Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

[klausD]

Emp. Fyron: Klaus... How many times must you dreg this up?

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".

Emp. Fyron: It will not be in any way, shape or form a RTS game.

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.

Emp. Fyron: 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.

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.

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.

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.

[Captain Kwok]

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.

[klausD]

Captain Kwok: 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.

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.

Mephisto: 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.

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.

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.

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.

[Fyron]

klausD said:
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.

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.

klausD said:
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.

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...

[klausD]

Emp. fyron: 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.

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.

Emp. Fyron: 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...

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.

[Fyron]

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.

[Hiruu]

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!

[douglas]

klausD said:

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".

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.

klausD said:

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, 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.

klausD said:

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?

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.

klausD said:
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.

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.

klausD said:

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.

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.

[Suicide Junkie]

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?

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)