JarlFrank
I like Thief THIS much
toons
The word you're looking for is "characters".
toons
That doesn't make sense, you can have excellent simulation with TB or RTwP.
so I take it you're backpedaling on your claim that RtwP is better for immersion
lol no. Check my post above the one you made. There are roughly two things, and people often use "immersion" indifferently for both - there's absorption in the game, engagement, being in a gameplay trance state, having your head filled with the "possible moves" of the game, and there's the sense of being there, of tranlocation inside the virtual world and living through the story. The latter is the older sense of "immersion" that developers originally used (which now tends to be called "presence") and that's the way I use it (probably because that's what was current in the 80s and 90s when I first got into videogames).
So: RTwP leans more towards staying "in" the virtual world and "in" the story, and goes with more epic and intricate story, whereas TB leans more towards having something that's more like a series of absorbing chess matches linked by enough story to hold the interest, but with some detachment. Either way you can have more or less simulation, it's a different thing again. It's not a hard and fast essentialist rule, and as people have pointed out there are always examples of games that do it the other way round. It's just a natural going-together, a tendency, a natural fit.
Mostly true, but phase based combat might also use some kind initiative order for resolution phase.However, is there even one WEGO classic D&D style RPG with positioning and melee combat out there which works? Or at least a wargame but which is quite close to that, not any wargame?
As someone who really doesn't like WEGO for several reasons, I can point to the ancient naval wargame Mare Nostrum as an example of why it doesn't work.
Mare Nostrum is a wargame with ancient battlefleets, from Greek naval battles to Rome vs Carthage naval battles. It has a hex grid and you command ships in squads as well as individually. You can set their direction and speed, and the game tells you on which tile they will end up in the next turn.
So far so good.
The problem is that ancient naval tactics relied a lot on close touching maneuvers: ramming enemy ships or shearing off their oars with a close "drive-by".
But in the game's WEGO system, both you and the AI make their movement decisions simultaneously, and then watch them play out.
You don't set a target for your ships. You tell them which tile to move to. That means you have to guess which tile an enemy ship is going to be at during the next turn. Will the enemy stop his ship? Will he continue rowing it forward at constant speed? Will he turn away? Will he turn to face you? You don't know. So it becomes a guessing game, and in most cases both you and the enemy will just maneuver your ships past each other. Because WEGO just doesn't work in battles that rely on close combat and maneuvering.
It would work much better if you could tell your ships to target enemy ships and adjust their course dynamically based on enemy movements (like, you know, an IRL ship captain would do), instead of having them target a specific tile. But you can't do that, so it becomes a mess.
The only games I played where WEGO works are games with a focus on ranged combat. Modern squad tactics, or spaceship battles, where it's all about moving into advantageous firing positions, moving from cover to cover, or aligning a broadside with your railguns. Those work because you don't have to predict the exact position of your enemy, just their rough location within the map space: as long as your guns are aimed northwards, your units will be able to fire at any enemy crossing north of you.
But with melee combat, it just becomes a total mess of soldiers running in circles around each other.
Mostly true, but phase based combat might also use some kind initiative order for resolution phase.
I feel like this cuts to the heart of what playing a RPG actually is though.
Your skills should not trump your characters skills.
RTwP bad.
So: RTwP leans more towards staying "in" the virtual world and "in" the story, and goes with more epic and intricate story, whereas TB leans more towards having something that's more like a series of absorbing chess matches linked by enough story to hold the interest, but with some detachment. Either way you can have more or less simulation, it's a different thing again. It's not a hard and fast essentialist rule, and as people have pointed out there are always examples of games that do it the other way round. It's just a natural going-together, a tendency, a natural fit.
Simulation is paramount for immersion. Unless you're absorbed by just doing shit... which I gather is how you define it. Which is a really useless definition of immersion, as it's no different from saying a game is fun or gud.
But no specific grain of simulation is paramount for immersion. Is a storybook section less immersive for being just a few words, choices and a faux woodcut?
I think this is simply the effect of the resolution being too coarse. Every turn-based game can get a little janky when too much can happen in a single actor's turn, such that an extremely long, obvious action can be taken with no recourse from the opponent. This spawns interrupt rules as an attempt to patch this problem: Reaction fire, attacks of opportunity, etc.The problem is that ancient naval tactics relied a lot on close touching maneuvers: ramming enemy ships or shearing off their oars with a close "drive-by".
But in the game's WEGO system, both you and the AI make their movement decisions simultaneously, and then watch them play out.
You don't set a target for your ships. You tell them which tile to move to. That means you have to guess which tile an enemy ship is going to be at during the next turn. Will the enemy stop his ship? Will he continue rowing it forward at constant speed? Will he turn away? Will he turn to face you? You don't know. So it becomes a guessing game, and in most cases both you and the enemy will just maneuver your ships past each other. Because WEGO just doesn't work in battles that rely on close combat and maneuvering.
I think this is simply the effect of the resolution being too coarse. Every turn-based game can get a little janky when too much can happen in a single actor's turn, such that an extremely long, obvious action can be taken with no recourse from the opponent. This spawns interrupt rules as an attempt to patch this problem: Reaction fire, attacks of opportunity, etc.The problem is that ancient naval tactics relied a lot on close touching maneuvers: ramming enemy ships or shearing off their oars with a close "drive-by".
But in the game's WEGO system, both you and the AI make their movement decisions simultaneously, and then watch them play out.
You don't set a target for your ships. You tell them which tile to move to. That means you have to guess which tile an enemy ship is going to be at during the next turn. Will the enemy stop his ship? Will he continue rowing it forward at constant speed? Will he turn away? Will he turn to face you? You don't know. So it becomes a guessing game, and in most cases both you and the enemy will just maneuver your ships past each other. Because WEGO just doesn't work in battles that rely on close combat and maneuvering.
RTwP is TB, just with the turns taking place at the same time, as they do in reality which is what one seeks to model as a baseline.
brofist.jpgWell, first, let's just disregard "immersion" as a meaningful argument, since people can't even define it clearly. Although personally, I'd define it as "willingness of the player to give up sleep to keep playing your game". By this definition, it seems clear that real-time or turn-based are irrelevant as both Diablo and Civ have the capability to induce players to forsake sleep in favor of playing them more.
Thus it comes down to "what better fits the game you're making". If you have a singular unit with a relatively limited moveset, it seems pretty clear that real-time works better. If your actions are basically commanding a single unit to move and/or shoot, you're not getting much out of turn-based. The first two Fallouts, as much as people love those games, are an example of TB used poorly: You only ever command one unit and his moveset is basically just "move" and "shoot". The entire turn-based combat business just drags down gameflow for no real gain in your control of the system. The flipside of this would probably be TOEE, where you have a small, but not too small, number of units that each has a fairly complicated list of possible move choices drawn from a large swath of the 3E moveset. This game is pretty much spot on for where TB hits best. At the very edge of the territory might be X-Com, where TB fits almost perfectly, but at the very endgame, the number of units involved can get so large that it starts to strain and flow starts to grind down because of it, which is probably why the franchise has flirted with RT combat. This here is pretty much where you're going to find the border between where TB works best and where RT becomes the better option, because you have a single game that is starts where TB works pretty much perfectly and expands to where you're seeing it fray at the edges, but when done as RT, the exact opposite situation occurs.
In short, there's some ideal sweet spot where TB works best, probably defined in terms of how many choices a player has to filter between. If the player has insufficient choices to make, dragging it out into a slow turn-based game makes it BORING. But if the player has too MANY choices to make, so most of the time he's just going to do the default action, then TB will slow the gameflow to a crawl. In the middle, you have this range where the player still needs to make detailed choices to get good results, and a real-time gameflow would tend to obscure these or turn them into a battle against the interface rather than the enemy.
ASSFAGGOTS are a pinnacle of fantasy team-based tactical combat. RPG players pootling around vs AI are pathetic in comparison.good real-time is better than anything else, it's just harder to get right than turn-based
and rtwp isn't real-time, it's a homo bastardization of RTS. In many ways, it's a precursor to ASSFAGGOTS games.
yea I don't care how many people on the codex this upsets
the problem is that it's not very fun to micromanage multiple characters
You are dumb or what?When people talk about TB being too slow or RTwP being better for larger encounters you’re talking about RT without Pause. RTwP is designed to be played at the same pace as TB. If you want faster TB there’s no reason you can’t use the same scripts RT uses to speed up turns you don’t feel like controlling yourselves.
the problem isn't exactly rtwp, the problem is that it's not very fun to micromanage multiple characters. These issues are alleviated to some extent in games that have gambits/tactics/whatevertheycallit such as DAO.
rtwp is probably more suited to multiplayer than turn-based games are