Should the next total war campaign map be in REAL TIME (VARIABLY ACELERATED TIME, NOT LIKE STARCRAFT OR AOE!!) or TURN BASED?

[Tspk91]

Tell your opinion and post your reasons!

REAL TIME DOES NOT REFER TO GAMES LIKE STARCRAFT

IT REFERS TO the EUROPA UNIVERSALIS, EMPIRE AT WAR, or SIM CITY style.

Advantages of RTS:
-Sliding bar to select time speed or pause. While in pause, you could do the things you do now in empire; like gestion.
-More diverse time of construction and recruitment, like 2 months, or 10 months, or even 12 months and one week.
-The AI reacts to your actions at the same time and the same for you.
-The armies would move slowly, so you could see them travelling from france to savoy, and you could intercept them with your army, so AI could defend its cities with their armies if they arrive before you.
-Interception of invasion navies.
-All the UI and graphical part wont be diferent.
-Improved multiplayer without needing hotseat.
-Im sure there are more...

[fieldmarshal]

I like how it is..turn based on campaign map, and real time on battle map.

[Rotaugen2009]

Well.... I don't really have 100 years to play this game, which is what it would take to do in "real time".

[Bawha]

Well.... I don't really have 100 years to play this game, which is what it would take to do in "real time".

Lol!
I think that pretty much owned the hole topic on real time and turn based in total war game.

Anyway...
Personally i just dont see how TW can go from turn base to real time as it is now, it would become a total mess!. With the time period/eras it wouldnt fit well imo.

I can just see the constant raids on yer farms in real time from the AI, damn!. Enough to give yer grey hairs!.

Im going pass on this idea. ^_^

[klesh]

I like how it is..turn based on campaign map, and real time on battle map.

Indeed.

I wouldn't be into an RTS version of TW. I pause the battles every 5 seconds as is to ensure the AI isn't getting the upper hand on some far off unit... I simply would be overwhelmed in trying to do the entire map at the same time.

It loses its "strategy" element if its RTS. Speed is not a strategy to me. To make a hasty decision ingame because the computer is moving all of its units at once (somethign a human can't do) is where the strategy ends and the silliness begins. I wouldn't want to have to pause the campaign map every 5 seconds too (which I did in the EU series untill I decided I didn't like the RTS genre).

Making well thought out decisions on multiple strategic levels is how I enjoy the campaign map. To put a time constraint on these choices and forcing you to compete with a computer that can make all these decisions at once will directly impede your ability to make a thoughtful, well planned strategy.

[Rotaugen2009]

Indeed.

I wouldn't be into an RTS version of TW. I pause the battles every 5 seconds as is to ensure the AI isn't getting the upper hand on some far off unit... I simply would be overwhelmed in trying to do the entire map at the same time.

It loses its "strategy" element if its RTS. Speed is not a strategy to me. To make a hasty decision ingame because the computer is moving all of its units at once (somethign a human can't do) is where the strategy ends and the silliness begins. I wouldn't want to have to pause the campaign map every 5 seconds too (which I did in the EU series untill I decided I didn't like the RTS genre).

Making well thought out decisions on multiple strategic levels is how I enjoy the campaign map. To put a time constraint on these choices and forcing you to compete with a computer that can make all these decisions at once will directly impede your ability to make a thoughtful, well planned strategy.

Exactly. This is supposed to be a contest of thinking (well, sort of. You versus static AI) as opposed to a contest of hand/eye coordination and speed. After all, the game is modelling 100 years of events, not 100 minutes. I have to pause often enough on the battle screen since it gives you an unrealistic level of control over your units that are spread all over the place.

[Tspk91]

the game could have an optional system where if AI makes any hostile action, the time stops; and if the AI is good, it would attack at once, fighting true wars; i see more advantages than disadvantages. It isnt fair that I cant go and chase an enemy army that attacks and destroys continuously my resources because it is their "six months of doing wathever you want while everyone just looks at you (and blames you)"...

PD: how can i make a poll?

[♔GrinningManiac♔]

Indeed.

I wouldn't be into an RTS version of TW. I pause the battles every 5 seconds as is to ensure the AI isn't getting the upper hand on some far off unit... I simply would be overwhelmed in trying to do the entire map at the same time.

It loses its "strategy" element if its RTS. Speed is not a strategy to me. To make a hasty decision ingame because the computer is moving all of its units at once (somethign a human can't do) is where the strategy ends and the silliness begins. I wouldn't want to have to pause the campaign map every 5 seconds too (which I did in the EU series untill I decided I didn't like the RTS genre).

Making well thought out decisions on multiple strategic levels is how I enjoy the campaign map. To put a time constraint on these choices and forcing you to compete with a computer that can make all these decisions at once will directly impede your ability to make a thoughtful, well planned strategy.

QFT

Although in all fairness, I find it unfair that because of the linear nature of the turn system, I have the first go, move a unit, in their turn they attack and defeat me, whereas the other way around if THEY had moved first I would have had a different strategy.

It sometimes seems like I just go around a big gameboard setting up peices, then everyone else takes turns in attacking me

[Fenon]

Very happy with the way it is, all I really want from the next Total War game is improved realism in the actual combat and for it to be finished before release.

[Kemengon]

I am a big fan of EU3 & the 'real time' thing, but I just don't think it would work here. Both require an unfortunate amount of waiting though, either for the AI to make their moves, or, in EU3 for something interesting to happen.

Reading this did give me a great idea though, and I haven't seen it posted anywhere. Rather than watching the flags move across your screen between player turns, you should have a popup that is a summary of your economic/political/prestige standings... you know, something to stare at while you wait.

[Humble Warrior]

I`m sorry, but I have yet to find an RTS I have liked. Even Sins of a Solar Empire I did not like and preferred Gal Civ II which is turned based.

What I don`t like about these RTS type of games is that you never have a period to think about strategic military, peacetime, social or diplomatic options. It always feels like a constant rush. And if you don`t rush, guess what? the AI (or Human Player) will bum rush you to defeat. I don`t know why they call them Real time Strategy because it`s not even strategy. Completely unrealistic. Why?

Well these type of games take, like, weeks to a month for events to happen(in game time). Marching that army takes a month, sending that Dreadnought takes 10 light years or whatever. In reality, you`d have at least a few weeks to a day to even a few hours in the worst case to plan a strategy. Turns work because you have as much time as needed to plan.

THEN when a battle commences you go to the `real` virtual world to fight the battle in real time, your army that you prepared stands ready prepared as much as can be, the enemy approaches ... Let the battle commence!

It reflects closer to reality than does a real time game that condenses in seconds with no actual turns. In a C&C RTS it all happens too fast at once; HQs are built in seconds, tank factories in minutes, hordes of clones just pop out and you barely have time to strategise anything before you`re overwhelmed.

Also real time games tend to descend into destroying the spawn building to stop the clones appearing more than actually fighting men. Another facter in TWs is they feel a LOT more personal. RTS feel very impersonal, you chuck out clones like confetti. There`s no sense that these are Human Beings that were born of women, bred went out and got enlisted. IN the TW games you get that feeling , so that in an abstract way, they actual feel more real. When a man dies, you feel it`s not just a clone that popped out of a factory but an individual who fought for your Country.

OK, a little emotive and arty, but that`s why this system works best imho.

[SmurfDude]

I like how it is..turn based on campaign map, and real time on battle map.

Ditto

[Forge13]

I like how it is..turn based on campaign map, and real time on battle map.

It would become increasingly hard to make decisions under a time constraint on the campaign level...

though i've never tried it under EU(3 right?) i would not want the campaign map to become a slow moving rts

[Silentio]

The set up works fine for the Europa Universalis franchise and I have no doubts that it could work out equally well for the Total War series. In short I would love to see it, but I doubt it will show up in the ETW sequel; maybe in the next game engine though.

[Rokhound]

I have recently been thinking about the problems related to the large movement distance allowing blitzkrieg attacks deep into enemy territory which is difficult for the AI to intercept and is unrealistic. There are some other problems related to the current play style, mostly related to the AI being unable to cope with the open style world. The 'engagement distance' is a stop gap measure that could be a good compromise when it is fully functional but some other possibilities are as follows;

-Another 'easy' fix would would be to reduce movement rates in enemy territory, but that too could get very annoying in large enemy provinces - especially away from the densely packed western Europe. Maybe some kind of 'supply line' idea where the further you get into enemy territory the slower your army moves unless it raids for supplies or something. I do like the 'wait a turn before you can move after a naval landing unless its in a port' game mechanic, otherwise it would be ridiculous.

-More turns per year with reduced movement rates. Frankly I spend enough time micromanaging and I fear this would only exasperate the problem as more turns would almost cerainly mean more commands to issue. Still, could be made to work if balanced well.

-Use risk style movement similar to Shogun and MTW with regions that DO NOT necessarily represent cities (could be wilderness, or strategic resources etc) is a good alternative I've seen suggested in other threads. This could be done in a grid or hex system as well, but it might lose some historical flavor of having regions.

-The OP suggestion of a 'realtime' (more accurately called 'variably accelerated time' as a previous poster pointed out) strategic map probably seems like blasphemy to many at first but does have real merit. Other games have successfully implemented this style of play though I dont have much experience with it. As long as the player had controll over the 'speed' of time and can pause to issue commands at any time I think it could have real benefits.

just my 2 cents

[Seamless]

I think it'd be pretty cool. Like when Total War gets up to WWII lol. Just have it so that when you move an army on the campaign map, it moves reeeaaaally slow. But also you have to consider all of the other aspects of the game like trading, governing, diplomacy, etc that would be kind of hard to turn RTS.

[mini]

Idea is cool, but I don't think it works with the current AI.
He wouldn't know what to do (not that he does now) or how to react on what you do.

Besides, if the engine has to contemplate every decision in realtime, the whole time... All that spells for me = CTD.
And that's by someone who hasn't had a CTD since launching day. (Lucky me)

[Tspk91]

Europa Universalis (i havent played it) also has to calculate everything in real time, as all rts; i think that turn based makes the AI to be calculating too much in an instant (when you pass turn)

[ohnoesaz]

real time would be great but I dont see how I can possibly keep an eye on an entire globe.... The three maps we have now are already too much to look at for every single turn. Sure, I wish we had the entire globe, but I only mess with about 1 section per turn. Real-time would need some sort of reliable alert system to pull that off.

[Cursisanafou]

If they made the next campaign real time i wouldn't buy the game.