Why do you enjoy turn based strategy vs real time?

[KainenMorden]

Just curious to hear monocled opinions on this matter

 

[fork]

Because they're senile, arthritic old fucks.

 

[KainenMorden]

That's fair.

Do you think it's possible that part of the appeal is the ability to take a moment and think before your turn?

 

[fork]

If you think in turns, you're a senile, arthritic old fuck.

 

[KainenMorden]

Noted

 

[Heroic Liberator]

I'd frame it as TB (& RTwP as in TW battles) being about strategy proper and RT being about tactics, so it's a matter of whichever you enjoy. I prefer strategy proper since I like taking my time and not stressing over playing suboptimally due to being rushed.

 

[KainenMorden]

Interesting, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I enjoy both but prefer TB as well for the same reasons. RTS I feel too stressed haha, I understand many players enjoy that though.

 

[Glop_dweller]

Why do people re-play old military battles? Even play the [established] losing side, and try to win?

Turn based mechanics allow the player scrutinize every moment of the situation, and attempt to make the best decision possible.

Additionally Turn Based mechanics afford the possibility of playing units that are more skilled than the player, for example Bruce Lee; with a dozen score of situation specific attack & defense moves at his command—but you cannot sensibly pick from among all of them in real time.

Yet again additionally, there is a meta-aspect at play when the player(s) can foresee forced outcomes (or likely outcomes) based on knowledge of the combat mechanics; this is just fun. For instance, in Fallout [1&2] it's fun to plant explosives where you expect the opponent to end their turn in the next round——and then have it go off on them before they get a chance to act.

*Alas... it is old mentality; the present and future are doomed to the mediocrity of small minds with no patience.

 

[KainenMorden]

Excellent points, I never thought of it that way, thanks!

 

[KainenMorden]

I completely agree with your edit as well. People have just become less intelligent in general. Everything that is mainstream media is watered down and appeals to the lowest common denominator iq.

The popularity, or lack there of, of TB is just an indicator of the times. I'm not even that old, I was a child in the early 2000s during the RTS boom and I had older family members that loved RTS games and had LAN parties with family and friends and it was fun but I always preferred Civ or early TW style games even then.

I wonder what percentage of today's children could pick up an RTS or TBS game?

 

[Tigranes]

People have complained about the younger generation being dumber, less masculine, less morally virtuous, and less industrious, at least every single generation since the 1860s. Plenty of examples before that too, even down to the Ancient Greeks, though obviously we have less records as we go back. So unless we as a civilisation have an incredible superpower to continue surviving despite becoming massively dumber every generation for thousands of years, which might make a good story, actually...

TB has funnily enough enjoyed a resurgence in recent years - it looked a lot more dead in some parts of the 90s and 00's and tons of people, including RPG makers, believed that nobody would ever want to play TB again, partly due to another popular myth that TB was just an artefact of inferior technology.

 

[KainenMorden]

I see your point but I think that, given everyone is walking around with a computer in their pocket that can access so much information, the fact that it seems like attention span and intelligence is going down is even more concerning vs ancient or medieval times when education opportunities/access to information was difficult for many people.

I would say the generation that complained before the fall of Rome was right and the West was in a slow decline until the Renaissance and the Reconquista was completed.

Anyways, yeah its interesting about TB. I loved the dark suns games, replayed shattered lands recently. Then there was never another TB dnd game until Toee and there wasn't too many if any fantasy TB games for a decade.

Now TB is thought of as mandatory in all crpgs moving forward. I think its great.

 

[Tigranes]

*shrug* All I know is that the 35+ year olds whining about "young uns these days" when I was younger were fucking insufferable and wrong at least half the time, so the least we can do is keep open the possibility that our back of napkin theories can be wrong.

I remember some arguments that the return of TB had a lot to do with the rise of mobile gaming, the slowdown & stagnation in rise of tech requirements for games, etc. - meaning people became a lot more used to playing & paying for stuff with "retro" graphics or interfaces. Hard to know how true that is, of course. I look at something like the Switch and consider it perfect for TB, but then you see people playing Skyrim on their phone.

 

[KainenMorden]

That's true.

Yeah I wonder about that. Well you do need either an expensive console or gaming PC to play many of the popular new releases.

I wonder if a bunch of people are playing BG or nwn on their phones. I would never do that but I do know the amount of yearly mobile releases in many different genres is crazy.

 

[JarlFrank]

I enjoy both equally

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Real time with pause, the benefits of both with none of the drawbacks.

 

[Ol' Willy]

Realtime always results either in *unitname* rushes or total clusterfuck

TB allows for a real thought

 

[Sranchammer]

Because I have a life

 

[Jonathan "Zee Nekomimi]

this whole topic seems like bait.
Besides that, really depends on what game type it is implemented, both types have their good and bad sides.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

this whole topic seems like bait.

OP is an AI seeking to understand the 'dex. See his posts in other threads as well.

 

[Raghar]

Turn based typically means you use all units and don't forget on any. Real time, you need to pause and jump around map regularly.

 

[Sarathiour]

There is a whole psychological aspect to rts precisely because you can't pause, decision fatigue is a very real thing that come into play when the player are roughly the same level.

 

[Raghar]

There is a whole psychological aspect to rts precisely because you can't pause, decision fatigue is a very real thing that come into play when the player are roughly the same level.

That's MP. SP games can be far more complex and last far longer than one MP session.

 

[Alex]

I've been thinking a lot about this issue lately. While I don't care at all for the time pressure and even reflex based gameplay of real time; I think there is a real trade off from doing quantised turns, and doing simultaneous movements.

The thing about quantised turns, that is, treating time for a single unit, or possibly several allied units, as separate from the rest (as in X-Com or Jagged Alliance) allows you to consider all the possible actions you could take in a more sane and isolated environment. This can make the game fun in a way that simultaneous movements wouldn't allow; perhaps we could even call it more "chess-like". In fact, bigger turns (that is, games that allow you to do more in a turn, usually through some kind of action points) might excel in this.

Simultaneous action games, games where every unit moves and acts at the same time, tend to have a different feel. Since there usually isn't a logic place to pause movement, the gameplay tends to be less optimised. You don't win by making sure you always end your turn behind cover or by saving aus to shoot the enemy if he walks in your field of vision. On the other hand, simultaneous movement isn't abstracted like turn based movement is. Some tactical options that are impossible in turn based combat become available with simultaneous movement. Some of these can be considered in turn based games, such as "overwatch" or whatever other names you might give to a unit attacking outside it's turn. But perhaps the worst problem is the issue with response. In a turn based game, units may take a lot longer to respond to what the enemy does than it is reasonable to expect, exactly because the turns are long.

I think there might be ways of further improving turn based combat so that it is more realistic while keeping the kind of gameplay they excel in. A possibility could be to have small turns for movement but larger turns for actions. So, for instance, you might move your character this or that way in the short turn, without much of a penalty, but giving up shooting an enemy for another might cost precious time units while your character drops his previous aim and focuses on the new target.

 

[Kane]

RT is a simulation only a Computer can provide, TB is an adaption of board games. RT is natural when using a computer, TB is something to play IRL with friends at a table. RT is therefore the natural evolution from TB.

RT increases realism and translates your grip on the game into success, which is not possible in Board Games.

RT brings in the elements of surprise, intuition and 'thinking on your feet' from sports. It thus fuses sports with board games, again which is only possible with a computer.

RT is best enjoyed with/against other humans, because the computer is frequently unable to cope with real time. RT therefore is inherently like games ought to be played.