Strategy Games but not realtime.

Got a great idea for a game - why not post it here!

Moderator: Slitherine Core

Post Reply
Rudy_Nelson
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 374
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 11:16 am

Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by Rudy_Nelson » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:35 pm

Back in the days of the 1980s and 1990s when computer gaming just getting popular, slow-play Strategy games were more popular than real time tactical games with aStrategic over-lay.
Even Nintendo style game systems produced a number of these. And there was a very popular stategy system of several games for WW2 and Fantasy.

As we original computer gamers are getting older, our reflexes are getting worse and that makes it difficult to enjoy.
Older gamers have significant amounts of money to buy such slow-play systems and the time due to retirment to play them.
So it would be nice to see the slow-play strategy games make a comeback.

jdm
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 1139
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 10:41 am

Post by jdm » Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:24 pm

Rudy

Keep your eye out for the annoncements soon. We are investigating ways of making this so:-)

JDM

anguille
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Posts: 646
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Bern, Switzerland

Post by anguille » Tue Apr 08, 2008 6:47 am

Legion II? (hint hint) :wink:

durin
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 4:39 pm

Post by durin » Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:20 am

anguille wrote:Legion II? (hint hint) :wink:
Yah it is a must, i have waited longer for this!

honvedseg
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 6:12 pm
Location: Reading, PA, USA

Slower games

Post by honvedseg » Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:34 pm

Slitherine's "real time" Legion Arena game is paced slowly enough that it isn't just another "mouse race", which is what most RT games end up being. The majority of RTS games send simultaneous attacks at you from opposite ends of the map, forcing you to scroll back and forth to control both situations, as opposed to using "real tactics" to create a challenge. I was also fond of the Close Combat (WWII) series, which was another "gradual" RTS game that didn't require frantic racing around on the map.

Wedging the combat engine of Legion Arena into a TB "empire builder" game framework would give you the best of both genres, without needing lightning reflexes or ridiculous accelleration settings on your "rodent". I guess we'll find out soon whether GBoMA fits this description or not.

Redpossum
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Posts: 1771
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:09 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Contact:

Post by Redpossum » Mon Jul 14, 2008 3:28 pm

Rudy, you are at the right place! And I hear you about getting older than we used to be (cough cough).

Hondvedseg is absolutely right about Legion Arena. The commands are spaced out by the game system; there is a delay between issuing commands and their implementation, and the next command can't be issued until the last one has been implemented.

Also, have you checked out Gates of Troy?

MajVonRyan
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 1:47 am

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by MajVonRyan » Sun May 13, 2012 3:33 am

While RTS have there place in gaming (somewhere & for the young) I agree with Rudy, Possum and Honvedseg that you spend way too much time racing around the map instead of using strategy.

Rudy could not have said any better " As we original computer gamers are getting older, our reflexes are getting worse and that makes it difficult to enjoy.
Older gamers have significant amounts of money to buy such slow-play systems and the time due to retirment to play them.
So it would be nice to see the slow-play strategy games make a comeback." :)

MrsWargamer
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by MrsWargamer » Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:23 pm

Almost sounds like one of my threads :)

Yeah real time is only attractive to the really young as I see it.

With the exception of Panther Games, I find it hard to play fast enough to matter in the long run. It's not that I can't think fast, but my arcade days are back where they belong, in the 80s.

The oft made comment about real time being more real is well it is what it is BULLSHIT.

I am not in a hurry though to give a free ride to turn using games that don't realise designs with so much work load that a turn requires so much work that I find myself falling asleep before finishing a single turn is an indication that game is too big (regardless of how awesome the detail might be).

The more Battle Academy/Panzer Corps/Team Assault offerings there, the better.

VPaulus
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 8048
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:33 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by VPaulus » Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:31 am

DSWargamer wrote:Yeah real time is only attractive to the really young as I see it.
I don't think is age related. But it's true that as we grow older, we've less appetites for RTS. That seems to be the trend.
Most of old school gaming, and this include younger players, prefer turn based. Personally I've always preferred the tactical and the strategical value given by turn base systems.
DSWargamer wrote:With the exception of Panther Games, I find it hard to play fast enough to matter in the long run. It's not that I can't think fast, but my arcade days are back where they belong, in the 80s.
I know that feeling. ;)
DSWargamer wrote:The oft made comment about real time being more real is well it is what it is BULLSHIT.
Couldn't agree more.
DSWargamer wrote:The more Battle Academy/Panzer Corps/Team Assault offerings there, the better.
Amen. And we've been fortunate in this last two years. More turn base games are coming.

bobk
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:26 pm

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by bobk » Thu Jul 16, 2015 7:15 pm

Add me to this list of RTS detractors, sort of. While I don't like playing them, they do as a whole look more realistic then their turn based cousins. What I don't understand is why game companies don't combine the two.
Sid Myers Gettysburg, and the Combat Mission games come to mind. Giving orders, choosing formations while the game is paused, then watching it play out in realtime would seem to be a natural compromise, and draw both types of players to the game.
I really love the look and time period of those War Airland Battle games, but would never purchase one because of the play style. Great graphics, but if you watch replays, the only way to play is zoomed way out moving tiny squares around, that's just not fun for me. Now imagine if you could give your orders, hit play, then after a minute or two zoom in and replay the turn all you want before the next turn. For RTS fans, you could play as is, in real time, and also multiplayer. See what I did there? Now you've got your original sales, plus I just bought the entire series as well, along with many other turn based wargame fans.

kerrylancaster
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 9:36 pm

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by kerrylancaster » Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:45 pm

It's not just about age (although I too am getting older! Closer to 60 now than to 50!) - it's about game style / preference. I play computer games because I like GAMES. Games that feel like games! I learned to play Chess when I was 5 years old and we played Monopoly and Parchisi and all those old classis board games as a family when I was a kid.

Gaming is about fun and strategy. I approach PC wargames like Chess on steroids. Turn-based is my preference. Always has been, even when I was younger and could keep up with all the RTS mouse-click chasing. Gaming is brain food, not finger food!

Warlords. Warlords II. Panzer General. Allied General. Pacific General. Fantasy General. Star General. (The original "Five-Star" Series). Panzer General II. Civil War Generals 2. All of these are still on my Windows 7 and Windows 10 PC's because these are the games that have lasting "gaming" value. I've burned through hundreds of other games in the past 20 or more years, but these few I keep around.

I quit keeping up with SSI at Panzer General III and People's General (didn't have the same "game" flavor). I quit SSG's Warlords series at Warlords 3. Lost interest as it moved more towards RPG style play.

Chess. That's the key. Piece value. Board Position. Combinations. Openings. These classic turn-based brainy board game elements make gaming fun and mentally challenging. And games with these elements will always have an audience.

My two cents.
-Kerry-

hmshood
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 1:52 pm
Location: Hayward, California

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by hmshood » Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:29 pm

:D yes!

Rudy_Nelson wrote:Back in the days of the 1980s and 1990s when computer gaming just getting popular, slow-play Strategy games were more popular than real time tactical games with aStrategic over-lay.
Even Nintendo style game systems produced a number of these. And there was a very popular stategy system of several games for WW2 and Fantasy.

As we original computer gamers are getting older, our reflexes are getting worse and that makes it difficult to enjoy.
Older gamers have significant amounts of money to buy such slow-play systems and the time due to retirment to play them.
So it would be nice to see the slow-play strategy games make a comeback.

hmshood
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 1:52 pm
Location: Hayward, California

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by hmshood » Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:34 pm

bobk wrote:Add me to this list of RTS detractors, sort of. While I don't like playing them, they do as a whole look more realistic then their turn based cousins. What I don't understand is why game companies don't combine the two.
Sid Myers Gettysburg, and the Combat Mission games come to mind. Giving orders, choosing formations while the game is paused, then watching it play out in realtime would seem to be a natural compromise, and draw both types of players to the game.
I really love the look and time period of those War Airland Battle games, but would never purchase one because of the play style. Great graphics, but if you watch replays, the only way to play is zoomed way out moving tiny squares around, that's just not fun for me. Now imagine if you could give your orders, hit play, then after a minute or two zoom in and replay the turn all you want before the next turn. For RTS fans, you could play as is, in real time, and also multiplayer. See what I did there? Now you've got your original sales, plus I just bought the entire series as well, along with many other turn based wargame fans.
I totally agree....well said

hmshood
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 1:52 pm
Location: Hayward, California

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by hmshood » Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:38 pm

MrsWargamer wrote:Almost sounds like one of my threads :)

Yeah real time is only attractive to the really young as I see it.

With the exception of Panther Games, I find it hard to play fast enough to matter in the long run. It's not that I can't think fast, but my arcade days are back where they belong, in the 80s.

The oft made comment about real time being more real is well it is what it is BULLSHIT.

I am not in a hurry though to give a free ride to turn using games that don't realise designs with so much work load that a turn requires so much work that I find myself falling asleep before finishing a single turn is an indication that game is too big (regardless of how awesome the detail might be).

The more Battle Academy/Panzer Corps/Team Assault offerings there, the better.
My arcade days wuz even earlier....and your comment here is spot on.

JohnCarlisle
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:04 am

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by JohnCarlisle » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:23 am

Yes I agree with this post.

Cheimison
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:09 am

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by Cheimison » Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:36 am

Rudy_Nelson wrote:Back in the days of the 1980s and 1990s when computer gaming just getting popular, slow-play Strategy games were more popular than real time tactical games with aStrategic over-lay.
Even Nintendo style game systems produced a number of these. And there was a very popular stategy system of several games for WW2 and Fantasy.

As we original computer gamers are getting older, our reflexes are getting worse and that makes it difficult to enjoy.
Older gamers have significant amounts of money to buy such slow-play systems and the time due to retirment to play them.
So it would be nice to see the slow-play strategy games make a comeback.
My joke with RTS and Paradox games is that it's a 'Pause Time Strategy'. I make absolutely no decisions with the clock running, I give all orders paused, unpause at super-speed, pause again to adjust orders, etc. Basically, RTS games are turn-based games where only I get a turn, lol.
bobk wrote:Add me to this list of RTS detractors, sort of. While I don't like playing them, they do as a whole look more realistic then their turn based cousins. What I don't understand is why game companies don't combine the two.
The WEGO system of simultaneous turns is by far the most realistic - where both players' units execute orders at the same time, and the player can't constantly issue new orders via psychic powers. They're also the least popular, because most players want to micromanage every single guy.
I personally am getting to where I would rather play a General Simulator than an RTS or turn based game; but I'm also getting to the point where I'd rather play a Government Simulator than a strategy game. I read too much, lol.

dejvid2
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 2:50 pm

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by dejvid2 » Sun Nov 19, 2017 11:56 am

Brøderbund The Ancient Art of War was technically a RTS but played much more like a turn based strategy game. You had a few units so it was never a mouse race. The time penalized dithering not how fast you could click on a mouse.

BornGinger
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:18 pm

Re: Strategy Games but not realtime.

Post by BornGinger » Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:02 pm

Rudy_Nelson wrote:As we original computer gamers are getting older, our reflexes are getting worse and that makes it difficult to enjoy. So it would be nice to see the slow-play strategy games make a comeback.
Aren't the turn based games kind off the thing this old timer is looking for?

I wonder if a turn based game, like Sengoku Jidai, Field of Glory 2 or alike, could be made with the idea of playing one (or maximum two) move each for the different parties playing the game? Instead of each part making xx amount of moves of units during their turn respectively, each part can only make one or two moves each during their turn. I think a game played that way could be a bit quicker although not realtime and require different kinds of decision making. One move could of course be both move forward, turn and shoot or just move forward and maybe even turn or shoot, depending on action points used.

Post Reply

Return to “Game Ideas”