If -insert RTS here- was turn based...

[Cassidy]

I wouldn't lose the opportunity to order or change the units under construction and base improvements while I'm too busy taking care of my units out there during a tactically challenging battle.

Yes, I know they are hotkeys and I use them when I can and that there is the pause button(though in some RTSes you can't give orders at all while the game is paused) but I still can perceive the imminent limitations real-time bring to the genre when I'm playing anything that is more strategically complex than Ground Control 1 or another RTS without construction and resource management and that add the need of some twitch skills as well. I think that in such matter the "Total War" games pulled a arguably nice solution by making the resource management and building turn-based while the tactical combat is real time. But now to other flaws besides interface limitations...

ZERG RUSH!!! Oh how I hate this infamously popular one-liner, it's the kind of thing that is crippling to novice players and very annoying to veterans, and when you could just build more infrastructure to become much more powerful later(valid for both sides), allowing a much longer and interesting attrition warfare, you are forced to build very early defenses because of them and when the rusher is a n00b, all you have to do is dispatch as small force and bash him as n00bs in RTS tend to forget about "what if my attack fails and there is a counter-attack?". Thus in most cases it equals short and uninspiring matches.

Also this infamous phrase can be used to describe which I consider the most annoying flaw of most RTSes: the gameplay aspect of whoever clicks/hotkeys faster has higher chances to win, even if he is slightly less skilled in strategy which doesn't exist in turn-based and is the most of the mentioned twitch-gaming.

Plus there are possibly other flaws I forgot to mention, but the questions are: Is there any solution to solve these problems in RTSes or are they inherent to the genre and unavoidable to the point that turn-based strategy is preferable for more complex in-depth strategic games? Is Total War series approach a nice compromise? Any other thoughts on such matter?

 

[Deleted member 7219]

A turn-based RTS?

*shudders at the thought"

 

[kingcomrade]

The time constraints are part of the game. Managing your economy while managing your troops is what RTSes are about. They do require twitch skills, you might as well make Zelda turn based.

 

[vrok]

RTSs are all about the multiplayer. Even less people want to play turn-based multiplayer (multi >= 2) games than they do turn-based singleplayer RPGs, including me.

 

[Cassidy]

A turn-based RTS?

*shudders at the thought"

I'm not expecting Medieval: Total War to suck, but I never played it so I can never be sure.

I'm wondering if improving an interface to the point you could renew build queues in your base without having to pinpoint buildings in a mini-map or move your screen all back there(in worst cases) wouldn't help with it. I've seen some good interface ideas in some RTSes, but most carry the default only. If a mere "A" to "select all aircraft plants" and then a "1" to "build unit type 1" were available, the burden would be less and the click fest much more uncommon.

 

[Nedrah]

I believe that Supreme Comander, however flawed one might consider it's execution, had the right idea to tackle that kind of issues. You are not the one telling each tank or even small group of tanks what to attack at any given time. Instead, you act more like a real leader - you say what you want produced, how much of it, what you want destroyed and who should do it. While that may sound like every rts ever, the clue is that, after issuing your orders, which may not be caried out until much later, you can go back to working on the bigger picture, where your skills are more valuable than they would be telling individual units exactly where to stand, what to attack at any given time, when to retreat for a few seconds - that'd be Warcraft 3 (which is also fun ) right there.

So, in essence (and sorry, it's late) I believe that, given an advanced AI that you actually trust to manage your stuff adequately and a sufficiently slick interface, a much less hectic and more strategic kind of gameplay can be achieved, even within the boundaries of the RTS genre. The trick's obviously to make sure the game still actually works through the player, as there's a certain danger of degrading him to more of an observer if you take things too far.

Sadly, with Supreme Comander wining tactics pretty much seem to revolve around building really lots of factorys and spamming your enemy to death - maybe they improved that, I don't know.

 

[NiM82]

M.A.X (Mechanised Assault eXploration) did the whole 'turn based RTS' thing rather well.

 

[Destroid]

http://www.galacticassault.com/

Galactic Assault is a turn based strategy game that looks rather a lot like an RTS. Made by paradox too.

EDIT: Published by Paradox. Made by some other people.

 

[the_Consumer]

A turn-based-real-time strategy game? Briliant!

 

[YourConscience]

http://www.galacticassault.com/

Galactic Assault is a turn based strategy game that looks rather a lot like an RTS. Made by paradox too.

EDIT: Published by Paradox. Made by some other people.

It's being made by a russian developer - Akella.

And it's actually a very simple classic turn-based strategy game. But judging by screenshots I also initially mistook it for yet another RTS. However, its basically a reincarnation of Battle Isle, nothing more, slightly less. (Battle Isle was quite difficult compared to this) I hope to be done with my review sooner than later...

 

[Globbi]

The whole idea is stupid IMO. If a game is made turn based then it is suited to be so. There are real time tactical games (those that are called real time strategies) and there are turn based strategies and tactical games. Both may be played MP or SP. Why taking a RT game and trying to make a TB of it? If you don't like one kind, play the other. I don't like the quick clicking in RTS games so I rarely play them on MP, but I like playing Civ4 or HOMM on MP.

 

[YourConscience]

The idea of combining real time with turn based isn't stupid at all. Jagged Allience had this in a very nice way: In non-combat situation you have real-time, in combat situations it's turn-based. As you know, this played out very well. The Total War series is another example of a good blend of real time with turn based. Basically, any game trying to let you play in two very distinct perspectives will profit from also making the feel of the two perspectives different.