Real-time vs turn based for tactical games

[Ivy Mike]

This struck me the the other day when I was getting my hands dirty with the Close Combat 3 demo: Isn't real-time, or possibly some phase-based (i e WEGO), system simply better for tactical games? For example, one of the major tactics you have to use in CC is suppressive fire by either infantry or mortar squads. If you don't any squad you try to advance on the enemy position is more likely to have their morale broken, and consequently fail to obey orders. In a real-time system, suppressive fire is easily implemented and executed - and I think the same goes for a WEGO type of system. But how to you implement such a tactic with a turn-based system? Since the whole point of suppressive fire is that it's executed simultaneously as you advance on the enemy position I can't see any way to make it work with a turn-based system.

Thoughts?

 

[LCJr.]

Panzer General 3D used suppresion. You fired during your turn and if an enemy unit was suppressed they were handicapped their next turn. Simple and effective.

This subject has been covered ad nauseum in regards to cRPG combat so I'll keep it brief. IMHO no one system is superior to another. One may be a better choice over another i.e. if you have a lot units scattered over a large area TB or WeGo would be the better choice in most cases. What matters is the design/game as a whole. Close Combat, Combat Mission and Jagged Alliance are all excellent games and each does things their own way.

 

[Elwro]

Suppresive fire is imo well done in Steel Panthers:

http://spwawwiki.eltacodiablos.com/inde ... unity_Fire

(ok, it's not exactly about suppresive fire but read more on the wiki to get the idea)

 

[Dmitron]

Something to consider about the Close Combat series: While it is real-time, its still paced quite slowly. You usually have ample time to make decisions. With the majority of RTS the physics and movement are all sped-up, cartoon like.

I remember suppression orders in West Front\East Front. Worked perfectly.

Looking forward to CC:Cross of Iron.

 

[obediah]

Oh, deja vu.

RTwP and WeGo (not pure RT) have a lot more potential for providing realistic tactical combat, especially modern combat. The problem is that so far no one has made a system that provides the realism I want without being mind numbingly tedious. I'm not sure it's even possible. So for now TB wins the 'fun' category hands down which is all i really care about.

 

[Fez]

RTwP can be a good source of annoyance and arguments when you are playing it multiplayer too.

 

[spacemoose]

I wish someone would make another close combat game

 

[Dmitron]

I wish someone would make another close combat game

edit: dead link, see baby arm's post below

 

[Jason]

Were you linking to "Dan Aykroyd to appear in Ghostbusters game" or "Dewy's Adventure wets the Wii"? Or maybe this.

 

[LCJr.]

Whatever happened to Firefight/Close Assault?

 

[Jason]

Do you mean this one? It looks like just a simple CC clone so I never bothered with it.

 

[LCJr.]

Do you mean this one? It looks like just a simple CC clone so I never bothered with it.

Matrix picked it up and started development as Close Assualt-Code of Honor. But it seems to have never been completed. BTW the author claims he came up with the idea before he even heard of CC.

 

[Ivy Mike]

Panzer General 3D used suppresion. You fired during your turn and if an enemy unit was suppressed they were handicapped their next turn. Simple and effective.

Sound like it should work. Isn't the drawback that you only get one unit executing suppressive fire, as oppossed to several, though?

This subject has been covered ad nauseum in regards to cRPG combat so I'll keep it brief. IMHO no one system is superior to another. One may be a better choice over another i.e. if you have a lot units scattered over a large area TB or WeGo would be the better choice in most cases. What matters is the design/game as a whole. Close Combat, Combat Mission and Jagged Alliance are all excellent games and each does things their own way.

I was thinking more along the line for squad based tactical games - something I think we both agree cRPGs cannot even begin to approach when it comes to tactical depth (atleast, none I've played). ToEE is the only one that comes close to having any tactical combat at all. Either way, my point was that perhaps real-time was actually better concerning the implementation of real battlefield tactics (f ex suppressive fire) compaired to a pure TB system - not which system works the best from a player perspective. I guess "operational realism" is the term I'm looking for. I'm not saying it is though, hence why I thought it might be a topic for discussion.

RTwP and WeGo (not pure RT) have a lot more potential for providing realistic tactical combat, especially modern combat. The problem is that so far no one has made a system that provides the realism I want without being mind numbingly tedious.

Not even Close Combat? From what I've play and read it's one of the games that comes closest to emulation a "real" battelfield and I wouldn't call them tedious.

I wish someone would make another close combat game

Ask and ye shall recieve.

 

[LCJr.]

Panzer General 3D used suppresion. You fired during your turn and if an enemy unit was suppressed they were handicapped their next turn. Simple and effective.

Sound like it should work. Isn't the drawback that you only get one unit executing suppressive fire, as oppossed to several, though?

PG3D works on a different scale than CC or CM. I'm not sure what it is but probably at least company/brigade level. And I think I'm wrong and it only affects them during your current turn. Suppression in PG3D comes mainly from artillery and tactical bombers. You hit the enemy with arty and planes first then send in your ground troops to finish them off.

In JA2 supression, if you can call it that, forces a soldier to change stance if a lot of shots pass close by them. For example they'll go from standing>crouched>prone. This eats up a few of their AP's but on the downside makes them harder to hit. I prefer my artificial idiots standing tall and proud so they're easy targets.



The main thing I see wrong your argument is that you seem to be confusing realtime with pyschological modeling. It's having the pyschological effects modeled in the game that make suppression fire effective. Take that out and CC would be just another RT shoot'em up with every unit fighting mindlessly to the death.

 

[Koby]

I'm just gonna slap it here instead of making a new thread (it fits the title of the thread at least).

After finishing JA2 for the 3rd time, and many hours of x-com, I started thinking what I would I like to see as the next step in term of realism in the genre, here is my mental draft.

Take the JA2 combat system as a basis, and change the following:

1) When you click "end turn", both your action and your opponent (computer/human) action get executed simultaneously, from start to finish (*1) without player intervention.

2) Interruption action is pre-programmed/pre-scripted, by you by some (*2) semi automated mechanism or manually or both.

*1 optional: interruption action can be manually dictated, with some penalty of action points (decision time penalty?).

*2 - (example/draft of) Semi automated mechanism

Attack priority modes: (x) (y) (fire)

(x) - grenade then act/no grenade
(y) - change stance to run (charge), walk, stand, crouch, prone.
(fire) - can be: snap, aim(level of aim?), auto snap (snap auto?).

Defend priority modes: (x) (y) (z)

(x) - grenade then act/no grenade
(y) - change stance to run (away!), walk (backward) stand, crouch, prone.
(z) - open fire, do nothing (assuming stealth), move (assuming stealth).

That’s is really.

edit******************************************************

Some more mental notes.

All action is prescripted (sorry my bad), with up to different 2 interruption action scripted.


Example 1
-----------------------
Action script:
1) walk to (*1) (x.y), interrupt script #1
2) crouch, (stance change untagble (<- defiantly not a word) for interaction script ).
3) wait, interrupt script #2

Interruption script:
#1: prone and fire at interaction causing enemy.
#2 fire at interaction causing enemy.


Example 2
-----------------------
Action script:
1) run to (X.Y) + fire, interrupt script #1 (*1)( (*2)
2) (*3) as action 1) interrupt script #2

Interruption script:
#1 prone + grenade at at original targeted enemy.
#2 prone.

(*1) use JA2 footprint like indicator or a more advance / other technique to tell the player how far he can go and still have enough AP for a certain action.

(*2) Charge / fire+movement is something a marc should definitely be able to do.

(*3) the marc still has enough AP for Interruption script #1.