Tactics, what is the point?

[Anomalous Underdog]

That is not a good explanation unless you have troops who doesn't know how to use guns.
Get any basketball player and let's see how much they will miss.

I was just sharing a joke. I hate the outrageous RNG in XCOM like anyone else. In fact, I'm not really in an inclination to use dice rolls in my game either.

The most I'd go for is perhaps, a "blind" curse you can put on an enemy, which gives him a chance to miss. But it's a little more controlled because such a status ailment would expire with a set duration that both player and opponent knows. Same thing for concealment (camo, hiding in bushes, etc.) which makes it dependent on terrain, at least.

 

[tiagocc0]

Yep.

I would get rid of dices completely unless for some specific actions, like in fallout when you want to aim for the head.

 

[tiagocc0]

I agree with you, such as I accept the fact that the player wants to reload so he can change tactics but not reload to get a better dice roll.
He can reload to choose another direction in the dialogue, but not to pass a skill check with a dice roll. (In the dialogue)

One is when you want to change and another is when you want the game to change.

 

[Captain Shrek]

To be honest, i have never understood this obsession with the "savescumming". Why does one care why and how a player decides to play the way he does? All developers need to care about is providing more content that is both sensible, interesting and challenging. Leave the rest to us, the players to decide what to do with it.

 

[tiagocc0]

You can savescum all you want not matter the design.
I can however deliver you a game that you need to savescum or one that you don't need to.

EDIT: Let me take that back, you can't savescum on games that makes you save your game online and at the same time doesn't let you save/load normally, just continue from where you were.
But unless this is a mmorpg, it's pretty aggressive way of ensuring the player can't savescum.

 

[Captain Shrek]

You can savescum all you want not matter the design.
I can however deliver you a game that you need to savescum or one that you don't need to.

.

Right.

Why would you make it a design goal to prevent "savescumming"?

 

[DraQ]

Amateurs study tactics ,geniuses (such as myself) study logistics. In conclusion, supply management should be the prime activity of every strategy/cRPG game on the market.

Unless the game is about being a group of amateurs running around and bad tactics can get you killed regardless of your supply management.

You know, an RPG rather than grand strategy.

 

[tiagocc0]

Right.

Why would you make it a design goal to prevent "savescumming"?

It's more like design that allows save scumming is bad design FOR ME.
Playing GURPS or AD&D with your friends is one thing, you need a dice to make it more fun while trying to stay real to some degree, instead of just telling a story and deciding what happens all by yourself. Playing WAR or Monopoly is the same thing.

In those games however you can't save and reload. The game is not designed for you to save and reload, so bringing rules from those games while is a good initial idea, it does not mean that all games should always use all the rules.

Yet I want to feel like a table game, without all the rules of a table game, I want to be able to play without saving/reloading to save my ass because I was unlucky on a random dice roll.
See, I don't want random dice rolls to ruin my game, I want my decisions to ruin my game and I want to keep playing from there.
It doesn't matter if I lose or if I win. This is how I want to play my game and any other game.

You assume that I want to make a game where the player can't save and still needs to win (without saving) and that's wrong.


I'm not trying to tell the player how he needs to play the game.
I just want to design a game the way I want to play it.

 

[Midair]

Imagine if one were to build a "Deep Blue" quality AI for an RPG. I can assure you that it would be very little fun to play against. Combat would become even more puzzle-like with an AI that only makes optimal moves with zero mistakes.

You seem to be saying here that all the discussion about making games more challenging is misguided. Should tactical combat simply require sound management of your adventuring party, nothing clever or puzzle-like?

 

[DraQ]

Guys, a hint:

 

[hiver]

For combat to be truly tactical - it needs to include the environment. Which none of the games actually do.
At the most its some contrived superficial crap. Especially in cRPGs where environment is simply a nicely rendered background.

Verticality, which is just one of the environmental factors, is not included - at all.

 

[J1M]

Imagine if one were to build a "Deep Blue" quality AI for an RPG. I can assure you that it would be very little fun to play against. Combat would become even more puzzle-like with an AI that only makes optimal moves with zero mistakes.

You seem to be saying here that all the discussion about making games more challenging is misguided. Should tactical combat simply require sound management of your adventuring party, nothing clever or puzzle-like?

Nope. And I anticipated your question in the very post you are quoting. I guess I should also have anticipated that you would not finish reading it?

Encounter variety, enemy variety, and ability variety are what maintain fun in a tactics game. Braindead zombies that always attack the nearest enemy are actually *more* fun to fight than zombies that use perfect flanking and 5-foot steps. That level of sophistication should be saved for a competing adventuring party.

 

[Commissar Draco]

No savescuming allowed is fine when you're 20 something and have time to replay the game from the beginning not so much when you forty with job womyn and kids on your head; besides to be honest RPGs are more interesting for story anyway if Commissar wants to delve into proper tactics, logistics and leadership he takes one of many tabletop like Wargames. Gaming is hobby and something to play in order to relax after always IRON MAN and not save allowed RL GAME so difficulty must be on the line between boredom (too easy) and anxiety (too fracking hard) .No offense but People who sperg against saving in games look like no life types for Commissar.

proves only that you offended DU in some way.

 

[tiagocc0]

No savescuming allowed is fine when you're 20 something and have time to replay the game from the beginning not so much when you forty with job womyn and kids on your head; besides to be honest RPGs are more interesting for story anyway if Commissar wants to delve into proper tactics, logistics and leadership he takes one of many tabletop like Wargames. Gaming is hobby and something to play in order to relax after always IRON MAN and not save allowed RL GAME so difficulty must be on the line between boredom (too easy) and anxiety (too fracking hard) .No offense but People who sperg against saving in games look like no life types for Commissar.

You assume that I want to make a game where the player can't save and still needs to win (without saving) and that's wrong.

Right, because you should only make perfect moves.
What about games that deal with losses? How can you enjoy failure as part of the game if you savescum?

I understand that time constraint has a big influence, but again I said that save/load game are allowed, you can savescum, the only thing that I'm arguing is that I'm also making some design decisions to decrease the amount of save/load you would be required to do.
For example you don't need to save/reload because of random dice rolls (being unlucky), you should save/reload to change tactics.
Now answer me if this decision is making the game easy or difficult? Is it taking more of your precious time?
No and no. It only reduces the amount of savescumming one would probably do.

You guys have to stop arguing with anybody that says the word savescumming, it's like saying something about alcohol and then everybody who is a drunk starts yelling without even knowing about what is being discussed.

 

[DraQ]

No savescuming allowed

Savescumming can be allowed but punished.

There is no need to make the game unnecessarily tedious by forcing to re-play the same part over and over again, but there is also no need to make player *want* to savescum.

 

[hiver]

That should not be such a big problem. I think the easiest solution is to offer different saving game modes - for the same difficulty. If its appropriate for the type and very gameplay of the game.

For example, in a cRPG i wouldnt mind a game mode where i can save only in safe places, like cities or specific houses, a tavern or a temple and other such similar locations.
But i also wouldnt mind there being a second mode for the same difficulty where saving everywhere is allowed.
In that way, you are not forcing anyone to play in specific single saving mode.

I dont think such a mechanic would be difficult to implement.

 

[DraQ]

That should not be such a big problem. I think the easiest solution is to offer different saving game modes - for the same difficulty. If its appropriate for the type and very gameplay of the game.

For example, in a cRPG i wouldnt mind a game mode where i can save only in safe places, like cities or specific houses, a tavern or a temple and other such similar locations.
But i also wouldnt mind there being a second mode for the same difficulty where saving everywhere is allowed.
In that way, you are not forcing anyone to play in specific single saving mode.

I dont think such a mechanic would be difficult to implement.

That's a shitty solution.
Game is there for the player, not player for the game, so player should be able to get up and away from the comp at any time he chooses to without losing progress.
That's primary purpose of a save and anything else simply fails to address the reason you want saves in the first place.

But that doesn't make anti-scumming mechanics any less desirable.

 

[hiver]

maybe i wasnt clear enough.

Like this:

Say youre playing on normal difficulty.
At the start you can choose between these two options. Save scumming enabled or save only in safe location.

The point is - when you have an option then nobody is forcing the player to play in a specific way. In this way the game is there for the player.

 

[J1M]

It would be nice if we could get back on track to the thread topic. I don't see this debate about saving going anywhere.

Saving is a solved problem. There are many options to choose from and the implementation is up to the developer. The DS Final Fantasy Tactics games implement save states that can only be loaded once to allow saving mid-battle without exploits, etc.

 

[The_scorpion]

For combat to be truly tactical - it needs to include the environment. Which none of the games actually do.
At the most its some contrived superficial crap. Especially in cRPGs where environment is simply a nicely rendered background.

Verticality, which is just one of the environmental factors, is not included - at all.

Verticality, but also 3d in general used right would be a dream come true. However, only few games would truly benefit from it. Most of the "stat-heavy" PnP-derived cRPG's and even aRPG's that are mostly focused on melee and Magic (with the odd ranger with a bow) seem to mostly ignore the surroundings of a fight.

on the individual single Player RPG Level, tactics is part of the roleplaying experience. Your Hero should behave in battle in a way that is in line with his Story. in party-based games, the Focus will be more on tactics, as it becomes the Point of it all. Or does anyone Play Icewind Dale for the Story alone?

 

[DraQ]

At the start you can choose between these two options. Save scumming enabled or save only in safe location.

Suck VS suck - the tyranny of choice.

 

[Midair]

Encounter variety, enemy variety, and ability variety are what maintain fun in a tactics game. Braindead zombies that always attack the nearest enemy are actually *more* fun to fight than zombies that use perfect flanking and 5-foot steps. That level of sophistication should be saved for a competing adventuring party.

Where I am coming from is I want to make a distinction between puzzle-like encounters, requiring some creativity to win, and laid-back encounters, requiring only attentive resource management. If you ask what is the point, then for the former it is a mental exercise like solving a puzzle, and for the latter it more of a psychological gratification like maintaining an old car.

If you have a sophisticated AI, then you already have variety, no need to start disabling components to make zombies and other dumb enemies. Variety would come from the dynamic tactics that a smart AI would employ. But, you would have a challenging, puzzle-like game.

The typical view is that greater mental challenge = greater game. This is contradicted by the suggestion that playing against sophisticated AI would not be fun.

Do players just want to experience a diversity of micromanagement tasks? If so, then the right approach to designing tactical combat is more psychological than intellectual.

 

[FeelTheRads]

What about games that deal with losses? How can you enjoy failure as part of the game if you savescum?

What? Stop savescumming then. Or play iron-man. What, iron-man too much for you? But I thought you're not allowed to saved in PnP?

See, I don't want random dice rolls to ruin my game, I want my decisions to ruin my game and I want to keep playing from there.

Yeah, of course, so you typically reload to get all the criticals but if it's a mistake "YOU" made, then you wouldn't reload. Don't make me laugh.

You ARE trying to tell the players how to play their games. Fuck you, if I want to savescum, I savescum, you're not my Sawyer to tell me what to do.

Whenever I hear people complaining about dice rolls in RPGs I can't help but feel that they're not in the correct genre. You're seeing RPGs as action games where you're gimped by dice rolls. Move on, this is not for you. Go with Bethesda or something.
You are the reason we can't have nice things, and you are the reason the future is bound to be an IGN-heaven where all numbers are removed from RPGs because lol u don't play pnp why u need numbars anyway lol

Say no to popamolers, throw some dice today!

 

[hiver]

Verticality, but also 3d in general used right would be a dream come true. However, only few games would truly benefit from it. Most of the "stat-heavy" PnP-derived cRPG's and even aRPG's that are mostly focused on melee and Magic (with the odd ranger with a bow) seem to mostly ignore the surroundings of a fight.

on the individual single Player RPG Level, tactics is part of the roleplaying experience. Your Hero should behave in battle in a way that is in line with his Story. in party-based games, the Focus will be more on tactics, as it becomes the Point of it all. Or does anyone Play Icewind Dale for the Story alone?

cRPGS should have stopped trying to emulate PnP after Fallout games. Its a fools errand. Fallouts were a point where it should have ended. because they became something unique, in a way - CRPGs.


There is no reason why stats and mechanics could not account for fuller usage of entire 3D space. Of course it would be hard to do. And of course it would require serious upgrade of enemy Ai.
Single player or party makes no difference to me in this sense. If me and you are engaged in combat im going to use everything i can to get an upper hand, unless we are simply standing right infront each other and all comes down who pulls first and slugs more. Combat mechanics is obvious area of use but i would say tactics could be useful in other types of role playing - if integrated in appropriate ways.

At the start you can choose between these two options. Save scumming enabled or save only in safe location.

Suck VS suck - the tyranny of choice.

I really dont get what youre opposing here. You dont like the example of saving only in safe places or having a choice? wtf?

 

[tiagocc0]

What about games that deal with losses? How can you enjoy failure as part of the game if you savescum?

What? Stop savescumming then. Or play iron-man. What, iron-man too much for you? But I thought you're not allowed to saved in PnP?

See, I don't want random dice rolls to ruin my game, I want my decisions to ruin my game and I want to keep playing from there.

Yeah, of course, so you typically reload to get all the criticals but if it's a mistake "YOU" made, then you wouldn't reload. Don't make me laugh.

You ARE trying to tell the players how to play their games. Fuck you, if I want to savescum, I savescum, you're not my Sawyer to tell me what to do.

Whenever I hear people complaining about dice rolls in RPGs I can't help but feel that they're not in the correct genre. You're seeing RPGs as action games where you're gimped by dice rolls. Move on, this is not for you. Go with Bethesda or something.
You are the reason we can't have nice things, and you are the reason the future is bound to be an IGN-heaven where all numbers are removed from RPGs because lol u don't play pnp why u need numbars anyway lol

Say no to popamolers, throw some dice today!

Fuck you and try reading what I said.
How am I telling people how to play the game if I'm getting rid of one thing, dice rolls? In a game that is not an RPG?
Didn't you read that I'm making a 4X game?

What I want is a game that savescumming is not necessary, you can do it all you want however, it's just that there is no point if random dice rolls are removed.
You would then reload because of other things and not to try a lucky roll.

Don't give me that fucking argument "stop savescumming", what I said is that most games don't allow you to STOP savescumming, like a part of the game is that you need to win or it's game over.
I'm not complaining about the difficulty, I'm complaining that losing is not an option so I can either savescum or I can restart the entire damn thing, those are my only options.

Again, I'm not trying to say how RPGs should be played, as I'm not talking about RPGs.

And if you fucking READ you will see that I'm always saying that I don't mind savescumming and that I just don't like when someone savescum to get a lucky dice roll.
What? Can't I have a fucking opinion? Do I have to like that fucking shit just because you do? Just because I'm a developer?

EDIT: And fuck yeah I save scum, like what have been said earlier, people have lives, I have a job, a wife, a kid.
I saved to get lucky dice rolls until the point that I started hating those games that allowed it by design.
Games that you can either win or win, that's why I stopped playing most games and play just 4X most of my sparing time.
I never said I didn't do it but just because I do something doesn't mean that I have to like it.
Or means that every game that I develop I have to put that fucking thing on it.