Battles, battles and MORE battles ! Turn based vs real time.

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderators: Oberlus, Oberlus

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
utilae
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2175
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 12:37 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

#61 Post by utilae » Sat Jul 05, 2003 8:19 am

I'm now siding with TB, though I supose the idea I have, for space combat ( :wink: secrets :wink: ), is TB for giving move and attack orders and the RTS for watching the chaos unfold. 8)

Krait
Space Krill
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 9:16 am

#62 Post by Krait » Sun Jul 06, 2003 9:37 am

While I favor the TB approach, I am sure something like Baldurs Gate (which is essentially a TB system converted to RT after all) could work very well, especially for single player which is my main concern...

With all the talk about Task forces though, I hope noone implies that we give up control over individual ships? Thats one of the things I loathe most about MoO3 combat. If my taskforce is more or less intact but one of my battleships in there got hammered early on I want the ability to pull it back w/o retreating the whole TF...

Lata
Krait

dirt-bag
Space Floater
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 3:13 pm
Location: antartica

#63 Post by dirt-bag » Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:02 pm

ok for all of u who cannot seem to grasp the concepts of my abhorance of real time combat i will try very hard to spell it out in the most simplistic elaborate manor i can muster.

i said real time sacrifices strategy for time, i did NOT say real time had no strategy whatsoever. there are definately strategic potentials in real time combat. however there are MORE strategic options in turn based combat. turn based allows u to captain each ship individualy as opposed to the real time waving ur hand (mouse) at some unmanned drones with weapons and armour.

i am not stuck in moo2, i have played moo2 for ages and am VERY familiar with how moo2 works and realize moo2 can easily be improved upon. i also realize moo2 is a great game and has some very good ideas that other games lack. these very good ideas is what makes it a great game. one of the moo2 'great ideas' is combat. moo2 combat is lots of fun, highly strategic (multiplayer, not vs some stupid ai), and very challenging. on the other hand games like starcraft with raging reviews and huge pulicity campaigns to be such a wonderful strategy game have next to no strategy and are more a contest of who can click faster, 'the twitch factor' i think one of u called it. as i play more and more different games i have found that strategy is what brings me back. everquest is a great strategy game in real time, with good strategy and team work u could do so much more than the pedestrian methods. EQ is a MMRPG and has a human controlling each unit.

if i want to play real time 'strategy' and test out my rural '56k' connection i can load up duke nukem or half-life and have at it. there are no upgrades for me the nearest town with a server is 45km away.

i dont envision space battles taking several turns as others do. the time required to travel from one star to another is measured in turns, stars are REALLY far apart from each other and take a LONG time for light to travel from one to the next (4+years to us from the closest). these games assume some sort of faster than light travel which puts a turn at something less than 4 years but, just how much faster than light are we to travel? even in moo2 the turns are based on an unrealistically short 1.2 months per turn.
and then there was dirt!

User avatar
mr_ed
Space Squid
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 1:13 pm
Location: Ottawa

#64 Post by mr_ed » Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:02 pm

utilae wrote:I'm now siding with TB, though I supose the idea I have, for space combat ( :wink: secrets :wink: ), is TB for giving move and attack orders and the RTS for watching the chaos unfold. 8)
Turn-based or phased would make things easier in order to do simultaneous ground combat.

OceanMachine
Pupating Mass
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 12:09 pm
Location: Chicago

#65 Post by OceanMachine » Mon Jul 07, 2003 8:11 pm

dirt-bag wrote:on the other hand games like starcraft with raging reviews and huge pulicity campaigns to be such a wonderful strategy game have next to no strategy and are more a contest of who can click faster, 'the twitch factor' i think one of u called it.
Why is it that you (and other critics) want to continually make a punching bag of the likes of starcraft, while completely ignoring those RTS games that are almost entirely devoid of "twitch factor" and that include a strategic depth that puts moo2 to shame? It would be like concluding that you could never make a decent turn based stategy game with any depth simply based on the existence of Risk...
Programming Lead

User avatar
Nightfish
FreeOrion Designer / Space Monster
Posts: 313
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:07 am

#66 Post by Nightfish » Mon Jul 07, 2003 8:14 pm

I'm not sure we're doing much good here, OceanMachine. :wink: Those die-hard MoO2 fans seem to have a very high resistance to arguments. If MoO2 didn't do it, it can't be a good idea...

drekmonger
Space Kraken
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:17 am

#67 Post by drekmonger » Mon Jul 07, 2003 8:41 pm

As near as I can tell it has more to do with a sense of total control and an unlimited amount of time to make decisions. Plus the fact that his connection to the internet is less than spectacular; he wants for there to be more strategy games that he can play multiplayer over a high ping, low bandwidth connection. (along those lines, I humbly suggest web based games. http://www.neveron.com probably being the best of the lot. It has a turned based combat engine using the battletech rules to boot--I use to play it all the time when I was stuck with a modem at home.)

Personally, I hardly care. By the time FO's combat system rolls out I suspect broadband will be more readily available. Plus, I'm here to scratch my own itch.

Assuming the core team doesn't go the TB route, PK dirtbag and the rest of Moo2 professional league are free to organize and make a TB combat engine of their own. I bet it would be super easy to bolt on to FO.

Krait
Space Krill
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 9:16 am

#68 Post by Krait » Mon Jul 07, 2003 11:08 pm

LOL!
I never though I would see Neveron mentioned here... Much less as an example of a good turn based game (currently you cannot really grow much because an established player will kill you as soon as you hit lvl6 unless you are protected by a large faction, I don't think that is 'good') that you can play with low bandwith hehe... I certainly couldn't... (Then again thats a question of empire size and mine is a lil overblown)...
When did you last play? Or do you still play?

And as for the diehard MoO2 fans... FO is our only hope! Please don't change TOO much or you will go down the same road MoO3 did (at least as far as the MoO2 fans are concerned...)

Lata
Krait

Vasily
Space Krill
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 1:10 pm
Location: Russia

Battles

#69 Post by Vasily » Thu Jul 10, 2003 5:11 am

I think the battles should be real-time, for at least we have 21-st century out of the window!. But unlike a starcraft fast-clicking with a lot of units I suppose to take a "naval" combat model, some like to 2-d World War 2 sea combat, with ships classes from heavy battleships and carriers to light gunboats-fighters. Surely, the ships should be designable, for creating and testing your ship is a half of MoO fun! But the ships should behave as sea units, moving and turning rather slow, to give time to decide strategy, and the gun's range should give time to align your front line. Small units are to be grouped in squadrons or battle groups, before combat starts to save "clicking" time. And there is not much clicking remains, other to order your fighter group to attack enemy missile carrier, and to cruisers to move forward and concentrate fire on enemy battleship.

Advantages: High sense of reality, and the large battles take just the same time as small, that is of use for multiplayer.
Disadvantages: Vast armies are difficult to control, but the player have not to create such vast and clumsy war machine, it is up to him, to optimise fleet.

And for multiplayer we may have no time to wait for battles, if the results will be known in the 2-nd turn or as soon as they occurs in this turn. Before that we can set a "battlesign" on planet. So the players, who not battle, may spend the time managing their armies and colonies.

Plasma Dragon
Space Floater
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:13 am

TB

#70 Post by Plasma Dragon » Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:56 am

I think dirt-bag is right. TB battles gives to player more control over units and strategy. Actually TB system forces to think much deeper for every move. Like in chess. Every move can be good or bad. So player really needs to think what will happen after enemy do "this or that". RT system also have some strategy in it. However it is more flat and consumes less brain then TB :D
Guest

Sidewalker
Space Floater
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 5:11 am
Location: Russia, Moscow

#71 Post by Sidewalker » Thu Jul 10, 2003 8:24 am

I still don't understand the RTS necessity...
Everyone agreed that TB in MOO was a GREAT fun! Everyone agreed that in MP there were no HUGE fleets! But still RTS-fans argue that 1000 ships battles would be ve-e-e-ry long... Do you want 1000 ships battles? I don't. Especially if it will looks like MOO3 super-sux combat... :?
In MOO2 were 2 game stages: 1st) At the beginnig every ship was so valuable that you should handle it with a GREAT care, and 2nd) At the midgame you had FLEET of some strong and solid ships, losing one or two in hard battle wasn't a big problem...
As for me, 1st stage was most fun then everything else. Handling small bunch of ships, trying to save every HP, calculating damage from every nuke, etc. And with RTS battles game WILL lose all these sweetest things.
All that will left is to build fleet, order to attack and watch that stupid AI trying to find something on the battle map to attack... :evil:
zzz...zzzz....zzzzz..... Ahem! 8-0 Who's there?!

dirt-bag
Space Floater
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 3:13 pm
Location: antartica

#72 Post by dirt-bag » Fri Jul 11, 2003 4:34 pm

i would like to point out that the web sites for birth of the federation and moo3 started out in much the same manner, and had all the same arguments for turn based and real time. in fact, many of the same arguments for governments, races, buildings etc are almost mirrored verbatum from the two previous games....we certainly dont want to remake those mistakes i hope...
and then there was dirt!

Plasma Dragon
Space Floater
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:13 am

yes !

#73 Post by Plasma Dragon » Fri Jul 11, 2003 5:26 pm

Agreed in 1000 % !
Guest

User avatar
Aquitaine
Lead Designer Emeritus
Posts: 761
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 1:54 pm
Location: Austin, TX

#74 Post by Aquitaine » Fri Jul 11, 2003 5:41 pm

dirt-bag wrote:ok for all of u who cannot seem to grasp the concepts of my abhorance of real time combat i will try very hard to spell it out in the most simplistic elaborate manor i can muster.
This is starting to become a problem on these forums, so I'll say this publicly (instead of via PM, as it's been done in the past).

Treat everyone here with respect. If you don't agree with them, that's great. Argue away. But statements like 'you cannot grasp it' are borderline offensive. Please show a little more courtesy -- especially if you're trying to make a point. Personally, I get distracted by somebody's tone in situations like these before I read what they have to say. Doesn't help anybody.

-Aquitaine
Surprise and Terror! I am greeted by the smooth and hostile face of our old enemy, the Hootmans! No... the Huge-glands, no, I remember, the Hunams!

dirt-bag
Space Floater
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 3:13 pm
Location: antartica

#75 Post by dirt-bag » Fri Jul 11, 2003 5:49 pm

it was an attempt at humour actually, clearly it failed
and then there was dirt!

Post Reply