On Complex and Simple Combat Resolution Systems

So, my gaming group is switching from a FUDGE based system to Pathfinder. I can't really say I'm surprised. We haven't a great of track record with more more simplistic systems. My best guess on the reason why is the 'feel' of combat. That is, the combat subsystem is not very detailed compared to ol' D&D 3.5E. Only a few ranges, not very detailed movement, everything very abstracted into simple rolls. This isn't a bad thing, but it doesn't feel as involved as a more detailed subsystem, like is present in 3.5E. The actual need to move little men (or pennies) around a battle mat, calculation ranges, and the like add to the 'feel' that something cool and different is happening. Simply using the core resolution mechanic of rolling a d20 and adding a number without the rest of it adds no 'feel' to the game. This might be different if we used more description in our attacks, to flavor the rolling of dice, but we're mostly limited to 'Sword Flurry at X' or 'I smack him with my hammer' which doesn't color the die rolls very much, so it ends with the same problem we had with 4E: everything feels the same. We use mechanical differences as the general 'feel' of the game, and that's the basic problem we have with the more abstracted game systems. It's very difficult to capture the feel of things mechanically while remaining simple, and one of the best ways to do that 'describing action rolls' is not a great option for us.