Would you play turn based or phase based

[drunkpriest]

Which is better and why?

 

[fizzelopeguss]

The fuck is phase based?

 

[NOVD]

The fuck is phase based?

Combat that is based on combat "phases" rather than turns. Basically it's a real-time system that is cut into distinct segments of a certain duration.

 

[inwoker]

Ibr is better and why

 

[racofer]

RTwP.

 

[Jim Cojones]

The fuck is phase based?

Combat that is based on combat "phases" rather than turns. Basically it's a real-time system that is cut into distinct segments of a certain duration.

It isn't every time a variation of RTwP. Phase based implies that there are more than one type of phase which include different activities - most common distinction is: planning phase, when orders are given, and execution phase. Execution may be real time but units can also act in order dependant on their stats like in Wizardry series or in Wasteland.

 

[Suicidal]

Is Pong turn-based or phase-based?

 

[Vault Dweller]

The fuck is phase based?

Wizardry. Wasteland.

Also:
http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=21

"Strengths - Phase-Based combat, like its close relation TB, provides tangible phases which can be carefully measured, anticipated and progressed through. The difference lies in the fact that rather than taking turns, combat is rationalised into two phases - planning and execution. Sequential phase based provides very little advantage over standard TB, however a simultaneous execution phase can provide all of the advantages of real time, sidestep most of the flaws in TB, but does come with it's share of problems. More on that a little later, first the advantages. All of the TB advantages apply here, but with the addition of simultaneous actions, which greatly speeds up the TB process, and also helps to satisfy the naysayers who believe TB is unrealistic. "WeGo" PB effectively takes away the abstraction of TB.

Weaknesses - However, as we said before, it's not without problems. The most glaring one is the fact that you are locking in a sequence of actions with no way of altering it on the fly, which can have effects ranging from frustrating to catastrophic. There are solutions, such as allowing the player to explicitly specify interrupts explicitly when they anticipate unforeseeable circumstances or by providing fairly short phases that don't allow the player to dig a hole too deep. This also works to keep the game interesting and interactive, as lengthy execution phases can be harmful to interactivity especially if all actions are predefined and unalterable. The second major problem is how the game handles invalid moves, such as two characters trying to move to the same location simultaneously. However, problematic as PB may sound, it boils down to being more of a challenge to the developer, and with proper design attention most bad points can be addressed effectively. "

 

[JarlFrank]

I prefer turnbased. When I let my wizard cast a spell on an enemy to kill him in phase based, and let my warrior attack the same enemy, and the warrior strikes first and almost kills the enemy with a critical hit, then the spell the wizard casts is overkill and would've been better used on some other enemy. Phasebased comes with its problems. You have less control over combat, which might also be a good thing, making it more chaotic/"realistic". I like both, but pure turnbased is my favourite. Like Jagged Alliance 2.

 

[skyway]

Real time is probably the best. Its the most realistic.