Idly musing on TB vs RTwP ...

[rusty_shackleford]

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

I feel exactly the opposite is true rusty. RTWP is a pain in the ass for multiplayer, while turn based lends itself naturally to multiple players. Ive had both experiences somewhat recently

Doorkickers 2 - pain in the ass to play with just one other person

DOS2 - fantastic fun with a fully group.

I hated playing dos2 in coop because I spent most of my time doing nothing

 

[Johnny Biggums]

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.

Autopause achieves the purpose of TB without needlessly compromising that baseline.

For me the simultaneity of action and the immediate reactivity of combatants (after you release the pause) is very engaging. It feels more like combat to me, and less like a rule-heavy puzzle. There’s also something mildly irritating about seeing combatants stand around while someone else takes a turn, sort of like in a kung fu movie where the protagonist is surrounded by a gang who just attacks one at a time. It can be well done but part of you always notices that it looks kind of dumb.

 

[Desiderius]

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.

You are dumb or what?

In TB combat, when all three combatants aim at one target and shoot at that in their side's turn, nothing can stop them, because it's their side's turn.

In RTwP, because it simultaneously happen on all characters, in such scenario, there's a chance, a big chance, others' action affect those three's action to save that target DURING those three's action. it could be one combatant throw out an AoE spell/grenades and kill off those three, or nudge them badly off-position that they can not target properly, etc...

Example on IWD/BG engine game: one summoner call up a apocalypse bone guard. Now if it's tb, his spell is unstoppable and you are going to have a tough meatshield on your face. But since it's RTwP, the other side's archers can try to concentrate arrows on him and force a failure in casting. Or the frontline 2hand spearman try desperately and can reach that one with his halberd, his melee attack force a failure in casting.

If I am what are you - this comment is a copy of what I just said a few comments back. If anything what you’re saying is that RTwP is slower than TB, which is opposite of the usual take I was criticizing myself.

Note to all ankle-biting fucktards:

If your first instinct when reading a comment is “hurr durr, dis guy is stoopid,” take a deep breath and read again, this time for comprehension, before you beclown yourself in front of everyone.

 

[ProphetSword]

I’m going to make an argument I haven’t seen here yet. Some of us like TB because it is similar to playing an actual tabletop rpg. When done right, it can mimic the tactical challenge of a well planned encounter by a really smart GM.

All that goes flying out the window in a RTwP clusterfuck. It’s like comparing chess to a frantic game of Hungry Hungry Hippos.

 

[Desiderius]

I’m going to make an argument I haven’t seen here yet. Some of us like TB because it is similar to playing an actual tabletop rpg. When done right, it can mimic the tactical challenge of a well planned encounter by a really smart GM.

All that goes flying out the window in a RTwP clusterfuck. It’s like comparing chess to a frantic game of Hungry Hungry Hippos.

We're trying to tell you that it doesn't. You're doing it wrong.

Click on Options. Find the Autopause menu. Configure your tabletop experience. Press "v" instead of Space. Enjoy!

 

[Faarbaute]

From RTwP to turn based, action, first person, third person or isometric, they all have their merits but it depends on what kind of story you're trying to tell, how and to who.

Maybe you want player skill to matter alot or maybe not at all, maybe you want a marriage of both.

Is combat just a means to an end in your game or is combat the reward in itself?

Diffrent kinds of challanges arise out of these systems that are enjoyable in diffrent ways to diffrent people.

Some players enjoy things heavily abstracted while others enjoy things to be as realisticly simluated as possible, from the way you control your character, to everything.

Some players enjoy controling a party of characters while others prefer a single character. Some enjoy hectic gameplay while others don't.

Maybe you like all of the above but it depends on your mood. Maybe your sweet spot for abstract gameplay is to have text blurbs describe details like in Fallout, while other feels that this is completly lackluster.

Lets say you are trying to create a fiilmatic feel in your game. You are doing everything you can to convince the player that he really is Sherlock Holmes. Having a character then exclaim something like "Wow! What a nice car!", requires there to be a realistic model of a nice looking car present or the whole thing is gonna seem retarded.

Or if you wanna tell a story like the Witcher for example, maybe the challange as a developer is to get people to feel engaged with an allready established story/character and one way you could do that is to focus on "immersion" in the sense of putting you there in the action.

But if your game is more about "playing", then having things simulated in a realistic way could just end up getting in the way. Like realistic animations in turn based games wearing out their welcome really fast.

TLDR: There is a time and a place for everything.

 

[BING XI LAO]

Some players are cringe while others are based.

 

[Tigranes]

Some players are cringe while others are based.

If this was 20 years ago your post would just be "LULZ PWNED L33T!!!!!"

A sweet, simpler past, I guess

 

[Johnny Biggums]

I’m going to make an argument I haven’t seen here yet. Some of us like TB because it is similar to playing an actual tabletop rpg. When done right, it can mimic the tactical challenge of a well planned encounter by a really smart GM.

You're not seeing that argument here because it's old hat. We're playing on computers, not tabletop, a different medium with different strengths, one of which is to play simultaneous turns that more closely represent real combat. In this light RTwP was a very clever adaptation to the medium's potential.

 

[BING XI LAO]

If a game really wanted to mimic P&P it should take half an hour to load while the player talks shit with the 75% of players who've turned up on time

 

[Faarbaute]

Personally, I prefer TB over RTwP not because I think one is superior to the other but for the fact that I feel like im fighting against time in RTwP, even worse if there is no "with pause" in there.

The more moving actors are involved the more stressfull it gets. I can overcome this by getting good but I don't find it inherently enjoyable, onley something to put up with.

This is not the challenge I'm looking for in RPGs so I avoid it if I can.

 

[Desiderius]

Everybody has played TB games from D:OS to Gold Box and RT (eSports, MMOs, shooters whatever) but unless you came up in the BG/PS:T window you may not be that familiar with RTwP and so either try to play it like RT or try to twitch skill the Pause and never get the experience as designed.

There’s no reason for shit to be flying everywhere out of control. Every control you have in TB is in-game. If you want more control use them.

 

[Faarbaute]

Everybody has played TB games from D:OS to Gold Box and RT (eSports, MMOs, shooters whatever) but unless you came up in the BG/PS:T window you may not be that familiar with RTwP and so either try to play it like RT or try to twitch skill the Pause and never get the experience as designed.

There’s no reason for shit to be flying everywhere out of control. Every control you have in TB is in-game. If you want more control use them.

I'm very familiar with how RTwP plays out. The fact that it has simultaneous actions, which some would say is its strength, means it can never be what I want it to be.

 

[ProphetSword]

I’m going to make an argument I haven’t seen here yet. Some of us like TB because it is similar to playing an actual tabletop rpg. When done right, it can mimic the tactical challenge of a well planned encounter by a really smart GM.

You're not seeing that argument here because it's old hat. We're playing on computers, not tabletop, a different medium with different strengths, one of which is to play simultaneous turns that more closely represent real combat. In this light RTwP was a very clever adaptation to the medium's potential.

Hey, no shit, we're playing on computers? Thanks, Captain Obvious.

I think the point your missing is that some people like to recreate the experience of tabletop. Maybe you should read what I wrote again.

 

[Humanophage]

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.

It depends on the TB approach. The major strength of RTwP is the simultaneous movement of opponents. Many TB games have the opponents not only move one by one, but the unit initiative makes player and AI turns mixed. So you get:
1) ToEE, Battle Brothers = individual unit turn order is based on initiative. This can get very slow and boring, especially in trash fights.
2) AoW = turn order is based on team, so all of your team moves in one turn. However, although there is a separate enemy turn during which you can do nothing but watch, all of his units still move one by one.
3) The Last Spell = turn order is based on team as in AoW. However, unlike in 2, movement is simultaneous for all enemy units. You might say that the player's turn is turn-based, but the enemy turn is real time.

I find that the last option is optimal, unless it is possible to turn off animation and make movement as well as AI calculation near-instant, which is rarely the case even in older games with better design like JA2. It would be particularly good for combat with many units. However, team-based turns might be said to be somewhat less tactically rich, although you need to do more prediction, which is good.

The big downside of RTwP is that may be tedious to manage if you have many units that do stupid stuff unless micromanaged. Say, in Paradox games, which are RTwP, it is a bother to follow 20 unit groups fighting in different parts of the world - that's in spite of the fact that combat is rather simple. But that is rarely an issue in RPGs, where units are few enough. There is the added advantage in RPGs that RTwP helps overcome perfectionism. Yeah, you're not using all the best moves and you're not squeezing out every last action point, you autist. You don't really have to micromanage that much in Baldur's Gate. The problem starts when the autism is so strong that you can't put up with the imperfections and begin optimising in an actiony fashion, like kiting enemies.

Civ4 has a pretty convenient semi real time system where it is your turn pretty much non-stop. However, it depends on you not abusing it when playing with the AI - in particular, no double turns by ending your turn and immediately moving before the AI can do anything.

 

[Johnny Biggums]

Hey, no shit, we're playing on computers? Thanks, Captain Obvious.

No problem, Private Shitty Comebacks

I think the point your missing is that some people like to recreate the experience of tabletop. Maybe you should read what I wrote again.

It's like wanting to use film to recreate stage plays. I'm not against it. It can definitely be done well. But, in that one respect at least, it's a utilitarian use of the medium rather than a clever or authentic one. It's even premised on being a second rate version of the other thing.

Simultaneous turns, on the other hand, was really a clever and creative adaptation - incline in the pure sense.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

Grid based TB combat in a game with tons of trash mob encounters.

Makes me consider using a belt as a necklace.

 

[Faarbaute]

Grid based TB combat in a game with tons of trash mob encounters.

Makes me consider using a belt as a necklace.

Autoerotic asphyxiation?

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

Autoerotic asphyxiation?

Sometimes I pretend I am waiting to become a butterfly and flutter away.

 

[Faarbaute]

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.

It depends on the TB approach. The major strength of RTwP is the simultaneous movement of opponents. Many TB games have the opponents not only move one by one, but the unit initiative makes player and AI turns mixed. So you get:
1) ToEE, Battle Brothers = individual unit turn order is based on initiative. This can get very slow and boring, especially in trash fights.
2) AoW = turn order is based on team, so all of your team moves in one turn. However, although there is a separate enemy turn during which you can do nothing but watch, all of his units still move one by one.
3) The Last Spell = turn order is based on team as in AoW. However, unlike in 2, movement is simultaneous for all enemy units. You might say that the player's turn is turn-based, but the enemy turn is real time.

I find that the last option is optimal, unless it is possible to turn off animation and make movement as well as AI calculation near-instant, which is rarely the case even in older games with better design like JA2. It would be particularly good for combat with many units. However, team-based turns might be said to be somewhat less tactically rich, although you need to do more prediction, which is good.

The big downside of RTwP is that may be tedious to manage if you have many units that do stupid stuff unless micromanaged. Say, in Paradox games, which are RTwP, it is a bother to follow 20 unit groups fighting in different parts of the world - that's in spite of the fact that combat is rather simple. But that is rarely an issue in RPGs, where units are few enough. There is the added advantage in RPGs that RTwP helps overcome perfectionism. Yeah, you're not using all the best moves and you're not squeezing out every last action point, you autist. You don't really have to micromanage that much in Baldur's Gate. The problem starts when the autism is so strong that you can't put up with the imperfections and begin optimising in an actiony fashion, like kiting enemies.

Civ4 has a pretty convenient semi real time system where it is your turn pretty much non-stop. However, it depends on you not abusing it when playing with the AI - in particular, no double turns by ending your turn and immediately moving before the AI can do anything.

If I'm not mistaken, Realms Beyond was going to feature both traditional initiative turn based combat and a system that let swarms of enemies, like a large group of goblins or kobolds, all act together on the same turn.

 

[Desiderius]

Guess we'll find out when Soyer buys it in 2037.

 

[laclongquan]

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.

You are dumb or what?

In TB combat, when all three combatants aim at one target and shoot at that in their side's turn, nothing can stop them, because it's their side's turn.

In RTwP, because it simultaneously happen on all characters, in such scenario, there's a chance, a big chance, others' action affect those three's action to save that target DURING those three's action. it could be one combatant throw out an AoE spell/grenades and kill off those three, or nudge them badly off-position that they can not target properly, etc...

Example on IWD/BG engine game: one summoner call up a apocalypse bone guard. Now if it's tb, his spell is unstoppable and you are going to have a tough meatshield on your face. But since it's RTwP, the other side's archers can try to concentrate arrows on him and force a failure in casting. Or the frontline 2hand spearman try desperately and can reach that one with his halberd, his melee attack force a failure in casting.

If I am what are you - this comment is a copy of what I just said a few comments back. If anything what you’re saying is that RTwP is slower than TB, which is opposite of the usual take I was criticizing myself.

Note to all ankle-biting fucktards:

If your first instinct when reading a comment is “hurr durr, dis guy is stoopid,” take a deep breath and read again, this time for comprehension, before you beclown yourself in front of everyone.

Dumbass never know their own dumbness, that's why they are dumb ass. This mean you, yeah you Desiderius, specifically.

When you are attacked with some specific attacks, you are going to respond precisely. General attack back with hurdur ya' dumb is just... low IQ.

YOu can make these great examples of this level? In your dream, noob.

 

[Desiderius]

Dumbass never know their own dumbness

Proof by demonstration, well done numbnuts. I'm often wrong, rarely in doubt, but no one thinks I'm stupid but retards like yourself.

Because I'm not. People, don't beclown yourself like this. Suicide by Kotex.

 

[laclongquan]

And have you EVER made a quality post? In this thread, or hell, in general over all this board?

Come on. Quote yourself! If you think you can make something worth while, that is.

 

[ADULF HITLOR FAN KLUB]

I prefer turn-based, because then I can easily eat lunch in front of my computer, or do something else on a second monitor, while waiting for repetitive animations to finish.