Wasteland: turn-based, phase-based?

[Gizmo]

Can anyone who has played Wasteland (or Bard's Tale), and Baldur's Gate... phrase a convincing dispute that Wasteland's combat mechanics were not in fact the 8088 version of "realtime w/ pause"? Think about it for a few minutes...

Wasteland's combat was 'phase based', where the party member's each chose a course of action, then watched it play out.
In Baldur's Gate the PC's all have their course of action selected at the start; (either by the player or the AI).
The game allows the player to pause and re-assign any PC's course of action, then resume to watch it play out. The game also offers the option of pausing at the end of each round ~that makes it absolutely "Phase based" if you don't tinker with it mid-round.

This is stark difference from Fallout or Jagged Alliance. In these systems, the action is conceptually linear, yet the player gets to base their character's actions (mid round) on the preceding actions of the other combatants.

[krellen]

if you don't tinker with it mid-round.

That's the biggest difference I can see; the phased-based combat of Wasteland/Bard's Tale doesn't allow the mid-round tinkering that real-time-with-pause does.

[Gizmo]

if you don't tinker with it mid-round.

That's the biggest difference I can see; the phased-based combat of Wasteland/Bard's Tale doesn't allow the mid-round tinkering that real-time-with-pause does.

Do we know if Baldur's Gate does? (I do not; but I wonder if the PC's action switches only after the ~invisible~ end of the round).

Still... Wasteland's combat seems (disconcertingly, in hindsight), like it's really Realtime w/ Pause; (technically speaking).

[Bryce777]

A turn is a discrete step realtime is continuous. That's the definition, no argument needed.

[Gizmo]

A turn is a discrete step realtime is continuous. That's the definition, no argument needed.

In Fallout (for example), character APs directly equate with time... How much can a PC accomplish in a round; (about 6 seconds?).

Conceptually the event is linear and happening simultaneously to the combatants, but the game splits it up into discrete segments to facilitate a chance for the player to deliberate and carefully select actions in an event that takes just seconds to transpire.

It's not exactly the same in Wasteland (or Baldur's Gate?), because the player only selects the action at the beginning of a round (call it six seconds also)... But here the characters act out their actions for the duration; this can mean that one PC's target gets killed before they can attack them ~In Fallout, that cannot happen because of the discrete segmented turns that each character has during the round.

[krellen]

Do we know if Baldur's Gate does?

It absolutely does. If you un-pause the round and find out the action you've submitted isn't working right, you can re-pause the game and immediately issue new orders before the turn completes. You can pause the game in BG any time you want. The game won't prevent you from pausing just because you've enabled auto-pauses.

[Gizmo]

Do we know if Baldur's Gate does?

It absolutely does. If you un-pause the round and find out the action you've submitted isn't working right, you can re-pause the game and immediately issue new orders before the turn completes. You can pause the game in BG any time you want. The game won't prevent you from pausing just because you've enabled auto-pauses.

A nasty side effect in Baldur's Gate, is that the engine decides that an attack hits (say a flaming arrow), but the player can pause, and move the PC before the arrow reaches them... and the arrow arcs in mid-air to wherever the PC is traveling to; but this does not happen with area effect spells like FireBall IIRC.

[krellen]

A nasty side effect in Baldur's Gate, is that the engine decides that an attack hits (say a flaming arrow), but the player can pause, and move the PC before the arrow reaches them... and the arrow arcs in mid-air to wherever the PC is traveling to; but this does not happen with area effect spells like FireBall IIRC.

You recall correctly, because the fireball targets an area, not a person. Well, usually. I think you actually can target a person, and it will follow them if you do. It's been a while since I played any of the Infinity Engine games.

[dmazz]

Baldurs Gate is turn based, it's just that the player is allowed to choose the length of his turn. (pause feature, is a end of turn feature.) Dodging arrows is allowed if mid flight the arrow takes a turn to get to it's location.

Fallout Tactics had two separate combat system s. One real time the other turn based.

I guess by turn based you mean fixed periods of time in the game, alternating from one player to another, fastest get's to 'go first' in the fixed time period.

Baldur's Gate had 'microturns', an action didn't take one turn but many microturns, which why you could be interrupted in the middle of an action. This gave the illusion of real time, but it wasn't.

[Brother None]

Can anyone who has played Wasteland (or Bard's Tale), and Baldur's Gate... phrase a convincing dispute that Wasteland's combat mechanics were not in fact the 8088 version of "realtime w/ pause"? Think about it for a few minutes...

Sure, it's simple. In turn-based games, actions are taken by the character after the command is given by the player. This can happen with one-command-one-turn, or with action points, but the point is you can only give commands before acting, in your own turn. In RTwP, you can interrupt and rejigger the commands at any point during their turn. And that's BG, which still had a turn-based system running underneath, whereas newer RTwP titles did not.

Wasteland was phase-based, yes, but phase-based is just a form of turn-based, based on the concept of separation of command and action that RTwP does not have.

[Gizmo]

In RTwP, you can interrupt and rejigger the commands at any point during their turn. And that's BG, which still had a turn-based system running underneath, whereas newer RTwP titles did not.

Wasteland was phase-based, yes, but phase-based is just a form of turn-based, based on the concept of separation of command and action that RTwP does not have.

But in your opinion... Doesn't Fallout's AP mechanic (loosely) parallel Baldur's Gate's essential (combat) gameplay when compared overall with Wasteland?
** In that during FO's combat turn, the player can also rejigger the commands at any point during their turn (within AP limits); and affect their choices based on the mid-round actions that preceded their turn. (Which cannot be done in Wasteland, but which is always done in Baldur's Gate ~unless you leave combat strictly to the AI).
It's not exactly the same of course; in BG the player can rejigger any or all characters at once during the round.

It just seems to me that where combat in Wasteland can be likened to 5 card stud poker, both Fallout and Baldur's Gate can be likened to 5 card Draw poker.

[UniversalWolf]

Baldurs Gate is turn based, it's just that the player is allowed to choose the length of his turn. (pause feature, is a end of turn feature.)

And that's BG, which still had a turn-based system running underneath...

I too thought this until I went back and played Torment. There are no turns in Infinity games, only actions with differing durations. The auto-pause will stop the combat at the end of a character's action, not at the end of a turn (since turns don't exist).

You have three characters. At the inception of combat you give the first an action that has a duration of 3, the second an action that has a duration of 6, and the third an action that has a duration of 8. The game will self-pause at 3, 6, and 8. If you order actions with durations of 9, 14, and 16, that's when the game will pause. Or you can pause it yourself at 2 and issue new orders to any or all of the characters. It's strictly real-time with pause.

FWIW, I find phase-based combat to be intriguing since it avoids some of the obvious exploits of turn-based combat. Check out the Combat Mission games from Battlefront to see a well-developed phase-based system. Orders are issued to both sides, then executed simultaneously for 60 seconds.

[Gizmo]

I too thought this until I went back and played Torment. There are no turns in Infinity games, only actions with differing durations. The auto-pause will stop the combat at the end of a character's action, not at the end of a turn (since turns don't exist).

Its not obvious, but that's how it is "under the hood". The D&D combat rules are turn based and the infinity engine games seamlessly jump from one round to the next without mention ~unless you set it not to, but the character actions are still round based.



*Strictly speaking... there are not sequential turns like in Fallout, but actions do occur sequentially and in a fixed order (as far as I know). In Torment & Baldur's Gate, a PC has a fixed number of actions per round. Spells can be selected for casting at any time, but they don't happen until it's time for the caster to act; then they begin to cast it.

BG 1& 2 don't list an initiative score, but IIRC, Character dexterity affects attack speed, (and in BG2 something listed as "Reaction adjustment"), so those with the greater score would seem to be attacking first; weapon speed affects this also.

While it's not turn based in the sense that each actor has a chance to pause and deliberate, and have all others wait on their [completed] action, it is sort of [distantly] akin to Wasteland's system in some respects.
____________________________________________________
Edit: Page 75 of the BG manual explains their modified initiative method.

[UniversalWolf]

Go back and play it again. It's not turn-based at all.

[Gizmo]

Go back and play it again. It's not turn-based at all.

Torment is round based... D&D combat (as per my post) is turn based. Black Isle modified the D&D rules to allow for realtime w/ pause.

[paultakeda]

WL is turn-based where the command and action are discretely different phases, so I guess this can mean it's a phase-based type of turn-based, so commitment to action may mean an entire party attacking one enemy group and even though the first two attacks kill that enemy the rest of the party cannot switch to a second group. Thus, you could say all action occurred at the same.

An example of turn-based where command is immediately followed by action would be Fallout, or for a contemporary to WL game, AD&D Pool of Radiance, where you can make micro-decisions during a single turn such that if an enemy is already killed by the first PC the subsequent PCs can attack another enemy.

[Hadar]

Hello y'all.

I think that as was said, Baldur's gate subdivided the turns to actions.And I believe this is a preferable system to the fallout system mainly because of the "Rat moves, Rat attacks, Rat misses" * 12 syndrome the game suffered horribly from at certain times. And going full party tactical, probably means a lot of rats.

About the arrows locking on to you in BG, this calls for some consideration in the game mechanics for a moving target, which is not all that hard to do (I think...). The game can for example, the moment you chose moving, adjust trajectories for a spear the same way a skilled thrower will compensate for a moving target(If he is skilled, that is). As long as the spear animation is not as slow as the BG arrows, shouldn't be a problem( especially with bullets...)

I loved Fallout, but always felt BG's combat was better, even if I couldn't carry around a turbo plasma rifle or a Bozar. So I vote phase, definitely phase.