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

[JarlFrank]

Again, take a look at how the 7.62 High Calibre games did it.

Every gun has a different firing rate. Aimed shots take longer than snap shots because your character is taking time to aim. Taking more time to aim = higher accuracy. Melee weapons also have different attack rates.

This is in stark contrast with the rounds of the IE games and many other RTwP games, where you have "actions per round" (usually 1 action per round, but high level fighters can get two per round), which means every type of attack with every type of weapon takes exactly the same amount of time. This is a direct translation of D&D turn based mechanics into a real time system, and it's just an awkward combination that doesn't feel right.

 

[Elu]

which means every type of attack with every type of weapon takes exactly the same amount of time.

But it doesn't. You fire an arrow and damage is delivered only when animated arrow reaches you. You can actually see in the log a roll, see that there's a 'hit', then gulp a potion and the effect of the potion will be applied before damage. You can run out of the fireball affected area, avoiding damage, if you're on the verge of it or hasted, even though the animation of fire spreading is already visible. You can run from initial swarm created by 'insect plague' in a comical way ad infinitum. When two characters roll a 'hit' against the same enemy and the one who rolled it first is far away while the second one is closer, the damage of the second one will be delivered first etc etc.
Also, in your example you don't have two actions but two attacks, the attacks are on a independent timer from consumables/spells.
That's not even taking into account casting times that may and do widely differ.

Again, take a look at how the 7.62 High Calibre games did it.

Every gun has a different firing rate. Aimed shots take longer than snap shots because your character is taking time to aim. Taking more time to aim = higher accuracy. Melee weapons also have different attack rates.

Yes, the maximal rate of all attacks is constant and independent of a weapon type in IE, but that's not exactly something that differentiates between TB and real time (in TB like JA2 you also have different firing rates, snapshots vs aimed shots etc). In ADnD they decided to show difference between weapon types through the different lag between assigning command and its execution, it is not inherently tied to turn-based paradigm.
And like I said, call BG/IE's RWTP a 'phase-based system with real time elements' or whatever, the point is, it's fundamentally different than TB.

 

[Elu]

If you're lookng at it like that, there's always some kind of personal 'round', even in real life ;p

You would be surprised how, while playing football, person's 'round' painfully lengthens and 'rate of actions' decreases the older one gets.

 

[Citizen]

Combat oriented RPG are never difficult, TB and RTWP alike. They are just about using the optimal party setup/overpowered character build and so on. It's puzzle games that are the shit when it comes to difficulty

 

[infidel]

If I group 12 dragoons together in Starcraft they are still modelled as individuals, it's simply they are now receiving duplicate commands; you can also give them individual order or reassign groupings at will. I think that's a UI element, more than a mechanic. Is a TB/P&P grouping similarly a mere UI convenience, or do they start sharing properties such as initiative?

My point was that once you handle armies, there's no reason to treat individuals as such. But once you decouple them after the battle, sure, why not.

1.) If I want to move one mage somewhere but another guy is standing in their way, I can tell them both to move. And in general if I see something going on and I want my guys to react, I can just do it, I don't have to wait, or keep track of who acts before or after other people.

I agree, narrow one grid unit passages would be a problem for TB but they're usually pretty rare because even marginal testing quickly reveals they're not working and all the corridors are made two units wide or more if needed.

For example if there's a poison effect on someone, it's obvious when it ticks, because it does so every X seconds. In Turnbased, in order to know if I should use the curing potion or if I can afford to wait for the priest to cast a spell before it ticks next, I either have to keep track of when things happen or there has to be a powerful UI that makes it clear. The way TB wrangles everything though its sequential mechanism can be quite irritating.

What's the difference between an effect icon with seconds number near it and an effect icon with number of turns left near it? What you're describing is just a UI problem of some specific games that could be fixed pretty easily.

2.) There's still 5 fighters with the very desirable autoattack property.

Not really. I've mentioned level and hp specifically to point out that big difference in these would make you choose carefully who attacks what so as not to die. Same thing with equipment. There's a plethora of throwables, usables and ranged weapons in D&D, fighter can take an action to switch them.

3.) Autoattack isn't the only RTWP convenience; 'spell completed' is another favourite. The idea of cycling through 10 mages in TB is a daunting prospect; that's why you call it a slog. But in RTWP? I issue 10 orders, then hit unpause and watch the fireballs bloom, and the game pauses only when it's time to issue a command, which I keep doing.

That's assuming all commands complete in the same amount of time which they won't. The whole point of that example was that the more individual (as in no two mages are the same) combatants you have on the map, the more micromanagement you have to do to be effective, no matter the flow.

Similarly in the poison scenario I thought of above, the potion and the spell take on a lot of meaning, and you have to make a plan, a decision. But in RTWP it's all go, all the time, you can even drink the potion and cast the spell at the same time! Wheee! Fuck, am I persuading myself to prefer TB now?

You actually shouldn't be able to do that but that's just because not every game bothers to implement time cost for all actions and proper actions queue. Have you played Door Kickers? It's not an RPG but it's probably one of the most interesting RtWP implementations I've seen. You can make a queue of movement and actions of any length and complexity, unpause and enjoy while your guys clear the whole level in tacticool fashion. Or die somewhere because the plan was not perfect.

 

[Shadowfang]

TB games are usually easy and not very deep as well. Anyone who thinks any of the even slightly popular Tb games are difficult or deep has severe brain damage.

I explained myself badly but it matters little if we find X or Y game easy/shallow, at least to this discussion. What matters is that TB are usually harder and deeper than RTwP games.
Are there bad TB games? Yes. Some of these TB games are worse than some RTwP ones? Yes. We can't deny this but the rule is that on average TB games have deeper mechanics than RTwP.
Why? Well i think it has less to do about mechanics but more about the target audience. RTwP games are usually more popamole in design because they are made for a more popamole audience.
RTwP was mode for people that found TB games slow and boring, and didnt like the abstraction of seeing characters taking their turns shooting each other. It's not that RTwP could not be more complex, its that its already being made for less stellar individuals from the beginnings.

We could discuss the potential of both genres but i rather focus on what games we have, what games exist.

Also, kiting is prevalent in competitive RTSs as well. What did the recent Deepmind AI that beat pros do in StarCraft 2? It kited. This has very little to do with bad AI

Because it's much better when units just stand around waiting to be killed? Kiting is prevalent because it's a reasonable and natural tactic. The problem is not the fact that people attempt kiting, but the fact that logical mitigating factor are not implemented like different movement speed and ability to hobble or pind down opponents. And that makes kiting automaticaly succesful, no matter circumstances.

As addressed before, kiting is a natural tactic that should be embrace by the system with the sensible countermeasures implemented.

You guys got wrong my critic of kiting, and its my fault for explaining it badly. the problem its not that the enemy unit follows one of your men non-stop. The problem is that it keeps doing even after taking damage from your other companions without changing target priority. This doesn't happen in all games but its a problem that arises with RTwP that has to be fixed and its not as evident in TB games. Its the AI fault? Yes sure, but it happens on RTwP games.

As JarlFrank E5 Brigade and 7.65mm are the best RTwP games. In that game it really matters if you are going to waste precious seconds aiming your pistol to the guys head or are you just going to do some quick hip shots. A little buggy but overall great combat.

When you were a kid you played these games for the first time, now you know them by heart. It's obvious combat won't surprise or excite you. It's the same for TB games.

 

[onemananadhisdroid]

What this really boils down to is that the inherently more "Natural" flow of real-time combat don't mesh all that well with at times highly abstract D&D and D&D-like means of resolving a battle. The RTwP Combat in BG or IWD still remains some of the best RtWP experiences to me. Whilst they inhibit some of the inherent flaws of the above; they had the Benefit of AD&D 2nd Edition back then in particular on lower Level not being overly "complex" to begin with. Plus; Bioware omitted several mechanics that could be a Thing in the tabletop back then too, like "free attacks" upon retreating / fleeing. Thus, positioning and rather abstract rules and conditions assigned to it also didn't provide another layer of abstract complexity when Units in real-time moved across the battlefields simultaneously. This was likely done on Purpose, as upon developing the mechanics of the Infinity Engine, Bioware were big time inspired by Warcraft 2 (and Starcraft) -- James Ohlen was a nut for this.

tldr; Pathfinder Kingmaker were an even better game had it been turn-based and sported an encounter design suited to the concept. And Old-Bioware back then actually knew what they were inspired by.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Ya know, i like to be able to read the paper, eat some toast, drink some coffee, go take a crap, answer the phone and maybe casually run through a TB combat not dick around with pausing or w/e mechanic.

 

[ItsChon]

TB is better, but RTwP is also fine and not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. It really isn't that fucking hard to figure out what's happening, and I don't know why the vast majority of Codexers like to play dumb about it.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Spoiler

OP is wasting his time, on the Codex it's a tradition that you prove your mettle through hating RWTP. At the same time, you ought to wax lyrical about TB. Or else.
In reality, both approaches have their own strengths. TB allows for incomparable granularity, one action can be given far more subtlety. We see this with things like aimed shots at body parts, spending action points for increased hit chances, very precise movement. TB lends itself very well to setting up intricate combos where several carefully planned actions can lead to a tide changing result.
RWTP, on the other hand, handles far better scenarios where improvisation and tempo are crucial. Simulatnaeous resolution and differing completion time of various actions allow for not only setting up your own plans but also for far more effective disruption of others. You don't need to implement specific hacks to allow for interruption (like 'ready vs' etc), it emerges naturally. As the numbers of enemies increase, the virtues of RWTP become more impactful. And vice versa, as the number of enemies decrease the subtleties of TB become more engaging.
Ultimately, the crucial difference lies in the fact that TB has far far longer history of design than RWTP. TB was being developed at tabletop, while RWTP could emerge only with ascent of computers. If we compare number of system and games that were developed with TB in mind vs TB, it's not a surprise that there are far more good TB games. Add to this the fact that many RWTPs are TB masquerading as RWTP and the already huge discrepancy grows. It doesn't mean that TB is inherently superior, just that it is easier to implement and more tried-and-tested solutions have been established for it.
In fact, I would argue that the only games that fully embraced the consequences of going RTWP are BG games.

It is in the IE games

Actually, it's not in BG games, just in IWD games. One of the reasons why IWDs are shit.

The kiting has to be the worst

Because it's much better when units just stand around waiting to be killed? Kiting is prevalent because it's a reasonable and natural tactic. The problem is not the fact that people attempt kiting, but the fact that logical mitigating factor are not implemented like different movement speed and ability to hobble or pind down opponents. And that makes kiting automaticaly succesful, no matter circumstances.

But compare TOEE complexity with the other inferior RTWP D&D variants

Can I dependably disrupt spellcasting in ToEE and build my tactics around it? No. Do I have to fear being disrupted by opponents? Not really.
Do I have to be wary of backstabbing enemies attacking from the shadows? Not really.
Do I have to first peel away magical defenses from spellcaster before turning him into pincushion? Not really.
Do I have to be wary of morale breaking points? Not really.
So where is this complexity in combat dynamics?

I have played through ToEE for the first time with one PC and few hirelings (and you're supposed to use a full party? A joke.) and the game was piss easy. Even a wizard with a reach weapon and familiar can solo initial areas, just cast obscuring mist and have familiar tank. In general, ability to trip and reach weapons allow for abuse of AoOs. Which is fun, but easy, far easier than BGs.

About kiting, its more a flaw of the AI than it is of the RTWP

As adressed before, kiting is a natural tactic that should be embrace by the system with the sensible countermeasures implemented.

As a kid i liked RTWP more so i played a lot of them and looking back the combat sucks

When you were a kid you played these games for the first time, now you know them by heart. It's obvious combat won't surprise or excite you. It's the same for TB games.

Thank you for being an adult in this room. Your presence is appreciated.

 

[Master]

TB is better, but RTwP is also fine and not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. It really isn't that fucking hard to figure out what's happening, and I don't know why the vast majority of Codexers like to play dumb about it.

Its not hard, since after all you can pause every microsecond if you want. But its very inelegant and suboptimal way of doing it.

 

[Doktor Best]

Its impressive that OP managed to bait 9 pages worth of replies with this shitpost. What a success story!

 

[Darkforge]

TB is better, but RTwP is also fine and not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. It really isn't that fucking hard to figure out what's happening, and I don't know why the vast majority of Codexers like to play dumb about it.

Its not hard, since after all you can pause every microsecond if you want. But its very inelegant and suboptimal way of doing it.

Which is why I absolutely hate RTWP. I tend to want to micromanage too much, leading to said pausing every few microseconds. Do I need too? No. But I always have this nagging feeling my character (especially in the new pathfinder game) is never actually going to trigger that command I just queued. So it just feels not enjoyable and clunky.

Someone needs to come up with a system that simultaneously allows the strength of TB with the one advantage rtwp actually has. Dealing with mass amounts of trash mobs. (and I would argue if that's what you are padding your game out with it's poorly designed anyway.)

 

[rusty_shackleford]

RTwP also leads to a lot of autoattacking and ignoring what's going on outside of hard fights. I found myself using a lot more single-round abilities(& using Tristian more in general than as a buff/healbot) when playing PFK with the turn-based mod.

 

[SkiNNyBane]

There are a few necessary advantages RT has over TB.

1. RT has the satisfaction of mechanical execution. E,g the headshots, skillshots, movement, micro etc... When properly implemented, the utmost potential for fun in a game peaks way higher than TB, which is limited to only strategy. You can both win by making good decisions and mastering execution. This allows for interesting scenarios like beating opponents possessing superior strategic advantage through sheer skill.
2. RT has the added advantage of not only requiring you to think slowly on a macro level, but test your ability to make fast reactive decisions that are constrained by time. Unlike TB where the conditions stay constant throughout the turn, you are required to adopt strategy depending on what happens at ANY time.

While I think both ways of designing combat can be good, It is hard for me to imagine the best TB combat ever be as fun as RT combat.

Another thing worth mentioning is that the strategy part of vast majority of games are trivial within reading a few guides or playing for a few hours. What is left after the game is figured out is execution, which is way more fun in RT.

 

[FeelTheRads]

you are required to adopt strategy depending on what happens at ANY time

That any time is spread between turns so you will still be required to adapt. Technically the time stops in a turn in TB, but it's meant to represent a moment in time, it does not change the time the combatants have, like people usually seem to think. Which is why you have dumbshit like "lol who would stay still and wait to be hit TB is so stupid and unrealistic".

And sure, requiring dexterity is a different matter. Though, I'm much more satisfied when my character scores something like a headshot than when I do it in a game that requires manual dexterity to do it.

 

[octavius]

With RTwP your party can all the beat the dead horse at the same time. With TB they have to take turns.

 

[FeelTheRads]

If you take TB for the abstraction that it is, they also beat the horse at the same time.

Desperadoes, Commandoes deserve a special mention. Not really RPGs, but the right way to go.

Not really RTwP either, but hey...

 

[meatface]

There are a few necessary advantages RT has over TB.

1. RT has the satisfaction of mechanical execution. E,g the headshots, skillshots, movement, micro etc... When properly implemented, the utmost potential for fun in a game peaks way higher than TB, which is limited to only strategy. You can both win by making good decisions and mastering execution. This allows for interesting scenarios like beating opponents possessing superior strategic advantage through sheer skill.
2. RT has the added advantage of not only requiring you to think slowly on a macro level, but test your ability to make fast reactive decisions that are constrained by time. Unlike TB where the conditions stay constant throughout the turn, you are required to adopt strategy depending on what happens at ANY time.

While I think both ways of designing combat can be good, It is hard for me to imagine the best TB combat ever be as fun as RT combat.

Another thing worth mentioning is that the strategy part of vast majority of games are trivial within reading a few guides or playing for a few hours. What is left after the game is figured out is execution, which is way more fun in RT.

RT mechanical execution can definitely be satisfying, but the whole "wP" thing doesn't fit with that, because it lowers the skill ceiling so dramatically. The way your typical RTwP game is set up, that's probably a good thing, as managing large parties where each member has a long list of skills (many of which are often highly situational) can be hell in real time, especially given the kinds of encounters that can be thrown at you (combat AI can help when playing in RT, but it removes the satisfaction of execution, and it's about as effective as letting a 5-year old play for you). RT works when the game is designed around it, like in ARPGs where you only control one character with a handful of skills, and maybe you could make a party-based RPG that plays like Starcraft, but you'd either have to comprise the pace of combat or characters' complexity, and neither of those are very exciting prospects.

The best TB combat is also highly enjoyable, but it's a different type of enjoyment. The original X-Com is a great example of TB combat being loaded with details and set up in a way that it produces a tense atmosphere.

As for the argument that RT games retain lasting satisfaction because they require execution... I see what you're getting at, but after playing so many ARPGs (even ones that I like) that just devolve into mindless clickfests, I think what really determines a game's lasting appeal is the depth of its systems, not whether they are RT or TB.

 

[ItsChon]

RTwP also leads to a lot of autoattacking and ignoring what's going on outside of hard fights. I found myself using a lot more single-round abilities(& using Tristian more in general than as a buff/healbot) when playing PFK with the turn-based mod.

This is something I actually consider to be a pro with RTwP. Can you imagine going through IWD with a TB combat system? It would take absolutely forever. With RTwP, you get to have the strategic and enjoyable fights, along with the ability to deal with trash mobs expediently.

 

[smaug]

RTwP also leads to a lot of autoattacking and ignoring what's going on outside of hard fights. I found myself using a lot more single-round abilities(& using Tristian more in general than as a buff/healbot) when playing PFK with the turn-based mod.

This is something I actually consider to be a pro with RTwP. Can you imagine going through IWD with a TB combat system? It would take absolutely forever. With RTwP, you get to have the strategic and enjoyable fights, along with the ability to deal with trash mobs expediently.

That’s not the point though. You wouldn’t need hordes of trash mobs to make the game interesting if fights were mostly strategic, and based our turn-based.