Quote:Original post by ENEX
It really depends on the person's age. Example: A very tired dad came back from a long day of work would rather play a turn-based game instead of a FAST FAST FAST FAST YOU LOSE kind of game. While a teen in the middle of studying would rather play something real-time.

If I were tired dad coming back from a long day at work, I would bask in the warm glow of blood and sweat as I beat down countless enemies trying to dishonor me. It's a good stress reliever after such a day. I think it has more to do with your current mood. Sometimes I want to sit back and create or build or strategize. Other times I just want to kick ass or blow something up.

Turn-based games got better when opportunity fire was introduced. I don't like the fact that, once out of AP, you just have to take what's coming to you. I know this is to try and get some sense of 'time' but I wouldn't mind a traditional TB RPG where you ALWAYS get the chance to defend yourself, and the, if you have any AP left from your previous 'moves' you can spend them on a counter-attack.
Imagine a hero and 3 orcs. Orc1 attacks and the hero has a 'free' chance to block. The block is successful so, as the hero has AP left, decides to counter-attack. Orc2 then attacks the hero, the block succeeds but he has no AP for counter-attack. Orc3 attacks and the block fails. The hero is dead.
At least he/she went down fighting rather than just standing there.
Maybe have a reserve of 'defend' points but counter-attack comes from your main AP.
It's a system I plan to use if I ever get around to doing an RPG so any thoughts welcome.

Quote:Original post by ishpeck
Synchronously-resolved turn-based combat r0x0rz

But I'm not sure how it could be implimented into a melee combat system. In fighting, reaction (unrelated to reaction-time) is really important. The point of the combat is to defend against then overcome your enemy's attacks. I'm not sure how that would be possible if you had to select attacks to counter unknown strategies ahead of time. It turns into more of a guessing game.

I really appreciate the idea, though.

Geneforge does a decent job of handling real time game play which switches over to turn based combat. Good game for an independent development team.

Personally I prefer turn based combat as it's easier to create situations where strategy and tactics can come into play - but if you're trying to make some money with the game, the market for these type of games doesn't seem to be as large as it used to be.

Quote:Original post by Nytehauq
................................

Do military squads pause time for a second when they enter combat?

.......................................

If a military strategist wanted to play a realistic game, I doubt that a turn based game would suffice. Real life isn't turn based.

........................................

[/rant]

Military squads have individual people controlling the individual people in the squad - themselves. In real-time combat in games you usually have one person controlling several characters at a time. So you need to think/react four, five or six times as fast (depending on how many characters you control) than if you were controlling one character or acting as yourself in a real life combat situation.

If there is only one character to control then real-time combat is reasonable (if implemented reasonably).

Quote:Original post by Nytehauq
I never get why people assume that real time combat is inherently less tactical. Do military squads pause time for a second when they enter combat?

I admit that my game's combat will not have the strategy that it might if it were turn based (even though I have never seen a melee turn based combat system - so I'm really just guessing).

In the military, I would imagine they plan the entire battle out before dropping off troops, then make small changes as they progress. In huge compains like that of the Civilization series, months and years went by between the combat. So there was plenty of time to think about the next move. Even though X-Com was more on the soldier level, I really hated playing the game in real-time. It was 500% more fun for me with turn based mode. In reality, real-time mode removed everything that made it interesting. This doesn't really apply to my situation, so I'm just saying turn-based systems will always have a place with me.

Even though a soldier needs to be tactical, it's on a much smaller scale. And that is the level that may game is controlled, from the soldier (it's non-militaristic, though :P). I want to avoid hack+slash combat, but that seems a lot more difficult to me than it sounds. How does one avoid it, exactly? Is it the level of detail? The number of options during combat? So just by throwing in more options, I add more strategy? Magic or special weapons (guns), mounts in battle (horse + sword), arching, interactive terrain objects, etc? Do these things help? Arching is already on the todo list, but the others are on the maybe list.

What would make real-time melee combat more tactical?