Climber Climber

A better combat system: WE-GO

▼

A better combat system: WE-GO

from Elemental Forums

Frogboy:

I can say post release I'm interested in putting in WEGO and letting people try out the RTS system we put in too.
Regardless, I want to write a free Myth-like mod for fun.

irongamer: 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-keeping_systems_in_games

In simultaneously-executed games (also called "phase-based" or "We-Go"), turns are separated into two distinct phases: decision and execution. During the decision phase each player plans and determines his units' actions. The decision phase occurs at the same time for everyone, so there is little wait for anyone to finish. In the execution phase, all players' decisions are put into action, and these actions are performed more or less automatically and at the same time. The execution phase is non-interactive, and there is no waiting for other players to complete their turns. Video game examples include Laser Squad Nemesis (2003), and the Combat Mission(2000-2007) and Master of Orion (1993-2003) series.

 
I am proposing that the default Tactical combat will be fought in a specific iteration  of WE-GO, as described below

In the decision phase, all players decide unit action similar to traditional turn-based combat (TTBC) that the game is paused.  In TTBC, melee unit is needed to be moved next to opponent, one by one.   In WE-GO, when melee units are ordered to pursue non-adjacent opponent units, a red arrow is painted towards the opponent.   The red arrow is fully adjustable, so that waypoints can be set to fine tune how it approaches  its target.    Spells that require longer cast time is casted this time e.g. healing, debuff or battlefield alternating spells.

In the execution phase, the unit may unexpectedly collide with other opponent units during its pursue.    Therefore player need to decide beforehand in the decision phase, telling them how they behave when this happen:  try to bypass unexpected opponent as much as possible, or eliminate any unit that is on their way before engaging the target.

Zone of Control (ZOC):   Your enemy cannot bypass your surrounding ZOC unless their SPEED is way higher than yours; e.g. the Mongols.  ZOC is bypassed if your unit’s Total HP is way less compared to your opponent; e.g. a lone ranger cannot hope to hinder an elephant charging towards him.

Execution phase is executed in a pixel-based RTS fashion.   In this phase, only certain spells can be casted; most of them are in the variety of direct damage spells like fireball.   The ONLY command can be given to units  in this phrase is 'retreat'.  

When retreating, units suffer extreme morale penalty and they cannot be controlled by player until they have flee to safety.  Examples of safe place is way behind the front line, or city wall in the case of siege defence.    If the only safety is at the edge of the map (where they 'exit' the map), a significant % of them will be lost if the battle is lost.   This % is higher if the movement speed/strength of the winning force is high. 

This way the execution (RTS) phase will not be a clickfest, but it keep players engaged throughout the 2 phases as certain but very limited amount of hand holding is needed.   Physics, formation (turning, back stepping ) can be better handled in RTS too.   Map is expected to be much larger than most TTBC games too.

This will work well for both MP and SP, as the Decision phase is simultaneous to all players.   No one needs to wait, compared to TTBC.  A timer can be set for this phase too, provide further control to the game flow.

===

Not exactly related to WE-GO, but ...

Combat that should be allowed to lasts multiple days.   It is epic, fun, and resolve a lot of problems.  "Combat ends after N sub-turns", but it is continued at the exact same location with the still living forces when next game turns arrive.   Enforcement can be brought in from both side (and allies) when next game turn arrive.

===

Any comment?   I think this is way better than TTBC or RTS.

174,695 views 56 replies
Reply #26 from Elemental Forums Top

yep i actually wouldn't mind going to 4 turns = 1 year as long as the children are really worthy to have around(man just sounds wrong saying that lol).  this would give them a much longer life, and make the game have a smoother continuity.  it makes sense for a large battle to last maybe 2 or 3 seasons.  this would be considered contested ground and well i am sure there is some sort of historical precedence to back this up.

Reply #27 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting LeBlaque, reply 11
I want to see it before totally committing one way or the other.

John you probably wouldn't see it in E:WoM beta unless they committed to this approach at release, but if you haven't played any of the Combat Mission games, there are some good demos that will demonstrate the WEGO very well at battlefront.com.

PawelS:  As a big fan of your 1.4 patch in AOW:SM and its TTBC approach, I can see your point; however, there is something quite frankly exciting about giving your various orders and then watching a "1:00 movie of the outcome" before your next series of orders.  Really builds the drama... and isn't that what good gaming is about?

StMorpheus-- I would be inclined to have tactical combat over multiple turns as well.  Essentially you could have 10 turns in WEGO (that would be 10 minutes of movies in the Combat Mission series) then revert back to the Strategic Map.  Units could then be brought into the on-going battle and they would appear at the battle map's edge as reinforcements.

 

Sorry, I should have specified. I want to see the Elemental version of Tile/Turn based. I know what it is, just curious to how it looks. Remember those Tactical battle images we were told were "old", well perhaps they are actually back to being new again. LOL

ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #28 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting XeronX, reply 12
You know I guess it is an immersion thing, But I can say that I never ever really associated a real time frame with turns in any TB games I played unless they put in seasonal effects.

Combat taking place over multiple turns wouldn't bug me, in fact I love the idea. I just have trouble understanding not doing it becuase some pre defined 1 turn = 1 year thing.

Personal thing but I would hate to see an idea as good as multiple turn combat go out the window because of something like this.

Here here. Can I get a harumph from that guy? :D

Reply #29 from Elemental Forums Top

I just found this screenshot:

I am going to miss you, continuous-turn combat  :'( .

That screenshot just looks so amazing.

Reply #30 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting pigeonpigeon, reply 29
I just found this screenshot:



I am going to miss you, continuous-turn combat  .

That screenshot just looks so amazing.

Why do you think it can't look similar using turn-based and tile-based combat?

 

Maybe some details will be different, but I think it will look much like on this screenshot.

Reply #31 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting _PawelS_, reply 30



Quoting pigeonpigeon,
reply 29
I just found this screenshot:



I am going to miss you, continuous-turn combat  .

That screenshot just looks so amazing.


Why do you think it can't look similar using turn-based and tile-based combat?

 

Maybe some details will be different, but I think it will look much like on this screenshot.

No it can't, with turn and tile based combat only two forces will fight at one point in time, in that screenshot many formations and units are fighting at once.

But what really gets me about turn-based combat is the number of abstractions necessary.

Reply #32 from Elemental Forums Top

Why do you think it can't look similar using turn-based and tile-based combat?

 

Maybe some details will be different, but I think it will look much like on this screenshot.

If it is turn-based, then everything will be static except the one 'stack', and maybe another stack of any fighting happens. Not even remotely the same level of awesomeness as the above screenshot would be in continuous turn format (or WE-GO turns), where everyone would be moving and fighting simultaneously (visually at least). Especially the dragon; in turn/tile-based combat it'd breath fire or stomp on some squad, then wait half an hour for its next turn (see below); while in CT combat, the dragon would be laying waste to all enemies around it constantly. Much more awe-inspiring.

And two, I highly doubt the above screenie is how turn/tile-based combat would look because that would imply a stupidly large number of separate squads to order around, hence the "half an hour for its next turn" in the previous paragraph. As a rough estimate, it looks to me like there are somewhere between 30 or 40 individual squads on that screen. Not only does that mean it'd take a ridiculously long time for each unit to get to its next turn, but combat itself would take forever and would be quite tedious. But I think the best reason that it's safe to assume that this screenie is from the trashed CT combat, is that there are too many layers and you wouldn't be able to do anything (not even move) with the guys in the back until the guys in the front have all moved or died.

Reply #33 from Elemental Forums Top

I haven't analyzed the screenshot enough to see that many units are fighting simultaneously. Such things are good for the "awe factor", but not for the combat clearness and ease of control, which are the deciding factors that make me prefer turn-based combat.

Reply #34 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting _PawelS_, reply 33
I haven't analyzed the screenshot enough to see that many units are fighting simultaneously. Such things are good for the "awe factor", but not for the combat clearness and ease of control, which are the deciding factors that make me prefer turn-based combat.

Well, I guess we're different. :)    I really don't care about "combat clearness" or "ease of control", I care about the diversity and complexity of succesful tactics and strategies, the more complex and diverse, the better.

In fact, I'd rather combat weren't that clear, in real life it isn't obvious why you won or lost, you need skill and experience to predict the cause of victory or defeat, and improve upon your strategies.

Like I said, we're different.

Reply #35 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Bill_Door, reply 34
In fact, I'd rather combat weren't that clear, in real life it isn't obvious why you won or lost, you need skill and experience to predict the cause of victory or defeat, and improve upon your strategies.

Realism is not the most important thing for me. Games are made for fun, so in some aspects they can be "better" than real life (if you know what I mean).

Btw I don't think that turn-based combat should be a "no-brainer", if done right it should allow using different strategies and improving your skills.

Reply #36 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting _PawelS_, reply 35
Realism is not the most important thing for me. Games are made for fun, so in some aspects they can be "better" than real life (if you know what I mean).

Btw I don't think that turn-based combat should be a "no-brainer", if done right it should allow using different strategies and improving your skills.

Well, better than real life for me would mean more complex, I just love floating in a sea of complexity; how I long for a game I cannot analyze fully.  Any game in which you can fully understand everything going on will have an ideal strategy unless the balance is absolutely perfect.

In my book diversity=complexity, so any game which has a high level of complexity will have a high level of diversity.

I would also point out that I don't want realism for the sake of realism, I want complexity, and realism is often the best model for complexity.  I guess what I really want is a game that is truly impossible to master, and where you can always be a better player, no matter how good you are.

I have a lot of modding to do. ;)

Reply #37 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Bill_Door, reply 31
No it can't, with turn and tile based combat only two forces will fight at one point in time, in that screenshot many formations and units are fighting at once.

But what really gets me about turn-based combat is the number of abstractions necessary.
It depends on how simultaneous TBS is implemented.  If it's 'action halts, all sides issue orders/etc. to all units, then action commences simultaneously (with possible pauses to resolve certain issues not covered by orders/etc.) as all units act, then action halts as that turn ends' then you could see something similar to that screenshot.

(Not saying Elemental will do this)

I really don't care about "combat clearness" or "ease of control", I care about the diversity and complexity of succesful tactics and strategies, the more complex and diverse, the better.

In fact, I'd rather combat weren't that clear, in real life it isn't obvious why you won or lost, you need skill and experience to predict the cause of victory or defeat, and improve upon your strategies.

Both simultaneous (as I describe) and what you prefer can achieve the ~same ends, they just get there in different ways.  Main difference between yours and what I describe* is yours has the 'twitch' factor (or whatever you want to call it -- ie reaction time)**. 

*other TBS implementations are different and are unlike what you describe

**you can pause in games like Total War and speed can be lowered to the point it's not that much a factor, etc., but it's still a difference.

A good simultaneous TBS implementation preserves Fog-of-War/etc., the problem of folks just sitting there waiting on others to move (tho in 3+ player games the third person just waits in both our systems), etc.

Reply #38 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Bill_Door, reply 36
I would also point out that I don't want realism for the sake of realism, I want complexity (...)

For the sake of complexity ;P


Quoting Nick-Danger, reply 37
Both simultaneous (as I describe) and what you prefer can achieve the ~same ends, they just get there in different ways.  Main difference between yours and what I describe* is yours has the 'twitch' factor (or whatever you want to call it -- ie reaction time)**.

As I wrote earlier, for me "simultaneous with pausing" is not as good as turn-based, because when things don't happen at the same time, it's easier to watch them and see what's going on. This is what I call "clearness".

Reply #39 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Nick-Danger, reply 37
It depends on how simultaneous TBS is implemented.  If it's 'action halts, all sides issue orders/etc. to all units, then action commences simultaneously (with possible pauses to resolve certain issues not covered by orders/etc.) as all units act, then action halts as that turn ends' then you could see something similar to that screenshot.


(Not saying Elemental will do this)

Indeed, this would satisfy me, but this doesn't seem to be the direction the combat is taking.

Quoting Nick-Danger, reply 37
Both simultaneous (as I describe) and what you prefer can achieve the ~same ends, they just get there in different ways.  Main difference between yours and what I describe* is yours has the 'twitch' factor (or whatever you want to call it -- ie reaction time)**. 


*other TBS implementations are different and are unlike what you describe

**you can pause in games like Total War and speed can be lowered to the point it's not that much a factor, etc., but it's still a difference.

A good simultaneous TBS implementation preserves Fog-of-War/etc., the problem of folks just sitting there waiting on others to move (tho in 3+ player games the third person just waits in both our systems), etc.

Actually, the 'twitch' factor is a problem, and perhaps what you describe would remedy it.  I guess my problem isn't with the turns, it's with the tiles.

Quoting _PawelS_, reply 38
For the sake of complexity

I don't deny it. :grin:

Quoting _PawelS_, reply 38
As I wrote earlier, for me "simultaneous with pausing" is not as good as turn-based, because when things don't happen at the same time, it's easier to watch them and see what's going on. This is what I call "clearness".

This is a minor concern to me, when compared to the issues with traditional tbs combat, i.e., the abstraction, which can cause cheese. (Such as one magic breastplate providing better protection than a full suit of iron armor, even when you could just chop the guy's head off without touching the guy's armor.)

Like I said, I shall most likely have to turn to modding to get what I want.

Reply #40 from Elemental Forums Top

It depends on how simultaneous TBS is implemented.  If it's 'action halts, all sides issue orders/etc. to all units, then action commences simultaneously (with possible pauses to resolve certain issues not covered by orders/etc.) as all units act, then action halts as that turn ends' then you could see something similar to that screenshot.

 

(Not saying Elemental will do this)

You just described a WEGO TBS system, which I would be very happy with. IMO, it combines the best aspects of TB and RT combat (in the context of a TBS game).

During or after the big debate about tactical combat, though, Brad said that he would consider releasing a WEGO combat system after release, which as far as I can tell means that WEGO or 'simultaneous' tactical combat is not the current plan. Sadly.

All signs point toward traditional turn- and tile-based, I-GO-YOU-GO turn-based combat, probably with some new ideas strewn around. I, for one, hope that they surprise me and do something different. WE-GO would be awesome :P

Reply #41 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting pigeonpigeon, reply 40

It depends on how simultaneous TBS is implemented.  If it's 'action halts, all sides issue orders/etc. to all units, then action commences simultaneously (with possible pauses to resolve certain issues not covered by orders/etc.) as all units act, then action halts as that turn ends' then you could see something similar to that screenshot.


 

(Not saying Elemental will do this)



You just described a WEGO TBS system, which I would be very happy with. IMO, it combines the best aspects of TB and RT combat (in the context of a TBS game).

During or after the big debate about tactical combat, though, Brad said that he would consider releasing a WEGO combat system after release, which as far as I can tell means that WEGO or 'simultaneous' tactical combat is not the current plan. Sadly.

All signs point toward traditional turn- and tile-based, I-GO-YOU-GO turn-based combat, probably with some new ideas strewn around. I, for one, hope that they surprise me and do something different. WE-GO would be awesome

I totally agree.  I really wonder why Brad chose traditional TBS combat.

Reply #42 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting pigeonpigeon, reply 40

It depends on how simultaneous TBS is implemented.  If it's 'action halts, all sides issue orders/etc. to all units, then action commences simultaneously (with possible pauses to resolve certain issues not covered by orders/etc.) as all units act, then action halts as that turn ends' then you could see something similar to that screenshot.
 

(Not saying Elemental will do this)

You just described a WEGO TBS system, which I would be very happy with. IMO, it combines the best aspects of TB and RT combat (in the context of a TBS game).

During or after the big debate about tactical combat, though, Brad said that he would consider releasing a WEGO combat system after release, which as far as I can tell means that WEGO or 'simultaneous' tactical combat is not the current plan. Sadly.

All signs point toward traditional turn- and tile-based, I-GO-YOU-GO turn-based combat, probably with some new ideas strewn around. I, for one, hope that they surprise me and do something different. WE-GO would be awesome
Agreed (in both how it would be nice and how it looks like it won't be in release). 

I don't care for 'twitch' based RTS, tho Total War isn't bad (pause anytime, slow things down to where my old reflexes/brain feels comfortable), but simultaneous TBS (wego is a new name for this old system) would be perfect very nice.  Some old board games attempted this as best they could (for example Squad Leader, with and without a third party moderator) but it was 'best of a bad situation'.  Computers are perfect for simultaneous TBS, and it's surprising it isn't used more.

Reply #43 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Bill_Door, reply 41
I totally agree.  I really wonder why Brad chose traditional TBS combat.
I'd be interested to know too.  I'd generally assume it's due to not knowing about it, but that's hard to imagine in this case.  I'm guessing the non-simultaneous system is easier/faster/etc. to make (as simultaneous requires keeping track of each unit's route, calculating when collisions occur then resolving according to orders, etc.) and as they changed tactical combat recently there isn't a lot of time before the possible Aug. release.

Reply #44 from Elemental Forums Top

GUYS!  I was just cogitating, and I noticed some SHTUFF.

 

Okay, I completely reserve the right to change my mind/whatever after I get my hands on tactical battles.  But there are a several different proposals here:

 

1) I go, you go, Traditional Turn Based.  Think Heroes of Might and Magic, or Chess.  I go, then you go, then I go...  This is typically done by moving one unit, because otherwise the player that went first would have a huge advantage (or if not the first move, someone sometime DOES).  Despite the thoughts of the player community, this does not appear to be the way they have gone.

 

2) Simultaneous Turns.  Frogboy actually stated they were doing this here:

"Ultimately, after playing around with it, we decided to implement turn based (simultaneous turns based on combat speed) with tiles."

https://forums.elementalgame.com/382931

In the third sentence.  Now, putting this together with a sentence later in that post....

"Combat Speed. Your combat speed determines how many “moves” / attacks you get during a particular turn.  In the begging of Lord of the Rings, what makes Sauron such a bad ass is that he can attack so many units at once. He has, in game turns, an incredible combat speed."

This appears to be a mesh of Traditional Turn Based and WEGO.  Say I have seven combat speed, and you have six.  I can pick ANY 7 units to move, and you have six to move.  We plan simultaneously and then submit our turns and see the results.  This is still turn-based, or maybe combat ROUND based, but it actually has many of the elements you talk about here.  You are limited by your combat speed (this is an area where a warfare sovereign will have an advantage, but you may be able to magically boost it), but all the tactics of WEGO, especially since we may have 10 squads on the field.  I have to anticipate your move AND which units you will move.

 

3) Full WEGO, ala Combat mission.  I plan my moves while you plan yours, all units move and there is carnage.  I don't think they'll move in this direction for release, as it is harder to control.  The path they have chosen addresses some of the concerns here, without sacrificing the tactics.

 

4) Continuous turns, which is kinda free-for-all, pausable combat that is closer to RTS.  This is what many of those screenshots are from, and I think the developers have permanently killed this one (for release anyway).

 

Personally, I had a lot of doubts because I thought they were implementing number 1.  If indeed they are implementing number 2), I think these past two-ish weeks must have been maddening for them as all the criticism was leveled at them.  Personally, I didn't make the connection until just now, and I'm quite hopeful for this possibility.

 

Stardock, I'll wait to see what you've got up your sleeve before I make judgment.  However, this sounds fun and original.  If this is what you're putting in, I totally take back all my criticism (whining)!

Reply #45 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Cyrogenic, reply 44
This appears to be a mesh of Traditional Turn Based and WEGO.  Say I have seven combat speed, and you have six.  I can pick ANY 7 units to move, and you have six to move.  We plan simultaneously and then submit our turns and see the results.  This is still turn-based, or maybe combat ROUND based, but it actually has many of the elements you talk about here.  You are limited by your combat speed (this is an area where a warfare sovereign will have an advantage, but you may be able to magically boost it), but all the tactics of WEGO, especially since we may have 10 squads on the field.  I have to anticipate your move AND which units you will move.

I don't think you understand combat speed.  What Brad meant was that each unit has its own combat speed, and can make that many moves per round/turn.  He did not mean that you can only mave as many units as your combat speed.

Reply #46 from Elemental Forums Top

Really?  Oh, well that's really depressing.  Why would they do that?  Stop popping my bubble!  >:(   :grin:   (not actually mad, but I hope you're wrong all the same.  No offense :-) )

 

 

Well, how should we account for his explicitly stating in a journal just two weeks or so ago that simultaneous turns were in?  I have a hunch combat isn't just Traditional Turn-Based, or we'd have seen it in a video by now, right?  He's not working on combat AI at the moment (at least, from all indications).  It seems like the combat system is fairly far along.  It doesn't seem like two weeks ago he could say there were simultaneous turns and now suddenly there's not.

Reply #47 from Elemental Forums Top

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but the conversation in this thread assumes what I said is true, and I'm sure Frogboy would have pointed out a misunderstanding that serious.

Edit: Indeed he said it was simultaneous, but that just means people take their turns at the sime time, not WEGO, or your idea about combat moves.

Reply #48 from Elemental Forums Top

Sigh.

 

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed my HOMM and all those.  Battles have just sounded so new and fresh all along, that it seems so stale and old to revert back to that mechanic.  Elemental is SO different in other areas.  And I liked that.  I liked innovation.  I'm sure combat will be fun, but...

 

I don't know, I can't put it in words.

 

 

 

I wonder how easy it is to modify a game changing mode in like this.  Because of hobbies, I'm already at least a little familiar with some of the limitations of a game mode like this.

Reply #49 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Cyrogenic, reply 48
Sigh.

 

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed my HOMM and all those.  Battles have just sounded so new and fresh all along, that it seems so stale and old to revert back to that mechanic.  Elemental is SO different in other areas.  And I liked that.  I liked innovation.  I'm sure combat will be fun, but...

 

I don't know, I can't put it in words.

 

 

 

I wonder how easy it is to modify a game changing mode in like this.  Even if it's the most boring mode ever, I'd like to try it

Well, Brad said that would probably patch in a WEGO option post-release, so we shouldn't need to mod it in.

Reply #50 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Nick-Danger, reply 43



Quoting Bill_Door,
reply 41
I totally agree.  I really wonder why Brad chose traditional TBS combat.I'd be interested to know too.  I'd generally assume it's due to not knowing about it, but that's hard to imagine in this case.  I'm guessing the non-simultaneous system is easier/faster/etc. to make (as simultaneous requires keeping track of each unit's route, calculating when collisions occur then resolving according to orders, etc.) and as they changed tactical combat recently there isn't a lot of time before the possible Aug. release.

Since I'm in the WEGO camp, I won't again spout its accolades. However,  I have to suspect the above quote is right on (I don't know) as a WEGO implementation would likely take much more programming than a more standard TBS as during the Execution Phase of the players' WEGO the Units must respond intelligently to potentially numerous unfolding situations.  By way of example in Combat Mission (WW II), a Sherman tank on a "Hunt Command" must decide among potential targets of opportuntity-- do I face that nearby Panzershrek Team that just appeared to my flank or do I engage the PzIII that popped from the woods 300 yards ahead?   This "decision-making" tree could grow awfully complex...and I can't imagine the number of permutations in a fantasy setting (take on the Manifesting Wizard, spear the dragon, throw up a "Power Shield," engage the Hero, on and on and on....).