Real-time vs. turn-based battle
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
gabortorok
Menu
▾
▴
Hi,
I've been getting some mail saying that battle is too fast and confusing. Some people asked to make the game turn-based (like, might and magic, most roguelikes, etc.). Currently battle in scourge uses a Baldur's Gate-style "pausable real-time" system.
It is possible to make the real-time battle slower, more balanced and less confusing. It's (probably) also possible to make turn-based combat optionally not stop between turns.
So the question is what do you think? I don't have time to play commercial games anymore, but if there is a battle system you say in one and liked, please let me know. Be sure to describe the system in detail (as far as turns, I don't need to know what kind of spells it uses...). My hope is that through this forum we can pick a system that is not overly complex to implement and pleases the most number of players.
Thanks,
--Gabor
I'd go with the "make the real-time battle slower, more balanced and less confusing."
Making the game turn based would take half the fun away and make it too technical. Part of the fun is getting in there and getting messy in a battle. Gameplay balancing should make it easier for new players to grow accustomed, rather than changing the game as a whole.
I also vote for real time system. If you want to work some more and make turn based optional, I would suggest you using Fallout Tactics system: each unit has action points, each action consumes AP, in turn based, your turn finished when you consume all AP, in real time, each unit attacks until consumes all AP, which are regenerated (in real time also) based on your dexterity. Anyway, I prefer the simpler method, real time, pausable, like it is now, just make it slower.
I would prefer turn based,
and I would also prefer to have more ambient light in the game. You have nice graphics, they could use a bit more light.
Cheers,
T.
But _why_ would you prefer turn based?
Because that is fun for me,
I always play all games in turn based mode if I can.
By playing turn based you (I) can maximize the power of your party. It means that you can handle tougher monsters, which means that the designer will put tougher monsters which means I will have to do my real best to win the game.
Real time just doesnt put me on the edge of my seat, unless if it is a console game and I don't think that is the goal of this game.
Cheers,
T.
Hi,
most likely (if I have time) I will make turn-based optional. Depending on a setting, you can either play the current real-time system (which will be slowed down, etc.) or switch to turn-based mode. Strangely, turn-based appears harder to code... in RT you can "gloss over" details like movement range, etc.
Thanks,
--Gabor
I haven't had time to play SCOURGE, but it surely looks very nice and looking at it is on my list or things-to-do-once-I-have-time-for-it. Anyway:
I think both real-time and turn-based systems has their strenghts and weaknesses. For examples I enjoyed playing turn-based UFO (enemy unknown, terror from the deep etc) and would not even consider trying the real-time version of it (it there would be one).
On the other hand the real-time system works brilliantly on Baldurs Gate. I would not like to play it on turn-based mode.
There is also third mode which is something in between those two modes: In Combat Mission you give orders (in turns with the opponent) to the units and after the command phase the units will try to execute the commands in real time (both sides at the same time). The game pauses after the "round" and the player can issue more commands or continue with the ones that still has not been executed fully. The units could have "guidelines" of how it will act on certain situations and/or character could have "traits" (coward, bad stamina, treacherous etc) that would affect on the execution of the commands.
The bottom line is: if you want tactics go for the turn-based mode or the Combat Mission style. If you want more action packed battles go for the real-time (but please allow the user to pause the game and issue "orders" in peace! :) ) .
Hello,
I am a big fan of turn based combat. I will always prefer a game with that is turn based over RTS.
In the RPG world, Fallout 1 & 2, Temple of Elemental Evil (pretty new) stand out.
Then there is the RPG-Strategy hybrids like X-COM, Jagged Alliance, etc.
All excellent games.
When doing squad based games, which is prety much the same as party based games, the wholequestion is how abstracted do you want your game?
The whole Wizardry/Bards Tale genrea said you don't even need to see your individual characters on te battlefield... just imagine it. Then game the Gold Box games (well, they were not the first, right... there was Wizard's Crown and others), made it that you could use strategy... a wizard's fireball all of a sudden became a very cool spell ...
Which is exactly the weakness of Baldur's gate - i almost never used an area spell, since i could never effectively get my people out of range first. It was hard to protect my wizard / priests, since everything was running around at the same time.
Right now Scourge is not in a good place. It doesn't have Turn Based, and the combat is so frantic, it doesn't even have the semi-managbility that Baldur's Gate had (slower real-time + lots of auto-pause triggers).
I would love to see the game go Turn Based. I also think you will get more of the roguelike game following to play with the game as well.
I am for fine tuned RT; reasons:
- TB (IMHO) favors perfectionism over fun
- MMORPGing (distant? future?) is impossible with TB
I am also against optional TB (at least til 2.0 or so); reasons:
- Requires drastically different balance approach
- Therefore requires considerable effort to develop
- Which might be better invested into making RT play better
Sok sikert a fejlesztshez!
Just to avoid confusion:
With TB I mean games like Zangband and Nethack.
With RT I mean UO and co.
For some technical ppl UO is non-RT, for them only games like Bzflag and Quake are "really close" to RT.
I am not that technical...
The fun of area spells is when you use it in unexplored areas to punish mobs from far distance. Using area spells in close combat is definitely Not A Good Thing (tm)
TB is good, but IMHO, RT is even better.
I just posted the 0.7 version which has the basics of the new battle system. If you don't like the turn-based combat you can "automate" it by going to settings and unchecking the "pause between rounds" button. Let me know what you think: if you want more/less control of a turn, etc. I'm thinking of making the RT version less turn-based and more of the old melee-chaos type... Anyway, let me know what you think.
Thanks,
--Gabor
I received the message below, asking me to post it on the forums. I included my response as well.
--------
Hi,
I'll post your message but I wanted to answer some of your points. First thanks for checking out the new version!
I numbered your suggestions for easy reference:
1. Battle is very slow, but you get used after some time.
A: You can speed up the game in "Game settings" in the options dialog (press "O").
2. Focus changes, so you cant command one character.
Pressing 0 (zero) in real-time mode toggles control from a single character to the group. In single-character mode, you can click on a party member and command only that character. You probably want to pause the game (press space) to select your characters.
3. Battle performs in continuous turn mode, and not in true real time.
Yes this is something I'm meaning to fix in 0.8. I wanted to release the turn-based code for people to see , in case I'm really going in the wrong direction. ;-)
4. The message window scroll in an unusual direction.
Uh, yes... fixing this is on my list, just haven't had time yet.
5. When you press I Inventory windows reopens, instead of close.
I'll fix this also.
6. Mob spawned behind a level gate, with both sides blocked by chests and a table.
You can move items like tables and chests by dragging them and dropping them somewhere else. Currently you can even put them in another container. So you can clear out a room by dragging the furniture onto a bookcase for example. (Later I will add some code to not let you do this for large items.)
Thanks again for your comments!
--Gabor
--- "Roger D. Vargas" <roger@ehtsc.co.cu> wrote:
> I tested it under Windows 200 Server, Intel Extreme
> video card, a very
> conflictive hardware. But after a few minutes of
> games didnt noticed any
> problem. Acceptable perfomance, with default
> settings.
> Just a few suggestions:
> Battle is very slow, but you get used after some
> time.
> Focus changes, so you cant command one character. I
> think it is that
> battle performs in continuous turn mode, and not in
> true real time (all
> party members perform actions at same time from the
> player's point of
> view).
> You cant move away a wounded character, because the
> party follows it and
> moves away from combat.
> The message window scroll in an unusual direction:
> instead of going up,
> new messages go top and older ones scroll down.
> Usually player looks to
> lower messages (a habit), so "in theory" the "right
> way" is to scroll
> messages up.
> When you press I Inventory windows reopens, instead
> of close if it is
> already active.
> Please post this suggestions in forum to see what
> other users think
> about it.
> I noticed something annoying, one mob spawned behind
> a level gate, with
> both sides blocked by chests and a table.
> Projectiles didnt hit it, so
> it took me some work to relocate party to find a
> good spot to fire.
> Maybe you should test that a path from NPC to
> character exists before
> selecting spawn coordinates.
>
> Great game, keep the good work.
> --
> Roger Duraona Vargas
> Linux user #180787
> A cada momento nos rodea lo desconocido. Es alli
> donde uno tiene que buscar el conocimiento.
> Paul Muad'Dib Atreides. Children of Dune
>
>