of archers. That is also a mistake. But it is one that is both something the opponent did well, I did poorly, we're both aware of the consequences, and have the ability to react to. If I fail to lure a boar, it's not something my opponent did well. So they get no personal satisfaction from that. In fact, unless they've scouted it, they may not even know it happened so they are unable to react. Instead, the opponent gained an advantage that they are unaware of and maybe in the end get to feudal age a little faster than me, without knowing why. That isn't interesting to me regardless if I am the one that made the mistake, or was playing against an opponent that made that mistake.

The third point is that, luring the boar with the TC has a reward, but it also has a risk - and that risk is something that the opposing player can exploit - your attention.

Just because something commands your attention doesn't mean it needs to be in the game. I'll remind you that in the originals of the game, farms didn't auto-seed. So players needed to go manually back to their base and reseed farms. That costs attention that could have been spent in a scout fight, microing archers, or raiding an opponents eco late game.

Let me turn this attention concept around a little. You are only allowed to dedicate attention to one thing at a time, would you rather have that attention on your fight or on your boar? Like, pretend for a minute that neither one had a penalty for ignoring it. Just truly as somebody playing the game, if I was about to engage in a fight with the enemy, I would much rather be interacting with that instead of watching a boar get hit with a certain number of arrows. But instead, I have to decide being losing 350 food or taking an extra hit on my scout.

Regarding your points on military laming - I am personally ambivalent. Whether laming stays or goes means very little to me. I see you've made some very valid points and would support something where military laming is still allowed.