RTwP is the Same as TB the Only Difference Being You Pick The T

[BING XI LAO]

TB is just RTWP with mandatory, extra, longer pauses

It is? then how do you play RTWP chess ? if turn based systems are nothing more than RTWP with pauses surely any system could translate to RTWP. I await your virtual RTWP chess game. Retard.

Name an RPG where every attack instakills and maybe chess will be relevant to the discussion of TB and RTWP RPGs. I await this, retard.

When you have attacks that roll to hit and then roll to deal damage that's often what, 10% of max HP, it doesn't matter who hits first, and there's no benefit whatsoever to having everything be slowed down by sequential turnbased moves.

If chess had attacks that do quite low damage per hit, instead of every attack instakilling, then that game would be vastly improved by moving to RTWP. Of course that would be a very different game, chess is fine with its current 1-hit-kill mechanics.

 

[Shadenuat]

The biggest problem with typical RTwP games, in my opinion, is that they take a turn-based game (generally, based off some form of PnP RPG or wargame), then make it real-time, but try to keep the turns

Note the timer for each action measuring the time in seconds up to 2 decimals. Rather than having actions take abstract "rounds", they take a certain amount of time, and having a character with higher reaction times can be a lifesaver because shooting and hitting 0.1 seconds before your enemy does can be the difference

It is not a problem, it's a good solution to break down flow of combat into easier chunks.

Decimals are fucking terrible when mixed with many abilities, see PoE 0.03 seconds buffs. And player reflexes shouldn't be key factor here, unless it's pure RTS, it's the difference between sequential turns and simultaneous turns which is important.

RTwP allows for simulatenous actions for both sides, where if enemy goes for your wizard you can react by interrupting your spell and casting hold person on him while breaking out one of your melees to intercept him. It is more tactical.

In TB after you moved your figure you can't take move back. You must predict all enemy moves and approaches or they kill all your x-com-men moment you hit End Turn button. It is more strategic.

Both are good.

P.S. The best part of ToEE is its faithful implementation of TB combat. But not actual game itself or its encounters.

 

[BING XI LAO]

To take just one example of TB being clunky and shit: I have 6 movement points. I use 1 point to step in front of a corridor that branches off to one side, 4 to shoot the Super Mutant that is down that corridor, and the last point to step back out of range. He has no chance to retaliate because of the amazing tactical depth of TB games.

 

[Fairfax]

I think you’re just being an autist now Fairfax. DQ not turn-based? Now that’s absurd.

The discrete phases for declaration and resolution make it phase-based. The basic concept is similar to AD&D, for example, it's just extremely simplified in DQ. DQ11 is strictly turn-based, since there's a turn order and each character's turn executes their actions. Most call both "turn-based" because they don't care/never thought about the distinction, and RPG terminology has always been lacking and inconsistent.

 

[Strange Fellow]

To take just one example of TB being clunky and shit: I have 6 movement points. I use 1 point to step in front of a corridor that branches off to one side, 4 to shoot the Super Mutant that is down that corridor, and the last point to step back out of range. He has no chance to retaliate because of the amazing tactical depth of TB games.

Hence why any half decent TB game with guns has reaction fire.

 

[BING XI LAO]

To take just one example of TB being clunky and shit: I have 6 movement points. I use 1 point to step in front of a corridor that branches off to one side, 4 to shoot the Super Mutant that is down that corridor, and the last point to step back out of range. He has no chance to retaliate because of the amazing tactical depth of TB games.

Hence why any half decent TB game with guns has reaction fire.

When your system is fundamentally bad so you have to add on even more contrived, arbitrary mechanics ontop.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Turn-based games abstracts time. RTwP does not. Create an action point system which functions through time usage, and it's all basically the same damn thing. For example, if every Action Point in Divinity:Original Sin were to represent half a second, the game would play in real-time just fine. The only significant design change would be to decide what interval to have AP regenerate. Pillars of Eternity attempted to do something like this, but they failed by not seeing the forest through the trees. I blame Sawyer's autistic focus on minutiae.

 

[Saduj]

To take just one example of TB being clunky and shit: I have 6 movement points. I use 1 point to step in front of a corridor that branches off to one side, 4 to shoot the Super Mutant that is down that corridor, and the last point to step back out of range. He has no chance to retaliate because of the amazing tactical depth of TB games.

What do you mean no chance? He gets a turn.

 

[Squid]

RTwP is more annoying than it is outright bad. Turn based is king.

 

[BING XI LAO]

To take just one example of TB being clunky and shit: I have 6 movement points. I use 1 point to step in front of a corridor that branches off to one side, 4 to shoot the Super Mutant that is down that corridor, and the last point to step back out of range. He has no chance to retaliate because of the amazing tactical depth of TB games.

What do you mean no chance? He gets a turn.

The situation is when you're at the end of a corridor, so you can take one step to have vision down the corridor, and one step to be out of vision of the corridor. You get to spend your turns shooting down the corridor, enemy gets to spend his turns moving down the corridor.

 

[Saduj]

To take just one example of TB being clunky and shit: I have 6 movement points. I use 1 point to step in front of a corridor that branches off to one side, 4 to shoot the Super Mutant that is down that corridor, and the last point to step back out of range. He has no chance to retaliate because of the amazing tactical depth of TB games.

What do you mean no chance? He gets a turn.

The situation is when you're at the end of a corridor, so you can take one step to have vision down the corridor, and one step to be out of vision of the corridor. You get to spend your turns shooting down the corridor, enemy gets to spend his turns moving down the corridor.

But it isn’t an infinite amount of turns. The number of turns to it takes him to get down the hall is based on how much AP he has, aka how fast he is. This isn’t a problem.

 

[Zer0wing]

TB is more tactical while RTWP is more strategical. I do like both types of combat,but do get annoyed at all the TB fanatics that want to make everything in it because they are too old to keep up with other types that need frequent impute. Don't know why TB fanatics are so butthurt.

If only everything was so simple. I personally just don't trust modern developers on RTwP. It's almost impossible to make it good and worth the risk even at the right hands. No, Obsidian is jsawyering themselves from this leauge. The only game trilogy that nailed it in both tactical and strategic sense was Brigade E5/7.62/Maradeur. The first RT game I've found starting to be enjoyable is Fallout: Tactics.

And you don't even need pausing in that game.

 

[BING XI LAO]

But it isn’t an infinite amount of turns. The number of turns to it takes him to get down the hall is based on how much AP he has, aka how fast he is. This isn’t a problem.

The problem is that despite the guy at the corridor end repeatedly exposing himself to fire down it, the guy in the corridor can't fire back because it's not his turn when that happens.

Sure, it's not a problem that completely breaks the game, it's just an example of TB being a bad simulation, lacking tactical depth, and being clunky and generally bad.

 

[Saduj]

But it isn’t an infinite amount of turns. The number of turns to it takes him to get down the hall is based on how much AP he has, aka how fast he is. This isn’t a problem.

The problem is that despite the guy at the corridor end repeatedly exposing himself to fire down it, the guy in the corridor can't fire back because it's not his turn when that happens.

Sure, it's not a problem that completely breaks the game, it's just an example of TB being a bad simulation, lacking tactical depth, and being clunky and generally bad.

Depending on the game they can use their AP for overwatch instead of running down the hall.

 

[Squid]

Depending on the game they can use their AP for overwatch instead of running down the hall.

Aren't ya listenin'? They already said,

When your system is fundamentally bad so you have to add on even more contrived, arbitrary mechanics ontop.

about that!

 

[Saduj]

Well I don’t know how you argue that overwatch is contrived and arbitrary while also making an argument that shows why it is a good mechanic.

I don’t play RTWP games very often but I would bet that in most it is possible to kite around corners anyway. Maybe even more so if the monster being kited wastes time trying too late to return fire.

 

[what am i doing]

RTwP allows for simulatenous actions for both sides, where if enemy goes for your wizard you can react by interrupting your spell and casting hold person on him while breaking out one of your melees to intercept him. It is more tactical.

If you want that sort of thing there's no reason to have rounds, though. Just go fully real-time. Guild Wars 1's gameplay worked like that and it was extremely good - by contrast round-based RTwP has never worked out well.

 

[BING XI LAO]

Well I don’t know how you argue that overwatch is contrived and arbitrary while also making an argument that shows why it is a good mechanic.

I don’t play RTWP games very often but I would bet that in most it is possible to kite around corners anyway. Maybe even more so if the monster being kited wastes time trying too late to return fire.

Overwatch is not a good mechanic, it's a bandaid that raises more questions, such as whether using it requires pre-planning, pre-assigned action points, or is free, etc. The answers to those questions are all ultimately arbitrary. In RTWP there is no problem and there is no tacked-on solution whose special mechanics need to be learned either.

In RTWP: oh that guy is peeking out at the end of the corridor, I can shoot at him when he does so

In Turnbased: that guy is peeking out at the end of the corridor, but I can never shoot at him because it's his turn. Unless there is a specific mechanic that I have to engage, let me open the manual.... ''Overwatch'' section.... wow, all this overbaked and unecessary additions soothe my autism, therefore Turnbased is more ''tactical''

In RTWP, if you want to take an action, you can do so. In Turnbased it has to be wrangled through whose turn it is, 'overwatch' and who knows what else. Turnbased is simply inferior.

 

[Strange Fellow]

whether using it requires pre-planning

Yes (what the hell does this even mean)

pre-assigned action points

Yes

or is free

No

ooh so hard

 

[Saduj]

You’re exaggerated RTWPs quickness. If you want to shoot at the guy peeking around the corner you have to assign someone to do so and with animation it takes time for him to do it even after you give the order. By then the enemy is back around the corner. So the AI has to decide how to carry out your attack order when you lack line of site - probably involving crap path finding.

 

[BING XI LAO]

whether using it requires pre-planning

Yes

pre-assigned action points

Yes

or is free

No

ooh so hard

So now the guy in my example has to pre-assign his action points, that he could be using to advance down the corridor, to shooting at the other guy when he pops his head out. And if the other guy doesn't take a shot that round? Are the action points still spent on 'overwatch' fire that never happened? Do they get restored to the guy's next round of movement, so that one turn he moves much faster due to not engaging the special Overwatch Mode? Every attempt by Turnbased-tards to pretend this shit is salvageable only serves to further showcase how fundamentally bad Turnbased is.

Here's another example of Turnbased being bad: even moving down a narrow corridor as a party can be a chore if the guy who gets to move first is standing at the back of the line. Then maybe some games will introduce a rule that you can move through allies who haven't taken their turn yet by switching places with them, or you can defer your turn until after the guys in front get to theirs, or whatever other Overwatch-style bandaid gets tacked on. Meanwhile in RTWP you literally.... just move your party down the corridor LOL.

 

[Strange Fellow]

So now the guy in my example has to pre-assign his action points, that he could be using to advance down the corridor, to shooting at the other guy when he pops his head out. And if the other guy doesn't take a shot that round? Are the action points still spent on 'overwatch' fire that never happened? Do they get restored to the guy's next round of movement, so that one turn he moves much faster due to not engaging the special Overwatch Mode? Every attempt by Turnbased-tards to pretend this shit is salvageable only serves to further showcase how fundamentally bad Turnbased is.

Could you do your best to explain what the problem is with this scenario?

 

[BING XI LAO]

You’re exaggerated RTWPs quickness. If you want to shoot at the guy peeking around the corner you have to assign someone to do so and with animation it takes time for him to do it even after you give the order. By then the enemy is back around the corner. So the AI has to decide how to carry out your attack order when you lack line of site - probably involving crap path finding.

The moment that guy turns around the corner, the game is paused, because there's an autopause option for that. Then you assign a party member to shoot at that guy. Both sides presumably have an attack animation. if the sniper has a faster attack animation - using a crossbow against a longbowman, perhaps - then he can get a shot off and hide again before there's retaliation. If he has a longer attack animation, then he can't fire with impunity, because unlike Turnbased, RTWP is not retarded. Hopefully AI deals with attack orders issued against enemies who escape from vision by cancelling them.

 

[Saduj]

I actually find it hard to believe that the better RTWP games involving ranged combat do not have the equivalent of an overwatch command.

Edit: also why is auto pause when some guy you didn’t know was there pops out and ambushes you a good thing? He should get a free shot before you assign resources to deal with him.

 

[BING XI LAO]

So now the guy in my example has to pre-assign his action points, that he could be using to advance down the corridor, to shooting at the other guy when he pops his head out. And if the other guy doesn't take a shot that round? Are the action points still spent on 'overwatch' fire that never happened? Do they get restored to the guy's next round of movement, so that one turn he moves much faster due to not engaging the special Overwatch Mode? Every attempt by Turnbased-tards to pretend this shit is salvageable only serves to further showcase how fundamentally bad Turnbased is.

Could you do your best to explain what the problem is with this scenario?

Could you do your best to explain why it doesn't trouble you that Turnbased has to add a contrived bandaid mechanic just to deal with this situation while RTWP handles it using normal mechanics, seamlessly?