STEAM GROUP
eXplorminate e4X
STEAM GROUP
eXplorminate e4X
43
IN-GAME
745
ONLINE
Founded
September 24, 2014
Language
English
Location
United States 
All Discussions > Off Topic > Topic Details
Nasarog Nov 20, 2015 @ 6:19am
Some other developer walks into a bar - Tactical Combat.
Hey guys, so, this really big developer listend to the most recent StraX - http://explorminate.net/2015/11/17/strategic-expanse-21-the-4th-x/

Anyways, this developer wants to get a feel for your preferences for combat.

Real Time

Turn Based

Tactical

Strategic

Share your feelings in here.


Thank you.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 51 comments
Nasarog Nov 20, 2015 @ 6:40am 
When I say big, I don't mean a one man team, and this is from a game that MANY of you really LIKE. Like really really like.

I can't say if this is for a future title or a current one, but I can say that the more you share, the more we'll benefit in the long run.


GO go go!!!
ashbery76 Nov 20, 2015 @ 6:52am 
Real time like Totalwar.It has to be slow enough that you are not rushed but still have depth in the system.I just think you cannot get away from the fact that turn based combat kills the game pacing in 4X games that have a strategic layer.I want huge fleets and pacing.
Last edited by ashbery76; Nov 20, 2015 @ 6:52am
I'm Spartacus Nov 20, 2015 @ 7:02am 
My favorite would probably come down to turn based strategic moves with real time combat as in the original Total War Rome -

I also highly favor turn based if it resembles Order of Battle: Pacific

I know some of the Paradox games are very good like HOI3 or CK2 and EU4 - but staring hour after hours at a static map of Europe with endless minutae - (called events ) puts me to sleep no matter how well done. I just can't handle that much micro management.
ChrisG Nov 20, 2015 @ 7:15am 
I kind of like every version of combat but it's dependant on the game too.
For games like EU i can't see how RT/TB combat would work.
For games like EL,Thea i prefer turn based.

Or maybe that's what i'm used to.

I really miss though a good real time battle system. Something better than the current Total War.
LnLP Nov 20, 2015 @ 7:44am 
If I had infinite resources, or if someone could make this happen, it would be my dream combat scenario:

A balanced mix of turn-based combat and real time tactical combat, that ends up being so unlike either of those descriptions that it becomes its own thing.

If I were the commander of a space fleet, I imagine the first thing that would happen is I study the situation, and try to determine A.) what the enemy is trying to do, and B.) what I should do given my fleet size, ship types, weapon types, and what I know about the enemy fleet.

There would be all kinds of different elements making their way into battle. Debris, asteroids, other ships, maybe even planets.. and there would be a seemless and quick way to address these obstacles in the form of formations and ship characteristics.

As commander, you wouldn't be in control of every ship. It will have its own characteristics (which would have been created ahead of time, probably at the time of ship creation, so it wouldn't slow down actual battle). However, you will set up their formation in a way that will pan out best for you. Once you set this formation, best on everything you've assessed, you then send your ships in to engage. The AI controllers will always fight as optimally as possible (with some fuzzy logic), so you just watch it unfold.

If one squad gets destroyed much faster than anticipated and leaves you vulnerable, you can retreat, reform, and re-engage. Rinse and repeat for a combat system that basically just lets you watch your plans unfold.

Ok… I might have to implement more of these ideas… but if not, I hope whomever is listening does this!!
FridayBiology Nov 20, 2015 @ 8:22am 
I really like Gratuitous Space Battle's combat style, the whole give tactics to troops and then send them to battle and hope. Though AI has to be complex and the ability to set multiple favorite orders saves giving the same commands over and over to differing units.
Allow me to command a flag ship and update orders to battle groups rather then single units in real time and I'm happy.
"A" deploy fighters then fire long range to soften capital ships
"B" flank right and fire at will
*battle structure changes mid battle*
"A" Move forward to support "B"
"B" Focus fire on "target"
...etc

Though I have to agreed with Ashberry. Too much micro will become grinding.
So maybe give me option to view and command in a fleet battles but, also allow the option the auto-complete as there is no point of entering combat with three groups of ships to command if your facing a single cargo hauler every 10 minutes.
Luke Nov 20, 2015 @ 9:31am 
Turn based like old Orion.
BitGamerX Nov 20, 2015 @ 10:17am 
My preference is turned based like MOO or Civ. I'm ok with real time action like FTL and DoE although it gets tiring having to pause the game.
Gregorovitch Nov 20, 2015 @ 11:18am 
I think Troy made a good point in the podcast on this: he was talking about two games, Armada4X and Thea, that resolved combat via a card game. So one was good and the other not so good. For me it matters little what style of combat a game uses so long as it works within the context and pace of the game and is tense and exiting throughout.

I think DD brought up another good point that if you try to be all things to all people a la EL you end up pleasing nobody. A game can be tactical combat focused, like AoW or XCOM, and the combat can be as lengthy and complicated as you like, you are playing the game for the combat bascially so as long as it's interesting, challenging and exiting it's cool. If it gets boring and repetative or too easy it's not cool. Or a game can be stategy focussed in which case you need to either streamline and speed up the combat (or possibly just have a lot less of it), like Sorceror King for example, or you need to make it more or less fully automated a la DW or EUIV.

I think as far as big grand strategy and war games there will be an increasing move towards orders driven AI managed tactical play as opposed to micro-management. Quite a few war games have already gone down this route and I think there will be a big emphasis on it in HoI4. There is a case to actually enforce it and remove the ability of the player to micro their way to (what becomes more or less certain) victory. I think it does two things: first it levels the playing field for the AI opposition meaning a game can present stiffer opposition without cheats and excessive bonuses. Secondly it speeds up the game (you can run a RTwP gajme much faster for example) so you are more likely to play more games and explore more of the what the game has to offer as a result.

Bottom line is that getting combat right is an art, not a science, and there is no one style or formula that always works best. It is easily possible to make big mistakes in designing it, for example Troy brought up that a big problem in Worlds of Magic is the time it takes for melee units to get at each other making ranged units far too OP and unecessarily extending battle times.

Anyway for the poll, i would say:

I don't go for RTS that much, I like to take my time to think about things.
I am equally happy with both turn based and RTwP
I am equally happy with tactical focus as I am with strategic focus. DW or XCOM? Both, please!



Nasarog Nov 20, 2015 @ 11:21am 
I'm noticing a trend about space games... maybe it's not a space game.. food for thought!
I'm Spartacus Nov 20, 2015 @ 11:49am 
heheh - not from me you didn't Nate!

besides it's all the same - only the cartoons change to protect the guilty
Last edited by I'm Spartacus; Nov 20, 2015 @ 11:54am
LnLP Nov 20, 2015 @ 11:50am 
ok, in my example, replace "asteroids" with "bushes", "planets" with "mountains", "ships" with "wizards", and you've got my idea FANTASY battles :P
Biz Nov 20, 2015 @ 12:18pm 
i prefer turn based, although real-time is okay if it's not about APM/micro/reflexes

there are some real-time combat systems that are still basically about taking turns (eg. anything with cooldowns).

anything more specific than that would depend on what kind of game it is

if it's a strategy game, long-form tactical combat is almost always a bad idea
if it's a game about tactical combat, then go nuts with it
Luke Nov 20, 2015 @ 1:25pm 
Card based would be an interesting variant. Fast enough yet still thoughtful.
MOO managed strategic and tactical, but yes tricky to do both.
Mr.Kill Nov 20, 2015 @ 2:08pm 
Real-time, tactical is just fine with me. In my opinion (though I really don't need label my comments with this especially on this thread), tactical combat is best for a real-time game and by tactical I mean unit composition, unit facing (optional but tends to be done well when included) and large numbers of units so as you allow flanking (or at least enough units so that flanking is possible, you don't need 1k units for that).

That said if the developer wants to include castable abilities or something then real-time is not the way to go as castable abilities tend to suck or make the game too much APM based unless of course you set the abilities to autocast and make them auto-cast well enough that it would do the same thing a player would.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 51 comments
Per page: 15 30 50

All Discussions > Off Topic > Topic Details