TB System: Action Points vs. Single Action

[kingcomrade]

aim: 1 tick
shoot: 2 ticks
run: 1.5 (rounded up) ticks per "hex"
walk: 1 tick per "hex"
etc.: x ticks [/qupte]
Isn't this real time with pause?

 

[Mayday]

Isn't real time with pause the best option if done well? (ie. most realistic and least prone to abuse).

 

[dagorkan]

There are at least two distinctions that are important in combat systems:

-Alternating actions (turns) vs simultaneous action
-Short rounds vs longer rounds

I think these two encompass every system ever made.

Both longer rounds and alternate turns sacrifice realism for gamist 'strategy'. The first distinction creates fundamental differences, the other one doesn't, it's a gradient. (Although as you reduce rounds the difference between alternate/simultaneous actions vanishes - what is called RT is extremely short rounds and the order of resolving actions is irrelevant)

I know that I prefer simultaneous action to turns, but how long rounds should be really depends on the setting, the system, and should be adjusted to whatever works best.

 

[DraQ]

Isn't real time with pause the best option if done well? (ie. most realistic and least prone to abuse).

Genuine real time with wide range of interrupt conditions to eliminate any influence of player's reflex might be reasonable. TB mechanics running in RT, but with active pause, as seen in infinity engine games was a travesty.

 

[TheLostOne]

I'd like to see something implemented in a squad based game which I've only seen in japanese tactics games.

Single action turns (move+action) which has a weighted time value depending on the action. So someone taking a quick stationary shot would do so and it would cost like 10 time units, but someone who moved first then took an aimed shot would cost 50 or so. You accumulate these points while other people are acting and your turn pops up when you reach 100. So if you only used 10 you're turn would come again much sooner than if you used 50.

I like this system because its simple and if I just want to use a turn to reload or take cover or scout out a few hexes then retreat I can do that without having to wait for everyone else to have their turn afterwards.

 

[Murk]

aim: 1 tick
shoot: 2 ticks
run: 1.5 (rounded up) ticks per "hex"
walk: 1 tick per "hex"
etc.: x ticks [/qupte]
Isn't this real time with pause?

basically . Though I can see a slowed down version of it in that it would give you actual time to plan and use the numbers to your advantage as a pretty decent system.

But then again, people really hated the Infinity Engine games' battle systems...

hence my confusion...

 

[Murk]

I'd like to see something implemented in a squad based game which I've only seen in japanese tactics games.

Single action turns (move+action) which has a weighted time value depending on the action. So someone taking a quick stationary shot would do so and it would cost like 10 time units, but someone who moved first then took an aimed shot would cost 50 or so. You accumulate these points while other people are acting and your turn pops up when you reach 100. So if you only used 10 you're turn would come again much sooner than if you used 50.

I like this system because its simple and if I just want to use a turn to reload or take cover or scout out a few hexes then retreat I can do that without having to wait for everyone else to have their turn afterwards.

The best example of that was... what, FF Tactics ( I refer to the original, the GBA one was gay I thought)?

While a sytem I loved and probably the most replayed ps1 game I have, it definitely was prone to abuse.

I suppose if people played as intended it worked well enough, though was very limited in "stuff you can do".

 

[SkeleTony]

Isn't real time with pause the best option if done well? (ie. most realistic and least prone to abuse).

No. real-time w/pause is plagued by the crappy pathing . This is especially evident in Baldur's Gate when you have to navigate those crappy dungeons with the narrow corridors and your idiot party members keep trying to take stupid routes to get to where they are ordered to be.

TB still pwns.

 

[SkeleTony]

"Blob with Arms": Most of the party based first person dungeon crawlers of yesteryear play out with you basically plotting a single action for each character, and without movement it relies on a well developed set of spells and phsyical attacks. The late Wizardries are prime examples.

I would disagree on late Wizardries, specifically Wizardry 8. While you only declare one action per character per round (two if you move around), characters are able to perform this action multiple times per turn (often switching targets), more so, their ability to perform multiple actions gradualy decreases with increase of the distance your party walked/ran in this round, so it's safe to say that Wiz8 has sort of AP system hidden behind single action interface.

Plus Wiz 8 had that tactical formations thing which, while not as tactically satisfying as isometric/top-down, was still pretty damned good.

 

[Twinnus Susainius]

Dominus illuminatio mea!

 

[Necropennis]

I'd like to see something implemented in a squad based game which I've only seen in japanese tactics games.

Single action turns (move+action) which has a weighted time value depending on the action. So someone taking a quick stationary shot would do so and it would cost like 10 time units, but someone who moved first then took an aimed shot would cost 50 or so. You accumulate these points while other people are acting and your turn pops up when you reach 100. So if you only used 10 you're turn would come again much sooner than if you used 50.

I like this system because its simple and if I just want to use a turn to reload or take cover or scout out a few hexes then retreat I can do that without having to wait for everyone else to have their turn afterwards.

Yes, that is more or less what I have in mind too, sorta like the system in FFT.

What's weird is that I can't remeber a western squad based TB game that doesn't have a AP system (hidden or not), but my memory is completely useless so there's probably a few