Why do you enjoy turn based strategy vs real time?

[Humanophage]

Real-time frequently degenerates into gamey micromanagement where you are playing an action game with a couple of units. Action games are boring because I am not interested in developing my twitch reflexes. I am okay at action games, but I do not find them enjoyable and they make me feel painfully dumb for wasting my time playing them. Why am I playing something that requires fast twitchy clicks, like I'm 8? It makes me sad. Admittedly, TBS are as much of a waste of life, but at least you don't feel like it's being rubbed in your face. Action can be acceptable if it intertwines with a lot of build-theorising, pre-planning, etc., so that your reaction means less than you plan.

If it's real-time without control, like pre-programmed battles in Dominions 5, then it is all right - but it's obviously not very tactical except in the sense that you must prepare. RTWP can be good because it deals with the biggest curse of TB games, which is that consecutive enemy turns take forever, whilst simultaneous enemy turns make the game less strategic.

Another problem with RT is that you cannot have very detailed unit skills because it is impossible to use many of them simultaneously.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

rtwpchads can't stop winning

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Real time typically means lots of AI control of pathing and moment to moment shit, so half the gameplay is managing the AI. Turn based usually means you control all aspects.

That said I enjoy both, but I don't think I'd enjoy turn based starcraft or real time civ. Although turn based starcraft might be interesting, to see all the super micro stuff become normal gameplay.

 

[Norfleet]

A recent study showed toddlers around 2 to 3 years old that spent a few hours a day staring at a screen had a lower mental development compared to toddlers of the same age that didn't stare at a screen.

Well, that's to be expected, if they just "stared at the screen" at the kind of inane, vapid dogshit that they show to kids now. My kids were given a steady diet of screen material that I required them to actually think when using and turned into edumactional moments. They weren't to be just having FUN with games, because that's casual shit, or worse, just WATCHING inane things like some kind of televitz. If you're just gonna watch something, it better be about science or history or some shiz.

I also encouraged them to commit deadly violence against random wildlife. That's an important life skill also. And it cuts down the cost of feeding and clothing them since they can just eat and wear the dead animals. That's what every gamer should intrinsically understand, anyway: You don't waste your money buying low-tier newbie gear that you're just gonna immediately outlevel. Just use whatever drops until you hit endgame.

That said I enjoy both, but I don't think I'd enjoy turn based starcraft or real time civ. Although turn based starcraft might be interesting, to see all the super micro stuff become normal gameplay.

Pretty sure both of those games have essentially been done. Although with Starcraft, this usually means that the spaceships section is sectioned off into its own game because the idea of shooting down a spaceship using handheld weaponry is the kind of thing you'd only accept in, well, Starcraft. Real-time Civ is just stuff like Empire Earth, Rise of Nations, or Age of Empires, though.

 

[Blutwurstritter]

Real time has the benefit that you can have very large battles with individual units that can all be controlled directly if needed, for example Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander. I don't think a game of that type would work in turn base without changes that make it essentially a different type of game. At some point it gets tiresome or bothersome to think of every move of every single unit when large numbers are involved. This happens for example in Age of Wonders 3 where you can have battles with 42 units + summons. At that point I usually use quick resolve since it would take forever to play it out in turn based mode. I like turn-based when combat is limited to a few units with lots of abilities and possible interactions, this is where it shines in my opinion. But on very large battlefields(large in comparison to the speed of the units) with many individual units, I prefer real-time. There is also a fine line between "twitch gameplay" and fun. Being able to dodge abilities in real time can be fun just as action games can be fun. The question is how important it is in comparison to overall tactical decisions. I like the pacing of DoW 1, Company of Heroes or Warcraft III while Starcraft 2 is too fast for my tastes.
I would say that the majority of games, real time included, don't require much thinking. Many turn-based games have very simple combat, just look at some of the recent rpgs with turn-based combat. So I'm wondering which games people think of when they say that turn based requires more thinking. I must have missed a lot of games if this is true.

 

[Wyatt_Derp]

Because they're senile, arthritic old fucks.

Play RTS games long enough and that's what you turn into.

Play Turn Based. You'll live longer.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

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.

most real time strategy games are not 'real time' but are actually sped up to be arcade games, there is nothing 'realistic' about playing a strategy game where you are giving orders to units like brigades or divisions where the time is sped up to resemble some sort of arcade type game because explosions are cool and fun. Waiting for actual real time orders to be relayed to divisional units and then for them to move would actually be much more boring and take more time than just playing a turn based game.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Simulationist real-time games are my favorite strategy games (or, more precisely, tactics games).

Total War (pre-Warhammer, that's too arcadey), Ultimate General, Grand Tactician, Graviteam Tactics, Men of War (especially modded Assault Squad 2).

I love real-time battles that attempt to simulate actual warfare. I only play Total War with realism-enhancing mods, and I love the more hardcore real time wargames like Grand Tactician and Graviteam Tactics. The physics engine of Men of War is great too, with its destructible buildings, projectile simulations where things like angle of impact can determine whether a round penetrates a tank's armor or not, etc.

Those games are quite complex as they try to simulate battles as accurately as possible, going from complete simulation of every unit and projectile in a detailed physics engine (Men of War) to a more abstract ruleset like Ultimate General's cover system (where having a regiment stand in a forest gives them 80% cover or so). This approach means you have to consider everything in your tactical approach: terrain, both your and your enemy's army composition, the condition of your units, etc. Some of these games are even more complex mechanically than your average turn-based wargame! I highly doubt there's any turn-based wargame with more simulationist combat mechanics than Graviteam Tactics, for example (only Steel Panthers is on par).

I agree with this, its just these games are very rare, but I actually do like these type of game if it is made right, its just hardly ever done, but if it is, it can be great.

 

[Riddler]

Simultaneous turn based.

 

[Luka-boy]

So I can play one or two of them at the same time while I'm working, obviously

 

[Oberon]

I like playing out a months-years long campaign (in simulated game time that is) also love the play by email format as it allows everyone to play on their own schedule allowing for larger scale games.

 

[muds_animal_friend]

We used to play games by writing letters to each other. With pens. On paper. In envelopes. Through the mail. You fucking subhuman RtwP degenerate trash.

 

[Rincewind]

Should rename thread to "Why do you enjoy chess vs bar fights?", then the question should answer itself.

 

[KainenMorden]

Excellent response, 10/10.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Should rename thread to "Why do you enjoy chess vs bar fights?", then the question should answer itself.

I'd like to see a computer win a bar fight

 

[gurugeorge]

I actually think it's moot, because if you're playing RTwP properly at high levels of difficulty, you're pre-emptively pausing a lot anyway, so effectively it's not that much different (you can have a cup of coffee, stroke your beard and walk the dog just as much between pauses as you can between turns).

The idea that RTwP is some sort of manly, adrenaline/twitch-based alternative to TB has a little bit of truth to it, but it's greatly exaggerated - unless the RTwP gameplay is so braindead that you hardly ever need to pause and change orders to cope with the shifting battlefield. (On the other hand, RTwP where you have finer control over the AI conditionals, like in Pillows 2, DA:O and a very few other games, is another kettle of fish - there you can "wind em up and watch em go" and you're still effectively "playing the game," just at a different level.)

Ideally, you really want all the things, at least I do. I love being able to switch between the two on a whim as you can in some games, and I love playing with AI conditionals in games that offer it. But I recognize that must involve compromises in the gameplay in some respects, and is more costly and difficult to implement for not much ROI.

Also, TB on the computer could be further developed in an intricate direction in terms of team synergies. Being able to delay turns in the action queue to specific positions later in the queue or manipulate one's position in the queue indirectly, either by builds, abilities and artifacts or whatever (as in Troubleshooter) is better than dully fixed-queue TB just based on an abstract "initiative" alone; being able to link your characters' turns in some way and do combined actions (e.g. ganging up on a particular mob) would be an even better iteration, then you're really have a "frozen" version of real realtime. I think there's still a lot of headroom in the possibilities with TB.

 

[NIGERundayoHater]

My two criterias for what consitutes a good game - be it realtime or turnbased - are complexity and good AI (no weebshit as well I suppose but that's a different topic). It's a lot easier to find realtime games with Good AI compared to turnbased, but it's a lot easier to find complex games in turnbased compared to realtime, rarely do you find jewels that incorporate both be it in TB or RT.

Besides comparing both is like comparing apples and oranges since they really are that different. It's like comparing a General in the middle of an engagement with a Ruler/Controller/Manager in the middle of his elaborate long-term 5d-chess plan he's currently cooking up in his Castle/Mansion/Office. The real reason there's even a topic of Realtime vs. Turnbased is because Strategy has become a niche market where we rarely get good new games, and when that happens you can only get one and not both. So if you enjoy realtime and you see turnbased release, you understandably get salty because that could have been a turnbased game or vice versa.

 

[KainenMorden]

Yes Rtwp in a difficult encounter plays like TB but often more chaotic and harder to manage. Games that do both well and where you can switch back and forth would be ideal. In the realm of cRPGs, Arcanum tried something like this but of course it was broken and I haven't played the newer games that were originally Rtwp but added turn based and you can switch back and forth but I did buy both Pathfinder games on sale and will play them eventually.

Yeah something like what you're talking about with that type of team queue system would be great but if there's a game that does anything like this, I haven't heard of it.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

too many turn-based games rely on actions that are resolved immediately rather than having to plan ahead

 

[flyingjohn]

You know why i like turn based more?
FUCKING PATHFINDING.

Just wasted 50 minutes of my life on skylords reborn and it failed because my units decided that the closest route to a straight line is some circular motion around the entire map.
Also spawned a unit that couldn't go through a building that is wide enough because muh ai decides that is not possible.
And all this time you are dealing with a million fires from unlimited resource teleporting enemies.

 

[Rincewind]

Also, TB on the computer could be further developed in an intricate direction in terms of team synergies. Being able to delay turns in the action queue to specific positions later in the queue or manipulate one's position in the queue indirectly, either by builds, abilities and artifacts or whatever (as in Troubleshooter) is better than dully fixed-queue TB just based on an abstract "initiative" alone; being able to link your characters' turns in some way and do combined actions (e.g. ganging up on a particular mob) would be an even better iteration, then you're really have a "frozen" version of real realtime. I think there's still a lot of headroom in the possibilities with TB.

I agree, and the various abilities and synergies between different characters in Dungeon of Naeheulbeuk make such kind of tactical thinking not only possible, but a requirement at higher difficulty levels. All you noted in the above paragraph is there in the game. These kinds of strategic decisions would be quite hard to do in real-time, hence my comparison to chess.

 

[Rincewind]

Just wasted 50 minutes of my life on skylords reborn and it failed because my units decided that the closest route to a straight line is some circular motion around the entire map.
Also spawned a unit that couldn't go through a building that is wide enough because muh ai decides that is not possible.
And all this time you are dealing with a million fires from unlimited resource teleporting enemies.

Pretty much sums up my experience when trying to get into any RTS game, then rage-quitting some time later.

 

[DakaSha]

I'm just here to read people saying gay shit like "turn based is real strategy and real time is brainless click festing"

edit: Both are good, and barely comparable.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

continue surviving despite becoming massively dumber every generation for thousands of years, which might make a good story, actually...

fun movie

 

[HeatEXTEND]

The bottom line is this: it's the decisions that must matter, not mouse latency, miliseconds of reaction time.

Never ever design a fighting game, thx.