This poll was suggested by Pete. I guess some people might be a little biased, with all the turn-based games we cover, but you never know. If you prefer something other than turn-based or real-time, please explain the system. And we'll be interested to know why you prefer turn-based or real-time if that is your cup of tea of course!

Both!

I likes Apoc's approach where you could choose, but I'm also extrememly happy with the systems in Silent Storm (Turn-Based, but looks cool, though the turns can take a while to play out) and UFO Aftermath (real time with lots of pauses ).

Turn-based, baby. It's the only way to have real strategy. Real time, you just end up reacting to your opponent. Turn-based, you can plan, actually use your mind.

I foresee a huge argument coming up about stuff like "would you wait fo the enemy to have their turn if they really did invade?" and so forth

It's ok, I'll ban them.
Of course you'd want the enemy to have a turn, not very fair if you don't. It may be ok for all those foreign types, but we Brits have to find time to fit in time for tea and sandwiches and sweeping chimneys and suchlike.
Cor blimey, guv'nor.

Well, depends for me
brainsuckers are evil on turn based, since my guys rarely react to them
however, if you are fighting megaspawns on real time, you usually get one missile and two or three laser out before you can kill them, which means fatal wounds and deaths. But on turn based, if you see them, you kill them. That's why i like real time. You make split second decisions and react to an enemies actions, not plan your own then the enemy plans theirs

It depends on the game for me, generally though I like to be able to take my time and evaluate the situation, otherwise in real time games I do something, then five seconds later realise that I shouldn't have, just as the artillery starts landing on my men.

In a game like C&C where men are counted in the hundreds a bad tactical choice is never a problem, since the person who can build tanks faster tends to win.

In a game like XCOM however, every man is worth his weight in Elerium and even one loss is a blow.

I picked other, because what I like is real-time that you can pause and give orders whenever you want.

By the way, if you think you can't plan in a real-time game, download a demo of a game called Brigade E-5: New Jagged Union.

It's Russian at the moment, but they've released some patches to make it English.

I'll make another topic about it...Uh, somewhere. Off-topic, I guess. There's really no general game discussion forum. It's either no game discussion, or discussion about a particular game.

Nevermind, making a post in the game topic on the OT forum.

This post has been edited by Jh316: 17th June 2005, 5:56am

Real time that you an pause? You should keep your eyes peeled for Space Hulk. Vengance of the Blood Angels. I think that was one of the first games to use that feature.

Bit old now though.

I've played a PC conversion of the Space Hulk board game before, it was a really fun turn based thing.

Not to mention Aftermath, or whatever it is. Real-time that you can pause whenever and still interact/give orders/plan/cry is just turn-based with dressing.

I voted "other".

I LOVE turn-based games, but i think the best approach so far is the system used in Laser Squad: Nemesis,
where each opponet plans 10 sec of movements ( force-fire/op. fire/hide... ) for all your units, and then you watch the results.

...and no, i don't play LSN for almost 6 months now.

My favorite game to use the kind of thing I'm talking about is Darklands, from '92 or so. It's an awesome game, and available at Hotu. Really shows that Microprose can make a great RPG, too.

I voted for turn the page (it is like reading a book: you pass it fast as you want and can take 'thinking pauses' when ever you want and maybe some 'drinking pauses' too).

I like the tb-games like SSs where is those actionpoints. One big reason for that is I want to see everything! It is not funny to play in big mission maps and see only half of events (shooting and killing) ...it makes me frustrating. In actionpoints based games you can see every move what your characters or enemies make (I play games because I am also a animations freak) I know it takes more time but if animations and AI is good it doesn't matter to me. It is not very realistic but if I want realism I will just turn of the computer and step outside... I don't want to play some kind of realistic alternative realism games.

I can see that tb games with 'smart pause' have been developed better and better (Brigade E5 etc) and maybe someday I have to change my mind about those 'controlled' chaos games. But actionpoints based tb-games are still more playable via hotseat (or LAN) and I like good multiplayer games a lot (when we can see Jones In the Fastline 2?!?" ).

Hopefully tb-games are forever on developers lists because I think they have only scratched the surface.

yeah, i think the future games will be total RTS
pausable RTS
and turn based
i actually prefer pausable RTS, but the Laser Squad nemesis type sounds very nice. Or in other words, i don't like constant chaos, but chaos, then a chance to review things, the chaos, then a chance to review things

Space Hulk was realtime. As you played, you gained 'pause' time, in which you could give orders (much like Aftermath). However, you could only stay in 'pause' time so long, so you needed to build up some more of the stuff by going back into realtime.

Quite a good system, if you think about it. Most likely it was wasted on me - I'm a defensive player, and my tactics didn't get me far against unlimited (read: 'respawning') hordes of Genestealers.

I played Apocalypse in TB mode about, hmm, once. Played it RT ever since. But, I tend to play Enemy Unknown more then any other strategy game, and that's TB only.

TB suits me best, as I like to sit back and think about things, but that's not a luxery you'd get in reality. Aftermath/Apocalypse's implementations of RT can be summed up as 'TB with really short turns', as opposed to the more mainstream style of strategy games today...

I agree with FullAuto and Bomb Bloke. With real-time you just test your dexterity against a more formidible player (usually the computer). While entertaining, it doesn't really challenge your brain to any large (or deep) degree.

At my age, keeping the brain sharp is a always a concern. Turn-based games allow me to plan things ahead and learn from any mistakes. Sometimes this information can be applied to real life. A side-effect of this is that you learn something by application of knowledge/strategy rather than simple prestidigitation. That is a much more rewarding experience than simply clicking faster than a computer at a certain level.

- Zombie

Other..because i would select both

i've been addicted to command and conquer , red alert 1 and especialy 2 online, the expansion pack yuris revenge. red alert 2 online offers great competition and i play to win knowing all the best build order's, tactics, using the best tank control..where as x-com is different its still just as appealing....its too hard to choose...how about x-com online? now theres perfection ^^

Yeah, both modes sure are fun. I tend to lean towards TB as preference however.

Regarding X-COM online, UFO2000 is a good step in the right direction! Did you try it? LSN isn't bad either!

Like your avatar . Could you possibly make your signature a little smaller however? Oh, and welcome to the boards!