I am talking about how turn based MMOs have very low traction today, since the current trend is action combat which is the polar opposite of turn based.
The reason why turn based is not common in mmorpgs is because its a huge turn off for the masses
Well, that is just partly true. Games like Age of wonders 3 did really well. The problem is more that turned based combat works poorly in an open world. It sucks when you see locked combat all over the world you can't join and that just stand in place for a long time.
That and the fact that AoW 3 have way better combat mechanics then Atlantica and similar games.
I do think you could make an awesome turned based CORPG with the right mechanics. Think Guildwars with AoW3s combat mechanics, I would certainly enjoy something like that (huge AoW and HoM&M fan). I don't think I am the only one.
An open world massive game on the other hand doesn't really work as well, there are some fans but just not enough of them.
Theres quite a few turn based in browser games but not so much in MMOs...I actually like the format...many think turn based = easy but Ive found some that are far from easy.
Turned based can be easy since you have longer time to think but if you have more options and need more tactics it can instead be harder. But it is the same thing with trinity and action combat games, you can make any of them simple or advanced.
MMORPG's are not the standard when it comes to turn based combat. Sure, it's less supported than action combat or tab based combat, but there are a whole chunk of successful browser games running turn based combat, and it's always been a successful genre in single player games, Heroes of M&M, Age of Wonder, Age of Magic, King's Bounty series etc.
I do not know why there has not been a spiritual successor to Atlantica Online. Nexon did have an Atlantica Online II in the works, then abandoned it. But Nexon are one of the worst gaming companies around, so that doesn't really mean anything. Just par for the course.
It's a gap in the market just waiting to be filled .
like i said earlier in this thread .. Heroes of Dire has done a good job with a TB mmo and has a great community if anyone is interested .....http://www.dire.com/
MMORPG's are not the standard when it comes to turn based combat. Sure, it's less supported than action combat or tab based combat, but there are a whole chunk of successful browser games running turn based combat, and it's always been a successful genre in single player games, Heroes of M&M, Age of Wonder, Age of Magic, King's Bounty series etc.
I do not know why there has not been a spiritual successor to Atlantica Online. Nexon did have an Atlantica Online II in the works, then abandoned it. But Nexon are one of the worst gaming companies around, so that doesn't really mean anything. Just par for the course.
It's a gap in the market just waiting to be filled .
You play Age of wonders as a singleplayer game? I always play it with 2-8 players, turned based combat is best when you have a few people around and a AoW3 fight with 6 players on 2 sides is incredible fun.
Of course the same turned based combat get messy when you have more then 8 people around, tried in Civ a few times.
As for no Atlantica 2 I think it is because Atlantica became rather popular fast but also became forgotten pretty fast. It had little long term fun, it's combat were way too simple and felt uninspired.
Of course there have been popular turned based games with simple and uninspired combat, like the Suikoden games but they had a good story and very well made and interesting npcs. Atlantica lakced that and had the usual simple Nexon story.
I'm struggling to imagine how turn-based combat would work in an MMO. Even in final fantasy games, the first thing I do when I start a new game is turn off the waiting mechanic so that it's no longer turn-based.
My main concerns for an MMO:
Movement stops being a factor in combat (though, presumably you could still have positioning)
Timeouts - would need to have some sort of limit so that people wouldn't take 10 minutes to decide on their move.
Scale - these are massively multiplayer games we're talking about. Turn based just seems like a bad way to handle large amounts of players as you could end up waiting large amounts of time between turns.
Who goes first - the first turn generally has a good advantage, making turn-based a poor fit for an MMO with PvP.
Deep combat - turn based combat tends to only work well when you have a really deep combat system. If players have tons of choices and those choices are meaningful and strategic, then turn-based can be really engaging and tense. The general MMO playerbase seems to be incapable of handling deep combat systems.
In general I'm a fan of slower, more strategic combat and I have a deep dislike for the shallow spamfest action combat pervading the genre, but I just can't see how turn-based would work well. That said, I'm happy to be proven wrong as I've never played an MMO with turn-based combat. I do enjoy it in some single player games, like the XCOM series.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
I'm struggling to imagine how turn-based combat would work in an MMO. Even in final fantasy games, the first thing I do when I start a new game is turn off the waiting mechanic so that it's no longer turn-based.
My main concerns for an MMO:
Movement stops being a factor in combat (though, presumably you could still have positioning)
Timeouts - would need to have some sort of limit so that people wouldn't take 10 minutes to decide on their move.
Scale - these are massively multiplayer games we're talking about. Turn based just seems like a bad way to handle large amounts of players as you could end up waiting large amounts of time between turns.
Who goes first - the first turn generally has a good advantage, making turn-based a poor fit for an MMO with PvP.
Deep combat - turn based combat tends to only work well when you have a really deep combat system. If players have tons of choices and those choices are meaningful and strategic, then turn-based can be really engaging and tense. The general MMO playerbase seems to be incapable of handling deep combat systems.
In general I'm a fan of slower, more strategic combat and I have a deep dislike for the shallow spamfest action combat pervading the genre, but I just can't see how turn-based would work well. That said, I'm happy to be proven wrong as I've never played an MMO with turn-based combat. I do enjoy it in some single player games, like the XCOM series.
Most turn-based MMOs have the world proceeding in real-time, but switch to turn-based for those in combat. That keeps the scale at a manageable level.
For some turn-based MMOs movement is much more important than real-time MMOs, because turn based allows a much more gameplay with line of sight, reach of abilities, and using positioning to block both movement and attacks than real-time combat.
Basically all turn-based MMOs have timeouts. Usual timeout is 30 seconds for a turn, though there are others.
If PvP is important, who goes first can be determined by initiative stat. Alternatively, the game can use same resource for both moving and attacking so that the one who closes distance can only do weaker attack on his first turn and neither gets real advantage. Alternatively, the game can have people competing with movement speed, spell reach, line of sight and tactics so that that the better player gets first attack.
I'm struggling to imagine how turn-based combat would work in an MMO. Even in final fantasy games, the first thing I do when I start a new game is turn off the waiting mechanic so that it's no longer turn-based.
My main concerns for an MMO:
Movement stops being a factor in combat (though, presumably you could still have positioning)
Timeouts - would need to have some sort of limit so that people wouldn't take 10 minutes to decide on their move.
Scale - these are massively multiplayer games we're talking about. Turn based just seems like a bad way to handle large amounts of players as you could end up waiting large amounts of time between turns.
Who goes first - the first turn generally has a good advantage, making turn-based a poor fit for an MMO with PvP.
Deep combat - turn based combat tends to only work well when you have a really deep combat system. If players have tons of choices and those choices are meaningful and strategic, then turn-based can be really engaging and tense. The general MMO playerbase seems to be incapable of handling deep combat systems.
In general I'm a fan of slower, more strategic combat and I have a deep dislike for the shallow spamfest action combat pervading the genre, but I just can't see how turn-based would work well. That said, I'm happy to be proven wrong as I've never played an MMO with turn-based combat. I do enjoy it in some single player games, like the XCOM series.
Most turn-based MMOs have the world proceeding in real-time, but switch to turn-based for those in combat. That keeps the scale at a manageable level.
For some turn-based MMOs movement is much more important than real-time MMOs, because turn based allows a much more gameplay with line of sight, reach of abilities, and using positioning to block both movement and attacks than real-time combat.
Basically all turn-based MMOs have timeouts. Usual timeout is 30 seconds for a turn, though there are others.
If PvP is important, who goes first can be determined by initiative stat. Alternatively, the game can use same resource for both moving and attacking so that the one who closes distance can only do weaker attack on his first turn and neither gets real advantage. Alternatively, the game can have people competing with movement speed, spell reach, line of sight and tactics so that that the better player gets first attack.
Yeh, so I wouldn't be interested if the scale was kept manageable. My personal feeling is that if you are building an MMO, then you should build massively multiplayer features. If you have to limit combat to a small amount of players then, in my opinion, you're missing the point of the genre and my interest drops dramatically.
I would want it so that if I was out in the world with my group of 10 friends, we could engage in a world boss and then have more and more people join if they felt like it. I would want the system to be able to handle large scale battles and for players to be able to come and go as they please.
So, in that respect, I wouldn't want it turn based like XCOM, but could accept something like final fantasy 7 or 9 where it is kinda turn based, but really it's just a long GCD which makes it feel turn based. Perhaps that could be a built in dynamic - below 10 players, have it turn based, but above 10 players it switches to just long GCDs or something.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
I really enjoyed Atlantica, I really wish they would have made another game with that type of combat style just not so grindy. also there was a point in that game you couldn't go much further without buying things..
I'm struggling to imagine how turn-based combat would work in an MMO. Even in final fantasy games, the first thing I do when I start a new game is turn off the waiting mechanic so that it's no longer turn-based.
My main concerns for an MMO:
Movement stops being a factor in combat (though, presumably you could still have positioning)
Timeouts - would need to have some sort of limit so that people wouldn't take 10 minutes to decide on their move.
Scale - these are massively multiplayer games we're talking about. Turn based just seems like a bad way to handle large amounts of players as you could end up waiting large amounts of time between turns.
Who goes first - the first turn generally has a good advantage, making turn-based a poor fit for an MMO with PvP.
Deep combat - turn based combat tends to only work well when you have a really deep combat system. If players have tons of choices and those choices are meaningful and strategic, then turn-based can be really engaging and tense. The general MMO playerbase seems to be incapable of handling deep combat systems.
In general I'm a fan of slower, more strategic combat and I have a deep dislike for the shallow spamfest action combat pervading the genre, but I just can't see how turn-based would work well. That said, I'm happy to be proven wrong as I've never played an MMO with turn-based combat. I do enjoy it in some single player games, like the XCOM series.
Most turn-based MMOs have the world proceeding in real-time, but switch to turn-based for those in combat. That keeps the scale at a manageable level.
For some turn-based MMOs movement is much more important than real-time MMOs, because turn based allows a much more gameplay with line of sight, reach of abilities, and using positioning to block both movement and attacks than real-time combat.
Basically all turn-based MMOs have timeouts. Usual timeout is 30 seconds for a turn, though there are others.
If PvP is important, who goes first can be determined by initiative stat. Alternatively, the game can use same resource for both moving and attacking so that the one who closes distance can only do weaker attack on his first turn and neither gets real advantage. Alternatively, the game can have people competing with movement speed, spell reach, line of sight and tactics so that that the better player gets first attack.
Yeh, so I wouldn't be interested if the scale was kept manageable. My personal feeling is that if you are building an MMO, then you should build massively multiplayer features. If you have to limit combat to a small amount of players then, in my opinion, you're missing the point of the genre and my interest drops dramatically.
I would want it so that if I was out in the world with my group of 10 friends, we could engage in a world boss and then have more and more people join if they felt like it. I would want the system to be able to handle large scale battles and for players to be able to come and go as they please.
So, in that respect, I wouldn't want it turn based like XCOM, but could accept something like final fantasy 7 or 9 where it is kinda turn based, but really it's just a long GCD which makes it feel turn based. Perhaps that could be a built in dynamic - below 10 players, have it turn based, but above 10 players it switches to just long GCDs or something.
Lets be honest here, how many enemies or other players do you encounter in a battle in MMOs at the same time? I dont talk about RvR or something, im talking about open world, Im not playing an MMO right now, but i guess its rather rare to encounter groups of 10+ players but if so, i think its quite possible to invent a turn-based system. that can easily handle 10vs10.
So if you have an open world, with an instanced turn-based combat system, where other players can join if you allow it, i would rather play such a game than the games out there, which instance everything else anyways.
Im playing Atlas Reactor, its a 4vs4 turn-based pvp game and it does a good job on it.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Turn based is ok and realistically,we are already sort of playing turn based,you hit,then the mob hits and we take turns back n forth. The problem with turn based is that most games need to drive their monetary systems and the best way to do it is through pvp and the competitive nature of players to buy or p2win.
So turn based in pvp is not so good and really doesn't work.The way combat works most of the time can keep p2win sort of hidden but in turn based combat,it stares at you blatantly revealing it's true face and how bad p2win truly is.
So you need to think about HOW all these modern devs would implement their typical p2win/cash shop structure into turn based.I can tell you right now that i play it within Hearthstone and it sucks badly,nothing worse than just sitting there watching your opponent real off several plays in a row and just otk you while you can do nothing because turn based=non interactive.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I played Dofus for a fair amount of time. The turn-based play allowed for a greater depth of tactical planning of players, and interaction between characters on the field in the implementation of those plans, than is typical in other MMO styles.
Having to wait between your turns when you were part of a large party allowed for easy and relaxed socialization during play, even for those communicating with the keyboard. In many game styles that kind of interaction is limited to voice, and in some the action so frenzied any talk is limited to the play itself. Despite the look and tone of the game I met several older players who were attracted to it because of this slower pace to play and easy socializing.
So, they have a uncommon mix of deeply tactical play that rewards intricate player cooperation while encouraging and facilitating a concurrent high level of socialization.
I'm struggling to imagine how turn-based combat would work in an MMO. Even in final fantasy games, the first thing I do when I start a new game is turn off the waiting mechanic so that it's no longer turn-based.
My main concerns for an MMO:
Movement stops being a factor in combat (though, presumably you could still have positioning)
Timeouts - would need to have some sort of limit so that people wouldn't take 10 minutes to decide on their move.
Scale - these are massively multiplayer games we're talking about. Turn based just seems like a bad way to handle large amounts of players as you could end up waiting large amounts of time between turns.
Who goes first - the first turn generally has a good advantage, making turn-based a poor fit for an MMO with PvP.
Deep combat - turn based combat tends to only work well when you have a really deep combat system. If players have tons of choices and those choices are meaningful and strategic, then turn-based can be really engaging and tense. The general MMO playerbase seems to be incapable of handling deep combat systems.
In general I'm a fan of slower, more strategic combat and I have a deep dislike for the shallow spamfest action combat pervading the genre, but I just can't see how turn-based would work well. That said, I'm happy to be proven wrong as I've never played an MMO with turn-based combat. I do enjoy it in some single player games, like the XCOM series.
Most turn-based MMOs have the world proceeding in real-time, but switch to turn-based for those in combat. That keeps the scale at a manageable level.
For some turn-based MMOs movement is much more important than real-time MMOs, because turn based allows a much more gameplay with line of sight, reach of abilities, and using positioning to block both movement and attacks than real-time combat.
Basically all turn-based MMOs have timeouts. Usual timeout is 30 seconds for a turn, though there are others.
If PvP is important, who goes first can be determined by initiative stat. Alternatively, the game can use same resource for both moving and attacking so that the one who closes distance can only do weaker attack on his first turn and neither gets real advantage. Alternatively, the game can have people competing with movement speed, spell reach, line of sight and tactics so that that the better player gets first attack.
Yeh, so I wouldn't be interested if the scale was kept manageable. My personal feeling is that if you are building an MMO, then you should build massively multiplayer features. If you have to limit combat to a small amount of players then, in my opinion, you're missing the point of the genre and my interest drops dramatically.
I would want it so that if I was out in the world with my group of 10 friends, we could engage in a world boss and then have more and more people join if they felt like it. I would want the system to be able to handle large scale battles and for players to be able to come and go as they please.
So, in that respect, I wouldn't want it turn based like XCOM, but could accept something like final fantasy 7 or 9 where it is kinda turn based, but really it's just a long GCD which makes it feel turn based. Perhaps that could be a built in dynamic - below 10 players, have it turn based, but above 10 players it switches to just long GCDs or something.
Lets be honest here, how many enemies or other players do you encounter in a battle in MMOs at the same time? I dont talk about RvR or something, im talking about open world, Im not playing an MMO right now, but i guess its rather rare to encounter groups of 10+ players but if so, i think its quite possible to invent a turn-based system. that can easily handle 10vs10.
So if you have an open world, with an instanced turn-based combat system, where other players can join if you allow it, i would rather play such a game than the games out there, which instance everything else anyways.
Im playing Atlas Reactor, its a 4vs4 turn-based pvp game and it does a good job on it.
I'm not playing any MMO at the moment and haven't done for nearly 5 years now. Part of that is because the scale has shrunk, I hate the solo-focus of modern mmos. I am definitely of the opinion that if you're going to make an MMO, you really should try to capitalise on the genres single unique selling point: being massively multiplayer.
PvP is also a requirement of mine so I try to imagine how to make 100v100 fights interesting. I just can't really picture how to make that happen with turn-based combat.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
I'm not playing any MMO at the moment and haven't done for nearly 5 years now. Part of that is because the scale has shrunk, I hate the solo-focus of modern mmos. I am definitely of the opinion that if you're going to make an MMO, you really should try to capitalise on the genres single unique selling point: being massively multiplayer.
PvP is also a requirement of mine so I try to imagine how to make 100v100 fights interesting. I just can't really picture how to make that happen with turn-based combat.
Of course 100v100 fights would be ludicrous with turn-based combat. IMO MMO doesnt only mean masses vs masses or masses vs eviroment, an MMO is still an MMO if you dont have this large scale battles, but an open world, where you still meet many other players, with which you can interact.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
I'm not playing any MMO at the moment and haven't done for nearly 5 years now. Part of that is because the scale has shrunk, I hate the solo-focus of modern mmos. I am definitely of the opinion that if you're going to make an MMO, you really should try to capitalise on the genres single unique selling point: being massively multiplayer.
PvP is also a requirement of mine so I try to imagine how to make 100v100 fights interesting. I just can't really picture how to make that happen with turn-based combat.
Of course 100v100 fights would be ludicrous with turn-based combat. IMO MMO doesnt only mean masses vs masses or masses vs eviroment, an MMO is still an MMO if you dont have this large scale battles, but an open world, where you still meet many other players, with which you can interact.
True, you don't have to have masses vs masses to be an MMO, just masses of people within the same virtual environment. But if you're going to have loads of people within the same environment, I'd like to think the combat mechanics can handle group sizes changing and growing, like if there was a big open world boss I'd like to think that as many people could join in as wanted to.
Have you ever played Lost Odyssey on the 360? That had a turn-based system that could potentially scale up. Essentially everyone, allies and enemies, picked their skills at the same time and once everyone had selected it put everyone in an order (based on speed?) and played out the skills. Thats the sort of thing that could work out large scale as you don't have to wait for everyone to make their selection and you could play out animations / moves quickly.
Not that I'm advocating for a turn-based MMO, thats not my thing, I'm just curious as to the different ways it could work.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
I'm not playing any MMO at the moment and haven't done for nearly 5 years now. Part of that is because the scale has shrunk, I hate the solo-focus of modern mmos. I am definitely of the opinion that if you're going to make an MMO, you really should try to capitalise on the genres single unique selling point: being massively multiplayer.
PvP is also a requirement of mine so I try to imagine how to make 100v100 fights interesting. I just can't really picture how to make that happen with turn-based combat.
Of course 100v100 fights would be ludicrous with turn-based combat. IMO MMO doesnt only mean masses vs masses or masses vs eviroment, an MMO is still an MMO if you dont have this large scale battles, but an open world, where you still meet many other players, with which you can interact.
I think Atlantica Online had server vs server for a while. I think the number is 50 vs 50. Not sure on exact number.
I think it is also possible to Guild vs Guild. But it is really rare guild fight each other.
Also non of the problem mention before on turn based combat is a problem.
I do solo most of my time in Atlantica Online. I'm never into the idea you have to group 100% of the time in a mmorpg.
There is another turn-based MMORPG, called STASH, that was released not long ago. It doesn't seem to have the depth of Dofus, but I didn't get anywhere near as high in level, or do much group play, so it could be it is there and I just didn't experience it.
It is quite primitive in presentation, though. Those that require lush graphics and orchestrated sound will find the game to be extremely lacking. Essentially, characters are presented as miniatures, and movement is very much like one being moved about in tabletop RPGs, both in overland travel and on battlefields.
As is typical these days it can be found on Steam for those wanting to check out this style of game without having to invest any money.
I am developing an indie MMO, combat will be turned based. It's still early developing, but the combat mechanics (coming after the resource system) will work much like Fallout 1 and 2.
If one player engages another in combat, it will create an area around the players dedicated to a combat queue. Anyone within that area will get put into the combat turn queue, anyone leaving the area during their turn will be removed from the queue. At each player's turn they will be given 10-30 seconds (combat experience depending) to choose what actions they would like to take which deducts from their action points. If they run out of action points or their timer hits zero, the next person in the queue will take their turn. NPCs will also be subject to the combat queue, of course.
The game is tile and voxel based, so, it'll kinda work for the genre, I think.
Comments
That and the fact that AoW 3 have way better combat mechanics then Atlantica and similar games.
I do think you could make an awesome turned based CORPG with the right mechanics. Think Guildwars with AoW3s combat mechanics, I would certainly enjoy something like that (huge AoW and HoM&M fan). I don't think I am the only one.
An open world massive game on the other hand doesn't really work as well, there are some fans but just not enough of them.
Turned based can be easy since you have longer time to think but if you have more options and need more tactics it can instead be harder. But it is the same thing with trinity and action combat games, you can make any of them simple or advanced.
I do not know why there has not been a spiritual successor to Atlantica Online. Nexon did have an Atlantica Online II in the works, then abandoned it. But Nexon are one of the worst gaming companies around, so that doesn't really mean anything. Just par for the course.
It's a gap in the market just waiting to be filled
Of course the same turned based combat get messy when you have more then 8 people around, tried in Civ a few times.
As for no Atlantica 2 I think it is because Atlantica became rather popular fast but also became forgotten pretty fast. It had little long term fun, it's combat were way too simple and felt uninspired.
Of course there have been popular turned based games with simple and uninspired combat, like the Suikoden games but they had a good story and very well made and interesting npcs. Atlantica lakced that and had the usual simple Nexon story.
My main concerns for an MMO:
In general I'm a fan of slower, more strategic combat and I have a deep dislike for the shallow spamfest action combat pervading the genre, but I just can't see how turn-based would work well. That said, I'm happy to be proven wrong as I've never played an MMO with turn-based combat. I do enjoy it in some single player games, like the XCOM series.
For some turn-based MMOs movement is much more important than real-time MMOs, because turn based allows a much more gameplay with line of sight, reach of abilities, and using positioning to block both movement and attacks than real-time combat.
Basically all turn-based MMOs have timeouts. Usual timeout is 30 seconds for a turn, though there are others.
If PvP is important, who goes first can be determined by initiative stat. Alternatively, the game can use same resource for both moving and attacking so that the one who closes distance can only do weaker attack on his first turn and neither gets real advantage. Alternatively, the game can have people competing with movement speed, spell reach, line of sight and tactics so that that the better player gets first attack.
I would want it so that if I was out in the world with my group of 10 friends, we could engage in a world boss and then have more and more people join if they felt like it. I would want the system to be able to handle large scale battles and for players to be able to come and go as they please.
So, in that respect, I wouldn't want it turn based like XCOM, but could accept something like final fantasy 7 or 9 where it is kinda turn based, but really it's just a long GCD which makes it feel turn based. Perhaps that could be a built in dynamic - below 10 players, have it turn based, but above 10 players it switches to just long GCDs or something.
So if you have an open world, with an instanced turn-based combat system, where other players can join if you allow it, i would rather play such a game than the games out there, which instance everything else anyways.
Im playing Atlas Reactor, its a 4vs4 turn-based pvp game and it does a good job on it.
- Albert Einstein
The problem with turn based is that most games need to drive their monetary systems and the best way to do it is through pvp and the competitive nature of players to buy or p2win.
So turn based in pvp is not so good and really doesn't work.The way combat works most of the time can keep p2win sort of hidden but in turn based combat,it stares at you blatantly revealing it's true face and how bad p2win truly is.
So you need to think about HOW all these modern devs would implement their typical p2win/cash shop structure into turn based.I can tell you right now that i play it within Hearthstone and it sucks badly,nothing worse than just sitting there watching your opponent real off several plays in a row and just otk you while you can do nothing because turn based=non interactive.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Having to wait between your turns when you were part of a large party allowed for easy and relaxed socialization during play, even for those communicating with the keyboard. In many game styles that kind of interaction is limited to voice, and in some the action so frenzied any talk is limited to the play itself. Despite the look and tone of the game I met several older players who were attracted to it because of this slower pace to play and easy socializing.
So, they have a uncommon mix of deeply tactical play that rewards intricate player cooperation while encouraging and facilitating a concurrent high level of socialization.
Different from the norm, but have their merits.
PvP is also a requirement of mine so I try to imagine how to make 100v100 fights interesting. I just can't really picture how to make that happen with turn-based combat.
- Albert Einstein
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'll buy it when it is on a sale. A more substantial sale more than 10% off
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
- Albert Einstein
Have you ever played Lost Odyssey on the 360? That had a turn-based system that could potentially scale up. Essentially everyone, allies and enemies, picked their skills at the same time and once everyone had selected it put everyone in an order (based on speed?) and played out the skills. Thats the sort of thing that could work out large scale as you don't have to wait for everyone to make their selection and you could play out animations / moves quickly.
Not that I'm advocating for a turn-based MMO, thats not my thing, I'm just curious as to the different ways it could work.
I think it is also possible to Guild vs Guild. But it is really rare guild fight each other.
Also non of the problem mention before on turn based combat is a problem.
I do solo most of my time in Atlantica Online. I'm never into the idea you have to group 100% of the time in a mmorpg.
It is quite primitive in presentation, though. Those that require lush graphics and orchestrated sound will find the game to be extremely lacking. Essentially, characters are presented as miniatures, and movement is very much like one being moved about in tabletop RPGs, both in overland travel and on battlefields.
As is typical these days it can be found on Steam for those wanting to check out this style of game without having to invest any money.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
If one player engages another in combat, it will create an area around the players dedicated to a combat queue. Anyone within that area will get put into the combat turn queue, anyone leaving the area during their turn will be removed from the queue. At each player's turn they will be given 10-30 seconds (combat experience depending) to choose what actions they would like to take which deducts from their action points. If they run out of action points or their timer hits zero, the next person in the queue will take their turn. NPCs will also be subject to the combat queue, of course.
The game is tile and voxel based, so, it'll kinda work for the genre, I think.