Real time or Turn based servay,

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Real time or Turn based servay,

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Real time or Turn based servay,

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Real time or Turn based servay, - 7/7/2001 4:40:00 AM

Sleepy Hollow

Posts: 3
Joined: 7/1/2001
Status: offline

Just out of interest, what do people prefer? Real time or turn based war games?

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 7/7/2001 9:28:00 AM

Warpup

Posts: 120
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Roseburg, Oregon, USA
Status: offline

Turn based, except for flight sims (guess it wouldn't be a sim if it were turn based!) and tactical naval games. Don't like turn based grand strategy, although I just got Europa Universalis and it seems pretty good. :D

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 2

- 7/7/2001 9:41:00 PM

fnguy

Posts: 1180
Joined: 6/18/2001
From: Deep in the heart of Texas
Status: offline

Definitely, Turn based, since most of the time in an RTS game, the AI sucks too bad for you to trust it to run any part of your side of the game.

_____________________________

Politics as practiced now should be judged a crime against Humanity

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 3

- 7/8/2001 3:22:00 AM

VictorH

Posts: 309
Joined: 9/3/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, U.S.
Status: offline

Turn Based!

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 4

- 7/8/2001 3:35:00 AM

Supervisor

Posts: 5166
Joined: 3/2/2004
Status: offline

Turn based for this style type of gaming, real time for sims (fighting, flight etc.) I like the opportunity to evalaute and ponder my next move. I wasn't impressed when ex: Fallout Tactics changed their ways and went real time (option was still there for turn based though which was nice). I guess alot has to do with what you are used to playing also.

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 5

- 7/8/2001 4:05:00 AM

MacCready

Posts: 591
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: USA
Status: offline

Tough question,I like both. Concerning Real Time. It is closer to actual fighting because,in real war you don't have a lot of time to "ponder" your next move. I've played real time since I bought "Dune 2" by Westwood. (1995) The best WW2 real time game bar none is a game called "Sudden Strike"(2000) If your not on your toes,your going home in a box. Concerning Turn based. I like turn based games because everything is planned out and executed (hopefully) with precision. Also a drawback of most real time games (not sudden strike)is its simply out produce and crush your opponent. Whats most appealing about Steel Panthers WAW and the new game Combat Leader is the real world weapons,the ability to outfit your army,and the vast catalog approach to the equipment.Not to mention all those Combat possibilities. [ July 07, 2001: Message edited by: MacCready ]

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 6

- 7/9/2001 12:46:00 AM

11Bravo

Posts: 2082
Joined: 4/5/2001
Status: offline

Turn based. I like time to think, and I never get more than a few moments at a time to play these games before interruptions occur.

_____________________________

Squatting in the bush and marking it on a map.

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 7

- 7/9/2001 1:24:00 AM

New York Jets

Posts: 2087
Joined: 6/25/2001
From: St. Louis, MO but stuck in Bremerton,WA
Status: offline

I prefer turn based for wargaming, with a few exceptions like Sid Meier's Gettysburg. Although, it is a bit frustrating at times to go back to a heretofore "secure" part of your line only to find it has melted away. Europa Universalis does a good job of melding turn based with real time in that you can fully access the interface even while paused or adjust the speed so that time passes very slowly. The Caesar III/Pharaoh gameplay really requires a real time engine. Given the opportunity and time, however, I like a good old turn based board wargame like ASL or the Advanced 3rd Reich/Rising Sun system, and there is no substitute for the look on the face of a well skewered opponent in a good face to face multi-player session of some "screw your neighbor" game like Republic of Rome. [ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Trog ]

_____________________________

"There comes a time in every man's life, and I've had plenty of 'em."

- Casey Stengel -

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 8

- 7/9/2001 4:16:00 AM

sinner

Posts: 174
Joined: 5/7/2001
From: North Carolina
Status: offline

Turn based. For wargames, and as a recent wargamer (only 14 years in the trade), turn-based are the best. Think of it as a grandiose chess game. Well, I like to play chess as if it were a wargame... so it's funny to send the cavalry to bring havoc in the enemy's communication lines or sending your armoured troops (rook) in coordination with your artillery (bishop). Set up your infantry to slowly-but-surely advance and control the hill (the center piece of the board). Of course, it doesn't work with true chess players, but I always have a blast :D I wish I could have some Flak 8,8 on AT role while playing chess. You only have one Panther (queen), so it's hard. On the other hand, for flight simulators or first-person shooters (done in proper military drill), real-time is a must. But that's about it. Salut and off-board artillery.

_____________________________

Sinner from the Prairy<br />"Thalassa! Thalassa!"

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 9

- 7/9/2001 2:27:00 PM

Mai Thai

Posts: 95
Joined: 4/21/2001
From: Switzerland
Status: offline

Hi to everyone. I like turn based strategy games like spwaw and Combat Mission since i was playing the first Panzer General, but i don't dislike some real time strategy like the close combat series (the third is the best, imho). I think in some way it is a question of taste but lets say thanks to have them. bye

_____________________________

-- occupy it, administer it, exploit it

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 10

- 7/9/2001 3:27:00 PM

ANZAC_Tack

Posts: 392
Joined: 7/9/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline

I live for Close combat,but... I feel like it need more features, nothing turn based can do for me, it must be real time for internet play,and be strategy.CC has hed my time for 3 years,but it is becoming apparant it needs more features that engine just can't do.

_____________________________

ANZAC_Tack

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 11

- 7/9/2001 7:05:00 PM

Muzrub

Posts: 1780
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline

I swing both ways. I enjoy the rough and tumble of realtime and the detail of turn based. :cool:

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.

Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 12

- 7/9/2001 8:12:00 PM

Marty 1

Posts: 141
Joined: 6/14/2001
From: Eldersburg, Maryland
Status: offline

I like real time for tactical small unit actions. Real time above a battalion level seems odd to me. For now turn based is my preferred way. I would have liked to see the system that Road To Moscow was suppose to be, a slow continous time I believe. That would work on a higher level I think. One day the AI may be available to allow it to control not only your opponent but your own forces. Until then I'll stick primarily to turn based.

_____________________________

You can never make something idiotproof.
As soon as you do they invent a better idiot.

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 13

- 7/9/2001 8:17:00 PM

New York Jets

Posts: 2087
Joined: 6/25/2001
From: St. Louis, MO but stuck in Bremerton,WA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by ANZAC_Tack: I live for Close combat,but... I feel like it need more features, nothing turn based can do for me, it must be real time for internet play,and be strategy.CC has hed my time for 3 years,but it is becoming apparant it needs more features that engine just can't do.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Close Combat is an awesome game. I feel it does one of the best jobs at portraying actions of that scale. It was actually another attempt to convert my favorite game system of all time to computer, Advanced Squad Leader. If you don't already play ASL and you have some time and opponents you ought to give it a try.

_____________________________

"There comes a time in every man's life, and I've had plenty of 'em."

- Casey Stengel -

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 14

- 7/9/2001 8:40:00 PM

Muzrub

Posts: 1780
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline

Close Combat is an awesome game. I feel it does one of the best jobs at portraying actions of that scale. It was actually another attempt to convert my favorite game system of all time to computer, Advanced Squad Leader. If you don't already play ASL and you have some time and opponents you ought to give it a try. The board game or the PC?. Is the PC game as bad as they say?. :p Mighty Muzrub in search of the truth.

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 15

- 7/10/2001 8:04:00 PM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

Its not that I "hate" real time, I merely refuse to be a slave to constant hardware upgrades to play the latest "toy" game. That and I find all to often, that the real time games seem aimed at the ill informed uninterested in accuracy consumer. There might be a few designs out there that are well made, but again they are all to often to demanding on my computer. I am happy to play turn based games. Its all I want. And there are plenty enough good ones out there that I wont have to stray for lack of something to play.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 16

- 7/10/2001 8:16:00 PM

pxreiman

Posts: 53
Joined: 6/15/2001
From: Illinois
Status: offline

Turn based - and here's why - in real life I can accomplish a lot in a little time because my options -from how, when and where I communicate to what I can tell my subordinates to do - is essentially unlimited. Even better, I can expect those units to use some common sense when I issue instructions. In wargames, I need to manage my units much more closely and my commands are at best limited to a few options. So in real time strategy games, the time line is the same as in real life, but all my options are compressed through the machine interface - without adding realism or playabilty. On the otherhand, if I am going to have my options decreased and have to micromanage my units and still keep the big picture in mind, then turns are a logical solution. There is the option of phases or simultaneous execution that will give the player that "fluid" feeling. But uber all- if you want realtime - play pong. pardon my rant.

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 17

- 7/10/2001 9:57:00 PM

New York Jets

Posts: 2087
Joined: 6/25/2001
From: St. Louis, MO but stuck in Bremerton,WA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Muzrub: The board game or the PC?. Is the PC game as bad as they say?. :p Mighty Muzrub in search of the truth.

The board game Advanced Squad Leader represents the pinnacle of WWII tactical simulation in the board game category. (IMHO) Chapter H of the ASL Rules Manual is still one of the finest reference materials on the equipment used by the various forces in the conflict. Squad Leader the PC Game represents, on the other hand, a pathetically lame attempt by Hasbro to use a venerated franchise name (Squad Leader) for purposes of marketing. I tried to play it, but after 5 minutes of looking at the screen it was too painful to watch. So, Advanced Squad Leader the board game is a "must have" additon to any gamer's library. Squad Leader the PC game is strictly coaster material. [ July 10, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Trog ]

_____________________________

"There comes a time in every man's life, and I've had plenty of 'em."

- Casey Stengel -

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 18

- 7/11/2001 3:56:00 AM

Tommi

Posts: 161
Joined: 7/3/2001
From: Finland
Status: offline

It depends. I kinda like them both, but if I have to choose one or the other, I'll take turn based. At least then I know the game won't be a clickfest (i.e. the fastest mouse wins). Actually, I'd choose the Combat Mission-style WEGO system, where you give orders like in any other turn based game and then those orders are executed simultaneously with your opponents orders. That eliminates the biggest weakness (IMHO) of turn based systems - separate movement "phases" and opportunity fire. Real time has its advantages, especially in small unit strategy, but I feel I'm constantly fighting the game interface more than the opponent. When playing against the computer, you're always slower in giving orders to your units than the computer, that's why I like RT games to have a command-while-paused option. It also gives you some time to think and see what's going on. Just my 2 cents. PS. Would someone PLEASE tell me what LOL means?! Living on lubes? Low on Liquor?

_____________________________

11 is louder than 10.

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 19

- 7/11/2001 4:45:00 AM

Marty 1

Posts: 141
Joined: 6/14/2001
From: Eldersburg, Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Tommi: It depends. I kinda like them both, but if I have to choose one or the other, I'll take turn based. At least then I know the game won't be a clickfest (i.e. the fastest mouse wins). Actually, I'd choose the Combat Mission-style WEGO system, where you give orders like in any other turn based game and then those orders are executed simultaneously with your opponents orders. That eliminates the biggest weakness (IMHO) of turn based systems - separate movement "phases" and opportunity fire. Real time has its advantages, especially in small unit strategy, but I feel I'm constantly fighting the game interface more than the opponent. When playing against the computer, you're always slower in giving orders to your units than the computer, that's why I like RT games to have a command-while-paused option. It also gives you some time to think and see what's going on. Just my 2 cents. PS. Would someone PLEASE tell me what LOL means?! Living on lubes? Low on Liquor?

Laugh out loud

_____________________________

You can never make something idiotproof.
As soon as you do they invent a better idiot.

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 20

- 7/11/2001 11:31:00 AM

ksbearski

Posts: 1
Joined: 7/11/2001
From: Land of Ahhhhhs
Status: offline

I like both. I enjoy SPWAW and Close Combat equally well. War at the squad, platoon, company level, at the point of the spear if you will, is violence and chaos and I think that real time kind of reflects that. To see unit interaction and planning work, I think that turn based best shows that...and to illustrate that no plan is perfect, there's oppurtunity fire!

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 21

- 7/12/2001 11:58:00 PM

Reiryc

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

I like both but I prefer real time...it just get the excitement going more than a turn based can for me... Reiryc

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 22

- 7/13/2001 3:09:00 AM

Coachace

Posts: 49
Joined: 3/13/2001
From: Fountain Valley, California
Status: offline

For me, wargames should reflect the classic reasons for which they were created. Prussian officers sat around a table moving pieces representing armies or fleets and the games were officiated by human judges. I got involved in classic Avalon Hill and SPI board wargames a long time ago which ustilized a turn based ruleset. I even prefer the hexes. I realize I'm percieved as a dinosaur to some younger wargamers, but unless I'm holding the real rifle or sitting inside the actual tank, a wargame for me just isn't playable unless it's turn based. Real time games are fun, but I don't get the pleasure of feeling like I'm commanding a force unless it's a turn based game.

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 23

- 7/13/2001 7:47:00 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

Something that hasnt ever been stated thus far anywhere I chat about ASL Advanced Squad Leader the board game is the price. It took me several years to get my collection but I bought it as it was released. Now to say "go try ASL" a person needs to understand it will cost you more than the price of a new computer if you buy the whole ASL system. We are not talking about a purchase that people on finite incomes will take lightly. If you want to try ASL be advised. The rulebook is a separate purchase. 80 bucks canadian when I got mine years ago and its just a binder full of rules and no game. It is assumed you have owned the for precursor games released under the name of just Squad Leader. You will want the boards that came with those boxed sets (which you can buy separately, its the only parts you want from them). Then you will begin an odyssey buying many modules that walk you through every combat that fought in the second world war on all fronts and theatres. Its no small purchase. Not for the faint of heart. How will you know if you want to buy it? Well if you WONT be playing anyone face to face forget ASL as its not worth it. If you DO have a real live in person opponent, buy it in the order it was marketed. Be assured, if you like Steel Panthers, you will like its grandfather ASL. ASL was there before the PC. I only play Steel Panthers because it looks like ASL. How hard will it be for non US resisdents to buy it? Hmmmm probably a bitch to afford it really. MMP the people selling it will have to answer those questions. I for one have all of ASL so I have that advantage. If my computer crashed tomorrow never to be replaced, I would just play ASL a good deal more. If I had to sell all but one of my many wargames, ASL would be the sole survivor. ASL has also had a solitaire module released. ASL is a REAL wargamers wargame. You must accept that you must keep counters in precise spots in precise postures in precise alignments within hexes in most cases. The game being a board game means you either read the rules or you dont get to play. ASL sure separates the men from the boys when it comes to dedication. It is also capable of being the most accurate most detailed most realistic gaming experience you will ever enjoy (including virtually any software ever created, and yes I am not backing down on that one, ASL is the king of accuracy). But it isnt free, you will see daunting arrays of methods employed to achieve that realism as well. The ASL manual looks intimidating. But you dont have to memorise it, merely know which section you want when a question arises. My favourite perk is that you can play it fine on a half board just fine. It is easily the most playable game I own for space friendly considerations. So all of you that havent tried ASL, get out there and discover it, check out sources and see what Steel Panthers is trying to mimic. Oh and dont wait for it to be a computer game to soon. It isnt going to happen, computers are still way to underpowered AI wise. And that abortion Hasbro is selling has nothing in common with ASL, so comparisons to it are not worth making.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 24

- 7/19/2001 7:09:00 AM

nikb

Posts: 95
Joined: 4/15/2000
Status: offline

Turn based (and its derivatives) wins hands down.

_____________________________

Nik

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 25

- 7/21/2001 3:45:00 AM

Marty 1

Posts: 141
Joined: 6/14/2001
From: Eldersburg, Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1: Oh and dont wait for it to be a computer game to soon. It isnt going to happen, computers are still way to underpowered AI wise. And that abortion Hasbro is selling has nothing in common with ASL, so comparisons to it are not worth making.

It's a shame but it's true. If ever a wargame cried out for being computerized it's ASL. IMO it would be the ultimate wargame if a faithful port was made.

_____________________________

You can never make something idiotproof.
As soon as you do they invent a better idiot.

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 26

- 7/21/2001 8:10:00 AM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

Turn based!!!

_____________________________

(in reply to Sleepy Hollow)

Post #: 27

- 7/21/2001 8:37:00 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

For battalion-level and below, real-time is good for the illusion of simulating actual WWII combat (CC and SPWaW). For regiment, brigade, and above, I definitely prefer turn-based (Battleground, Ardennes Offensive 2, etc). It only seems appropriate for the human commander--without a staff, controlling each manuever element of a three-division corps is a bit much for a real-time game, isn't it?

_____________________________