Turn-based PBBG-friendly combat idea

[Jackolantern]

I was doing some thinking about regular turn-based PBBG combat systems. Obviously, turn-based (non-real time) combat systems are the easiest to implement since they work with the nature of PHP. But the problem is that they can be somewhat boring, where it turns into the player just clicking the same option or two over and over until they or the enemy are dead. How could it be spiced up, or how could you add some strategy to the system?

I actually took a cue from American football. In football, the game stops after every play, and the coaches will call down a play to the players. The play called must take into account what your own team is trying to accomplish, the situation your team is currently in, and an attempt to figure out what the opposing team is going to do. I was thinking how this could be applied to a turn-based PBBG, because, as odd as it seems, the flow of both football and turn-based PBBG combat are quite similar.

To support this system, it would be helpful to have both the player's and enemy's actions occur simultaneously. Then what I was thinking is if the player's usable skills have special reactions to what the player thinks the enemy is going to do. Maybe you would guess they are going to use a healing item, so you use a paralysis spell that makes them drop and lose their item if it connects. Or you think they are going to attack high, so your warrior makes a spinning sword slash that parries with the shield and then makes the strike. Of course, there could be penalties if the player guesses their opponent's moves incorrectly, such as being the victim of a critical hit, or breaking an item and needing to get it repaired.

While this could be exciting, a major downside would be making a semi-predictable AI system for enemy mobs. If the enemy is acting completely randomly, then it will more closely resemble a slot machine than a strategic battle. One idea I had is that you could make "enemy action templates", such as "use item", "attack high", "cast verbal-component spell", "flee", etc., and then just implement specifics in those categories for different types of mobs. Then you would only need to make the AI system deal with those higher-level actions and the server scripts could translate that into the actual actions of the mob. While this could be augmented with mob-specific actions and AI routines for special mobs such as bosses or rare mobs, the majority of the mob combat AI would deal with the high-level enemy action templates, thus making the AI system creation more generic, and thus easier to implement.

[Callan S.]

This is something I've run into and...here's some lateral thinking: Instead of combat, let's call it 'Z'.

Okay, were going to have some Z as our game.

But Z is kind of boring, so how can we spice it...


Wait a minute! Z is boring? If Z is boring, why are we having Z as our game?


Why are we trying to add a boring thing, then go through the labour of making it unboring? Can't we just find something that's exciting to begin with and use that?


I know there's a massive focus on COMBATOMGCOMBATKILLMURDERCOMBATOMG in games. But an idea is to try and put aside that elephant in the room and actually think, what is exciting. Because honestly, were all a bit older and the sort of stuff that is labled combat has become incredibly stale to us.

What is exciting? To each individual developer (no need to have an excitement everyone thinks is exciting - only requirement is you find it exciting).

And if nothing is exciting, perhaps it's not time to make a game yet?

[Jackolantern]

Basically because players expect it out of those types of games. It is one of those "players wanting contradicting things" situations. Of course, not all players, but a lot of them. They would think the game is boring without it, but are also looking for some innovation while still staying familiar (this idea pretty much forms the entire commercial MMORPG market of the last 6 years).

Also, I mention it because it is easy to make. Most of the PBBGs being developed here use some form of turn-based combat, and using the template system I outlined above, a system like this would not be too hard to add in and could really spice up combat.

If we were talking about a 3D graphical MMORPG, I would agree with you, but we aren't. We are talking about much more basic PBBGs, which for the most part are build on hit-swapping combat systems as their main form of content. There are players out there who enjoy them, and I guess for them, a basic turn-based combat system isn't so much boring as it is repetitive (one would think they are the same thing, but in PBBGs/MMOs, we know that isn't the case lol). This just adds some variety.

I personally don't like the kinds of PBBGs that this idea is aimed at. I find them dreadful and can't play one for more than about 10 minutes, but there are millions of players out there who play them, and this could possibly be a decent addition to that type of gameplay for those players. However, I wouldn't be developing this because I am not personally interested in it. I am just throwing it out there for anyone else who may be interested (which kind of goes along with your "the dev must be excited" point).

[Callan S.]

Well, if were just talking about devs in general -

1. if you've got enough energy to code yet another take on combat, then cool.

2. But if you don't, well, even if combat systems are 'what people expect' and 'popular'
A: A game you didn't have the energy to code - Number of players: 0
B: A game that started off with something your excited about and did finish - Number of players: >0

Atleast we have the freedom the big publishers don't. We can ignore what's popular and it's gunna end up with more players than a game we never code.

Not to knock going for what's popular - if you've energised for it, good. But by the same token maybe if one never finished any projects for what's popular - perhaps one is not energised for it after all?

"players wanting contradicting things"

Yeah, players want things but A: are not willing to sweat out the details and tightly related B: Aren't willing and because of A aren't able to realise they don't want all of it. Only us devs sweat out what we want and sometimes find we drop some things, pick up other things.

Players are uppity sheep! They just need to be lead with our crooks to the pastures that are good for them, as determined by us!

[Jackolantern]

You seem to be hung-up on someone making a game they don't want to play! I won't be making this because I don't like to play these types of games. But obviously, plenty of people do, and plenty of people will have the drive to make them because millions of people play them every day and we even have projects going on here for these types of games. More are popping-up every day!

This all went off the track when I said the word "boring" lol. It is boring to me, but I don't play them and don't make them! I should have said "both devs and players want a twist on this familiar genre". That would have been more accurate

[Chris]

Make them be able to restore health to take up a move.. switch weapon.. change attack style.. etc

[Callan S.]

You seem to be hung-up on someone making a game they don't want to play!

That's a hang up?

and plenty of people will have the drive to make them because millions of people play them every day and we even have projects going on here for these types of games. More are popping-up every day!

I don't know why? Just because lots of people are doing something, doesn't mean it really works out? Lots of people used to smoke (and still do) and it doesn't work out. I've pitched there may be a problem with doing this approach and that 2B from above beats 2A (and I wonder what the completion rate of these games that pop up is?). Anyway, that my idea in relation to combat, so I've said it now and I don't need to harp on about it any further. Hopefully it helps someone start a project they complete, somehow! And if someones pumped about making a combat system with a twist, the first post is a good idea.

[Qjedi]

I know this topic has been dead for over a month, but I'm new here and just spotted it!
I'm a long-term player of text-based PBBGs, and actually rarely participate in combat because I really AM bored by it, but there are a lot of other things that can be done, so I enjoy the games nevertheless.

One simple way to "change" combat is to allow players previously set defensive actions, as stated above.
For example:"Try to escape" or "Heal if wounded more than 50%" or "Surrender after 5 rounds".
There is a lot that can be done with this sort of thing, but I have found that a lot of players would like to be able to prevent the attacks in the first place! Allowing a "safehouse" to be bought or built is a great way to make your game stand out, as long as it actually does help prevent attacks and allow safe storage of your "stuff" in a PVP game.

There are a lot of options here, but the major goal is to get people playing, even if "Z is boring to some folks".
Personally, if Z is more interesting in one game than another, I might like Z in the differentiated game, and that really is an important way of getting people involved.

[Callan S.]

I think that leads to a fractured player base. It's like trying to build two games at once, except both keep interfearing with each other.

[Jackolantern]

I think that leads to a fractured player base. It's like trying to build two games at once, except both keep interfearing with each other.

What do you mean that it is like trying to build 2 games at once?