Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I am not sure if I should look forward to the next release of a game which was since its SEII incarnation one of my favorite games. I can understand all the wows and hoorays of many fans. The screenshot graphics are looking very good and some features of the new release are very promising (like the infinite universe and tech trees) But IMO there are some more or less serious problems with SEV if it arrives in the announced way.

1. To the most serious problem
Realtime tactical combat? I cannot understand this. After 3 Editions with good old turnbased combat, Aaron is planning one central element of the game in realtime http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/fear.gif
At least for me I never played a good realtime/turnbased hybrid type of a game. (ok I played also never a good "pure" realtime game) And the baddest of them was MOO3. This game had also a realtime tactical engine and my fear is that Aaron SEV will go in the same trap than MOO3.
One strength of the SE series derives from its similarity to the boardgame Starfire and that game is of course turnbased. So the upcoming realtime change of SEV is fundamental to the whole game and there are virtually no broad discussions about it in the forums.

2. Another prob: ground combat
As far as I was able to follow the messages about current SEV, Aaron plans a similar ground combat system as in SEIV. While this is in my eyes preferable to a realtime ground combat system its not the best one. Many posts are opting for a better ground combat. So is there any chance for this? And if not, why is Aaron ignoring the many demands? Personally I would not like to have a very detailed system with ground movement or so. But there should be a motivation to design different types of units (like artillery, special planetary assault units and so on) and a possibility to do some abstract tactics like "dig in" or "all-out assault". It would also be good to have the possiblity to planet assault with several ships at once instead with just one.
I think invading whole worlds is not a minor thing. I is complex and it could sometimes last very long. (sometimes for years in game world terms) The SEV design should pay attention to this matter and should adjust the rules accordingly. Such an approach would make the gameplay deeper and would add an additional and interesting dimension in strategic planning.


3. All these stuff about heroes, ship crews and so on

Well the scope of the game is to rule hundreds of worlds with hundreds of billions inhabitants. Single persons or ship crews should rather be the scope of a small unit tactics game, SF-shooter or an SF-adventure than that of a galactic strategy game. I as designer would improve the AI or do better ground combat rules instead spending my time on developing hero rules.

What do you think about this?

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

1. The primary reason for switching to realtime combat was for play balance. In SEIV, the turnbased nature of combat gives a HUGE advantage to whoever gets to shoot first, which is usually determined pretty much randomly. Most of the concerns I've heard about the realtime combat issue are that it would degenerate into a rapid clickfest with little actual strategy. I'm not in the beta (yet) so I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty certain it will be realtime with pausing - take all the time you need to issue orders, then watch them executed in realtime for either a set time or until someone hits pause - so that's not likely to happen.

2. Yes, all we had heard for a long time indicated that ground combat would be just as simplified as it is in SEIV. Then this screenshot got posted.

3. "Heroes" or "Great Leaders" or whatever you want to call them were one of the most liked features of the MoO series, and they have been requested for SE many times by many people. I'm afraid you're outvoted on this one. Besides, even in a gigantic empire with 100 billion citizens, surely there are a few individuals who have developed a widespread reputation as one of the best at their job, whether their job is fleet command or new colony development.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

The primary reason for switching to realtime combat was for play balance. In SEIV, the turnbased nature of combat gives a HUGE advantage to whoever gets to shoot first, which is usually determined pretty much randomly

If the "play balance" was the prob in SEIV then its easy to change it without turning the whole tactical system upside down. MOO2 has achieved this with a simple trick - alternating initiatives depending on the offence modifier. With a little bit time to think about it a similar solution would also have been possible in SEV.

And regarding play balance. In realtime the guy which clicks faster on some pause or order button wins over the slower thoughtful guy. And while he manage one part of the battlefield he get stomped on the flanks by his frenetic clicking enemy who is used to play those realtime shooters. THIS I call a problem in play balance.

To solve the problem with the faster clicks the only possible solution seems to me if the game automatically stops every minute or so and this is the only time both players can give orders. During the game is moving no order issuing should be allowed by any of the players. After order issuing the game should only go ahead if both players (not just one) hit their "go" buttons until the time the next predefined pause showes up allowing to give new orders. Another realtime system prefers the fastclicker over the slow thinker.

Another problem is the range of weapons. As long as the weapon range is per hex or per square there is no problem in calculating the necessary distances for optimal usage of a weapon.
And how is it in realtime? I suppose you have to hit a seperate button for each single ship to be informed about the maximum weapon ranges. What is with bigger ships and different weapons on them? Do I have to click on each weapon system seperately? And do I have to calculate in the current moving speed, so that the weapon range of every weapon on every of my ships is changing every second? A real clicking nightmare if you want to control a whole fleet. And very dissatisfying if you fire-click too soon and the salvo is 3mm to short.

Such a realtime system is not what I understand of a good strategic game. MOO3 is greeting!

Ground combat screen
Thanks for the link to the screenshot. If this is used then it seems that the ground combat system is hex- and turnbased. Not a bad thing if it is designed well.
So now we have a turnbased ground combat system and a realtime space combat system? (and a turnbased strategic system) What comes next?

Single Person and Heroes
I still think they add unnecessary design time but I can live with them as long as the rest of the game is ok.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Which is why Aaron will be very careful to design the combat engine so this isn't a problem.

Congratulations for answering your own concerns! I'm pretty sure this is almost exactly how it will work when the game is finished.

Do you really think you'll have to micromanage battles that much? I'm sure your ships will be perfectly capable of figuring out that they have to move just a little bit closer before shooting by themselves. The orders you give will probably be more along the lines of "Stay at maximum range of x weapon while trying to surround the enemy. Fire as requently as possible using targeting priority list y and allocating z% overkill to compensate for misses."

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I heard the same from the MOOIII developers about their real time combat system and for three years I waited only to see the game die in three weeks. I am very disappointed I thought I had finally found a 4X game to take up where MOOII left off. I will not buy a real time game.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

MoO3 was a disaster, I'll grant you that, but I very much doubt the same thing will happen to SEV. MoO3 wasn't even developed by the same company as MoO1 and 2, much less the same people, and went through many major design changes. It also suffered from a lack of dedication to making a truly good game in the face of pressure to get it out the door quickly so the publisher could make money. SEV is being developed by exactly the same person who made all the previous Space Empires games, is not going through frequent radical revisions to the basic design, and Aaron has a history of delaying release to make the game better and then sticking around and improving it for years afterwards. Even right now, the beta test has started and quite a number of the beta testers are forum regulars who have expressed some concern over the issue in the past. If the consensus is that the realtime combat engine sucks, you can depend on it that Aaron will keep working on it and improving it, taking suggestions from every fan who cares to give one, until it's great. You should at the very least give the demo a try when it comes out.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I don't understand why game companies don't get it. The exploration, the Tec research the building up of the planets are all for one purpose....combat. It is all just to get you into comabt with the ships you've designed. It is the tactical turnbased combat that made MOOII and for me SEIV must have games. I don't want the AI making any decisions for me. I'd play MOOIII (if it can still be found in the dust bin) if I wanted that. I'm sorry to come off so hard but I am very dissapoined. There is a reason everyone holds MOOII up are a measuring stick. Think of that, a 10 year old game that is still considered the best game yet.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I will be willing to try the Demo. After all Bauler's (Spelling?)Gate, had a semi-realtime and it was a great game.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Realtime combat is good. Remember it isn't a real time strategy game. There will be no real time resource management or build queues or anything like that, just straight up combat. Say you have a small skirmish with just a few ships each side, maybe you can speed up the time. Big huge fleet battle? Slow it down a bit. Alot of RTS games have that sort of option.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I have played both SE3 and SE4 a lot, but I haven't ever finished a tactical combat battle. At least I play Space Empires only because of the strategy part.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

That will not do it for me. Name me one 4X game with real-time combat that is still talked about let alone still on the market. Ask your self why games like SEIV and Galactic Civilization have a following. Many of the players are die-hard MOO II fans that love turn base combat. I'm sorry but I very seriously doubt I'll be buying SEV. Out of respect for the developers and beta testes I will not post on this again. I've worked on a lot of games and I know how much blood sweet and tears goes into making a game.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Douglas,
You mean you have infos about the way the realttime tactical combat will be?

We will see if this is really the approach. The new strategy game imperial glory for example is also a hybrid tactical realtime/strategic turnbased game and in tactical combat each player has to check constantly the ranges of every unit without the options to predefine the behaviour of his units you describe. This means not of course that SEV will have the same system but it shows the usual (and questionable) way modern hybrid games go.

Kid,
so I am not the only one who is in concern with turning the tactical game upside down. Good to know.

Stregone,
If people want to play a realtime SF game there are myriards of those out there. No need to invade the SE series and making it not enjoyable anymore for its turnbased fans who played (and bought) every incarnation the last 10 years.

zarix,
well I have no problem with that you dont like the tactical game of SEIV. But there are many people who like it (me for example) and thats the reason for my concern and for this thread.

General
The more I think about the topic the more I assume that the SEV designers are in search for the mainstream bucks. Its their good right to do with their game what they want, but this new way excludes many of longtime SE-fans which prefer turnbased thinking over realtime clicking.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

No, I don't actually have solid information on how that will work, and I won't until either the game is released or I get in the beta. Of course, if I get in the beta, I'll be bound by the NDA to not tell you anything about it until release, so either way you'll just have to wait for the release date or an official comment from Malfador. I'm just figuring that Aaron knows about the concerns of longtime fans that realtime combat could become a micromanagement clickfest nightmare, and what I described is the logical extension of SEIV's strategies and would solve the problem quite nicely.

Yes, it does seem that Aaron is going for big bucks to some extent this time, he's even going with a retail distributor instead of online distribution only. However, I think he's established far to good a reputation with his current fanbase to want to risk alienating them. Plus, too many prominent members of the online community have expressed their opinions and their (very similar and quite reasonable) suggestions for making realtime combat not a clickfest for him to reasonably ignore them.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Have no worries my friends!

There are many excellent options available for the real-time tactical combat, including the ability to pause every X seconds to issue orders to your ships if you want - this can be used to easily recreate turn-based combat except all ships would execute their orders at the same time during the interval.

Even cooler is that you can even just focus on controlling just one ship (as if you're the commander) while keeping the others under AI.

It's not at all about who can click the fastest or anything like that.

I can't say anything more than that, but again don't worry. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Sure, perhaps a bit of real-time combat might help the appeal of the game and add some eye candy, but there are far more benefits to having such a system. It eliminates 95% of all the silliness and lopsideness that occurs in a turn-based system.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I'm sorry, but you really can't compare SEIV combat to Galactic Civilizations combat. GalCiv combat was, quite frankly, primitive. SEIV had a much greater deal of control, and had far fewer things hidden from the player. No comparison, really.

Some advice: You have said you probably won't be buying SEV, simply because of the change in the way combat is dealt with. Why judge so fast? There's really no reason at this stage for you to believe it will be horrible. I'd suggest at least waiting until the demo comes out, download it, run a few combats, then judge. But please, don't be so negative just because some other games haven't managed to do a good job.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

... Said two beta testers, who have actually had the opportunity to try out the new realtime combat system. Does that do anything to settle your concerns, klausD?

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Said beta testers might want to watch their comments lest they get wacked with the NDA stick..

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I for one love the idea of a real-time combat
*Just to note that Ive yet to actually try SEV combat out*
As Ive always found Turn-based combat too slow and tedious, and Im the type of guy who likes to have to think fast and be on my feet

As for, who can click the quickest... dont forget it will be against the AI, who can think a 1000 times faster than us anyway, plus issue a 100 orders to a hundred ships before we finish that first thought
As for MP, if its like SEIV, then you dont get to see the combat until after its occured anyway

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I didn't say anything that Aaron didn't mention in the IRC chats. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I remember hearing that the ship strategies, as well as the more general AI stuff, was now done with scripting systems, so you have more control over things than in SEIV? Can anyone confirm or deny this?

Keep in mind that simultaneous strategic movement will probably work in much the same way as in SEIV (aside from the hex grid replacing the square grid), so if you're playing multi-player you wouldn't have direct control over your ships in combat at all anyway.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

The AI can be scripted yes. To what degree I cannot say!

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

What I said, any fool could say. Anyone can say that people should wait before judging, and my comments about SEIV have nothing to do with SEV! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif I was quite careful to stay away from potential NDA-breaching comments.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I will wait for the demo. I'm very happy there will be a demo. A lot of game companies no longer do that

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Then there's an IRC chat I haven't read. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I don't know if there will be a demo for sure, I'm just assuming from the SEV website found at www.malfador.com Find the SEV link near the top, click it, then look on the left side and you'll see a link saying "Demo". That's all I'm basing the assumption that a demo will be available on.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

LOL don't worry I won't turn on you if they don't make a demo.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Phoenix-D said: Then there's an IRC chat I haven't read.

That just might be true. It was the first question answered in the first SE:V chat: IRC Chat Session on SE:V #1 (Europe Timezone)

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Heh, I guess I sounded like a politician there eh? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Klaus... How many times must you dreg this up? It will not be in any way, shape or form a RTS game. Considering who is making this game, I feel fairly confident in stating that your concerns are entirely unfounded. Real time != click festing. There are many real time games out there that entirely lack RTS elements.

Against human opponents, there would likely only be strategic combat available, as in SEIV. In such situations, it does not matter one iota whether the combat is real time or turn based, as you have no control. Against the AI, you can take as much time as you want issuing orders while the game is paused, then unpause it for a bit and watch your orders be executed. The best turn based combat systems tend to feel arbitrarily clunky in their attempts to emulate simultaneous, real time combat execution.

MOO3 is in no way a valid comparison. As others stated, it was not made properly. Way too many corporate fanaglings went on in its production that ripped the heart and soul out of it. This is not going to happen with SEV.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Simply looking up the responses made by me and Fyron in the older threads about SE5 should answer a lot of questions. (Given Fyron's post below, I presume he feels the same frustration about people repeatedly voicing the same concerns without ever truly comprehending the responses.)

Trust in what the ancient SE4 masters had to say about things.
Wise in the ways of Aaron, they be.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

No, sorry to say that it does not settle my concerns. For example Captain Kwok writes that it is possible to pause the game every x seconds. Well this means that I have to press the pause button myself. This is not a good message. Because if I dont press it (because I am too slow or the cat jumps on the desk or I simple dont like to press it...) I will loose. So I am forced to press in the right moment and not before or thereafter. And voila the clickfest begins.
And the remark that you can just control a single ship. Well this gives me the rest. WHAT is Space Empires? Its a galactic strategy game! Its not Elite. Controlling a single ship with your heroes have nothing to do with such a 4X game. If I want to play a single ship/hero game I am playing Elite or Starfury.
3. Captain Kwok also says that a turn-based system is silly and lopsy. If this is the new design philosphy behind SEV so why not changing the strategy part too to real-time? I am quite sure SEVI (if it somedays arises) will have this.
Of course with a pause button and no clickfest. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

dude, you're a blockhead.
I'm sorry, but it's true.

it's not a clickfest. full stop. just shutup if you are not going to belive those in the know till theres a demo out.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Kwok said you could handle a single ship in combat if you want, the rest would be AI controlled. Such option was present in SE4 for planets as well and you were not required to use it.

Further, he said that combat could be paused every x seconds. Such a statement implies that there is an option to make the game stop automatically every x seconds without user interaction. Have a look at the Combat Missions series to see how such a system can work very nicely.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Well I am drewing it up more than once, because I am really concerned about the future of the SE series. And I am drewing it up because it was one of my favorite games on PC over the last 10 years. Another reason I was drewing it up is that are too few discussions in the forums about the upcoming fundamental real-time change and its "benefits".

Maybe you have a different view what a RTS game is. My view is if the engine is realtime, it is RTS. If it has a pause button or a "slow down" function does not mean that it is no RTS anymore.


Well the question should be allowed what happens if I am issuing orders too late because the AI does this faster than I? I guess my ships will be blown up, even if I have the better overall tactic. Or is there an inbuilt mechanism which grants me that I am always faster in issuing orders as my opponent?

And just watching my orders executed is not a really realistic statement. Especially if there are hundreds of ships and fighters involved as in SEIII or IV. Then there is always something to click and to do on the battlefield. And give your orders before the AI does it or your ships will be blown up. Additionally while you are watching the ship moves at one part of the battlefield, your ships at another part will be stomped by the AI, except you are scrolling in time to this part and press the pausebutton to issue new orders. Not my definition of a stressless game. Thanks.

You are right MOO3 was not made properly. The designers wanted too much. They wanted rather a galactic empire simulation and not a traditional 4x game. And one of the major problems along the crappy AI and the bad Interface was the change to realtime tactical combat. For the strategic part of SEV I dont really fear (on the other hand who knows?) but at least the tactical part has with its realtime change the same "good" idea as MOO3.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Seriously,

Like Mephisto said, the pause is automatic. You choose X seconds, it stops every X seconds and won't run again until you hit play. What more can I say? There is no element of being rushed to complete orders on time or anything like that. Just take it at whatever pace you want. I am not a fan/player whatsoever of RTS games, but I have no problems using this system.

I just said it was possible if you were so inclined to focus on controlling one ship while you let the others do their auto thing, no big deal. Not that it's required or anything of the sort.

The key word is that the system is very flexible for players of all tastes.

For combat purposes, real-time is superior to turn-based, or at least turn-based on how it was executed in SE:IV. In SE:IV it was paramount to have the first shot iniative, without it you could easily lose big in what should have been an equally matched battle etc. But now, it happens all at the same time, making for much better and fairer battles.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

It seems to me that you are beating a subject to death that has been talked about and resolved to the satisfaction of the vast majority of forum members many times.

Well, that certainly is a valid definition of RTS, but going by that definition does not imply that RTS = clickfest. I'm sure Fyron was referring to the common misconception that RTS and clickfest are synonyms.

How much difference can being half a second later, or a full second or even 3 seconds, make? Longer delays could potentially be a problem, yes, but that's what the autopause feature is for. Set it to 5 or 10 seconds, and that's it - your orders will never be later than that. Even in classic examples of clickfest RTS games like Warcraft III and Starcraft, both of which I have played quite a bit, such small delays only make a difference in my experience when repeated many times in the resource gathering/base and army building part of the game, which will be completely absent from SEV realtime combat, or in extreme examples of micromanaging units. By far the most likely such example to translate to SEV combat is waiting too long to start a retreat, allowing your units to be surrounded to the point where they can't retreat any more. I don't see this being a problem because the AI will work for you, too - you will almost certainly be able to specify criteria for automatically retreating, based on range, number of enemy ships in range, and any number of other factors.

So pause frequently, using the autopause every x seconds feature if necessary, and inspect the whole battlefield every time it's paused. And again, the AI will work for you, too, within the strategic parameters you dictate for it.

The change to realtime combat was not inherently bad, it was how they implemented it that made it fail so horribly. Aaron has had plenty of time to learn from their mistakes, and his realtime combat engine will be criticized by quite a number of beta testers who definitely do not want anything resembling a clickfest in their favorite 4x game series.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

WTF? SE4 already does that.
Its called "Simultaneous Turn", and ships move around the system in real time. (At least for stock scale ship speeds - if you start modding wacky ships with 30 speed then it starts to break down)

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Thats good to hear. Ok, its not what I would really prefer (a similar system to MOO2 but with sligthly improved graphics) but its better than the standard realtime system I assumed in my first posts. I could not learn the procedure from your previous post, but after your second explanation now I check the system. Thanks for the info.

I know combat mission. Graphically its nice, but I am not very fond of it. Too much 3D and too simulative to have each combat parameter under direct control. (and of course I miss hexes/squares to predefine the weapon or movement ranges) Its has too much of a simulation and too few of a boardgame for my taste. If it goes to grognard style TB-wargaming I prefer the classic HPS series of Panzer Campaign or Steel Panthers II.

Well you dont have to be sorry if you call other people with such special names. Do it or let it be but dont be sorry. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

This definition is absolutely wrong. Real time does not make RTS. RTS implies very simplistic heuristics. It implies speed over strategy. It implies victory through clicking/pressing buttons quickly. A real time system is NONE of these inherently. RTS is one tiny portion of the real time spectrum.

The best turn based systems use simultaneous ordering combined with some form of initiative system. Each player issues orders, then a phase of execution occurs, with units from both sides acting in an interspersed manner. This eliminates the stupid things that happen in combat systems such as that of SEIV, where one side gets to do a ton of damage to the other before the other side can react. It also eliminates the stupid things that happen in systems like MOO2, where one side still gets a lot of ships acting at the same time, before any enemy ships can act. This is because MOO2 only has the initiative system, no simultaneous order execution. Immediate execution of orders brings about many balance problems. The MOO2 system was a small step in the right direction, but did not go far enough.

Real time execution with auto-pausing just smooths out the initiative curve and eliminates all turn based idiosynchrocies. All ships get to truly act at the same time, providing a far more realistic and balanced system. It plays out the same exact way that a good turn based system does, except it does it better. You don't have to click on ANYTHING during the short phase of order execution, as in a simultaneous turn based system. Thus, no click festing whatsoever. Period. It ends up being EXACTLY THE SAME in terms of you interfacing with the combat system and giving orders. The ONLY difference is that the real time system makes everything smoother.

A simple "replay last execution phase" would eliminate any concerns about not seeing what happened on another portion of the combat map. It would replay the execution of combat that occured between the last two auto-pause points. You could go view a different portion of the map, hit the button, and watch the combat from that segment of the map's perspective. In fact, it would be a good idea for everyone to email Malfador with requests for this feature... se5 at malfador dot com awaits your emails. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

We must be prophets or somesuch; what has been described on the SEV combat system is exactly what we told you before would alleviate all RTS and click festing concerns you had...

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I agree that SEIV is stupid in this respect. But with the change of some rules, there could be found a proper solution for this problem without the need to change to realtime. A rule designer have just to look a little bit around at existing initative systems. There are alot of clever designs in the classic board wargame sector out there which solve exactly the SEIV initiative problem. MOO2 did it in a certain (but not perfect) way in its 1.31 patch, so why not SEIV?

Well but we will see if the new realtime engine is really that good as you say. At least I hope so and in sake of my love to the SE series I will give it a try without much prejudicing.

Well as you surely noticed English is not my native language so maybe I was not able to understand everthing in the previous posts. Sorry for that.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

The point is that those clever initiative systems are all designed to make the combat more and more like a realistic, "real time" system. They are designed to make it seem like events are occuring at the same time, rather than in a silly sequential method. None of them can ever get entirely away from the problems inherent in turn based execution. Going with "real time" merely smooths out the remaining problems and makes the combat that much more balanced and realistic. It is a perfectly natural evolution. You can not get a real time system in a board game, but computers can certainly handle it just fine.

On a semi-related note, I personally think the "sequential" method of turn processing should be eliminated entirely. Only "simultaneous" should exist. It is far superior in terms of balance and overall gameplay. Nothing sucks more than ordering a ship to move in one direction early on in the turn and later realizing that you would have prefered it to move in the opposite direction to react to a new situation... Certainly, the non-combat portions of the game should never be done in "real time." That would definitely be taking the game in the wrong direction.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Aaron and crew have progressively deliver a finer product with each game, and until they let me down, I'll trust the guy's judgement in making games. This is Malfador's golden opportunity to break into the big time, and rightfully snatch the 4X crown from MOO (some might say they already have, but not to the masses!), so i doubt that they are going to mess it up. I was skeptical about the realtime aspects of combat, but I really liked the look of those screenshots, since it looks just like the ones from SEIV, except for the 3-d aspect view. I hope the beta process is completed by summer and we get a demo, or at least a larger demo pool...hint hint!!! There wasn't much that needed to be change on SEIV basic structure to keep me happy, so the screenshots alone were enough for me. Overall, until I see more screenshots and a demo, I'll give Malfador the benefit of the doubt.

Also, Please don't mention the Space Empire in the same breathe with MOOIII, as that game was complete garbage!

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I just would like to add that although I love Turn-based 4x games too, there is one Realtime game out their that uses Real Time combat AND is still quite popular even today. Sierra's Strategy game "Homeworld".

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I might add for real time combat, since more of the games time units pass in a real time situation. The putting in of weapons that would take too many turns to scale out properly (such as extremely low power, rapid fire weapons).

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

True, all those gatling cannon components can be one big gatling cannon in a realtime combat environment.

See P&N-ism mod for Starfury to see such stuff in action http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I can understand both sides pro and contra real time combat.
Although I rarely use tactical combat at all in "real" games (tactical combat with more than 10 ships gets painful anyway) I think it is an important part of SE and especially to test some Mods I found tactical combats essential.
In my opinion the key point is what you can do or can't do during the pauses. If you can target and give movement orders then real time combat is an improvement IMHO. Hovewer if these two action can't be performed during pauses then I would prefer the old turn based combat.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

I agree with Q completely. I'd also point out that, just based on numbers, most people who own SE:IV don't play multiplayer so tactical combat is probably more widely used when viewed over all game owners.

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Please refer to Kwok's post:

Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?
 

Baldur's Gate is perhaps one of the greatest games of all time.