Just to talk about pro \ con of turn based.

[Verx90]

Hi , i just wanted to think about what coul Stellaris gain from being TB , and what it would lose.


some points that i think could gain from TB would be a better combat system ( that could continue in various turns ) for both space and land battles .

and while i'm aware that there are TB games that manage to lagg and have performance issues, i think TB would benefit this too .

the only con i can think of right now, is that TB would increase the game time , esponentialy.

 

[Ryika]

some points that i think could gain from TB would be a better combat system ( that could continue in various turns ) for both space and land battles .

I would argue that Stellaris could have a "better" combat system right now - there are, after all, many real time strategy games that have very interesting combat systems.
It's just not the focus of the game.

and while i'm aware that there are TB games that manage to lagg and have performance issues, i think TB would benefit this too .

How so? Things still need to be calculated. The main difference would be the nature of the performance issues - you'd have to wait between turns, instead of the game becoming somewhat laggy.

the only con i can think of right now, is that TB would increase the game time , esponentialy.

Well, the main con would be that the game is then turn-based. I really like how Paradox-style grand strategy play, and the real time element is a big component of that.

Why even list the pros and cons though? Just as a thought experiment? Stellaris is almost certainly not going to be converted into a turn-based game.

 

[Verx90]

Why even list the pros and cons though? Just as a thought experiment? Stellaris is almost certainly not going to be converted into a turn-based game.

totaly a thought experiment .

How so? Things still need to be calculated. The main difference would be the nature of the performance issues - you'd have to wait between turns, instead of the game becoming somewhat laggy.

you are right , it would be more appropiate to say that it would be "hidden" better . as it is just a waiting between turns getting longer and longer instead of the laggy feeling.

I would argue that Stellaris could have a "better" combat system right now - there are, after all, many real time strategy games that have very interesting combat systems.
It's just not the focus of the game.

one of the factor that alienate me most of evrything is that weapons takes days to fire.

while TB could give the chance to go in the "automatic combat" that is a classic for paradox, i actualy would keep it , just increase the possibility of decisions around the combat and the combat balance .

it is not the main aspect of the game , but it is a significant one .

Well, the main con would be that the game is then turn-based. I really like how Paradox-style grand strategy play, and the real time element is a big component of that.

i was just thinking that. but then again, i like TB too and came to the conclusion that i was not sure why i liked the RT part of it.
apart from the time gain that is significant.




RT make it flow , while keeping the possibility of multitasking with "pause" (in singleplayer at least) .

maybe i'm just biased by the fact that i like TBS and RTS , i guess i should try to play a game simply slower .

 

[Zenicetus]

The main advantage of a turn based strategy game, assuming a fast enough machine, is that it's more respectful of the player's time. You take in the current situation, make your decisions and actions, and then advance to the next turn. You don't sit staring at a resource number slowly ticking up until you can do something, or a research project slowly filling up a completion bar, like I often do in Stellaris when there is nothing else happening. It's disrespectful of my limited gaming time, compared to a turn-based game.

Of course you can flip speed settings back and forth to move things faster, but that's busy work to compensate for the game not proceeding at exactly the right pace to keep me engaged without having to juggle too many things at once.

There are some positive aspects to real-time though, like the element of surprise. Some event will trigger that I wasn't expecting, and I have to stop what I was doing and deal with it. Events don't happen at the predictable pace of advancing to the next turn, it feels more realistic, more like a living Galaxy. I still generally prefer turn-based strategy games, but can find things to like with this type also.

 

[Ffc]

I hate turn based games in MP

 

[grommile]

what it would lose.

All of its market momentum, due to the time taken to redesign it from the ground up.

 

[moglus]

you are right , it would be more appropiate to say that it would be "hidden" better . as it is just a waiting between turns getting longer and longer instead of the laggy feeling.

I would argue that it's the opposite IMO. For example, I used to play a decent amount of Warhammer Total War, back then I had a much worse PC, even at the start of a new W2TW campaign the end turn timer would take 30-45 seconds each turn. Now as a player who almost exclusively auto-resolves one-sided battles (which is most battles in TW with proper planning and strategy) that meant I spent a lot of time on the campaign map, and hit the end turn button a lot more frequently than players who like to play the vast majority of battles themselves, so my campaign progressed a bit faster than more tactical minded players. So the 30-45 sec turn calculation became 1 minute, then 1:20 min, then 1:45 min and finally about 2 mins each in the late games. Which is why I eventually stopped playing altogether, because the toilet break length "flow break" between every turn was so obvious it couldn't be ignored anymore.

In contrast the gradual slowdown of ticks in Stellaris as the game went on, and having more and more things to manage in real-time while that slowdown was happening made it much less noticeable and therefore bearable to me. Which is why on that old PC I managed to play about 120-ish hours of W1TW/W2TW combined, and a little over 1000 hours of Stellaris

 

[Taylor]

Stellaris is already turn-based. The turns are just very fast

 

[MathyM]

TB would increase the game time , esponentialy.

Linearly**

 

[Quinzal]

The real question is, what would constitute a turn? A day? A month? A year?

You can alter your fleets' movement multiple times per in-game day if needed, so if you wanted to keep that amount of control over the game, you'd be extending the length of a normal 2200-2500 game from a generous part of a day at Fastest to weeks. Real life weeks.

If you choose to make a turn's time greater than that, then you're losing that fine control that attracted a lot of people to the game in the first place.

Pretty much every single one of Stellaris' mechanics do not lend well to being restricted by turns. And if your suggestion is to change those mechanics to help them accommodate a turn system, then we wouldn't be playing Stellaris anymore. We'd be playing Civilization: Beyond Earth 2.

 

[MatthewP]

The real question is, what would constitute a turn? A day? A month? A year?

Pretty much every single one of Stellaris' mechanics do not lend well to being restricted by turns. And if your suggestion is to change those mechanics to help them accommodate a turn system, then we wouldn't be playing Stellaris anymore. We'd be playing Civilization: Beyond Earth 2.

Wait, which other mechanics? I think every pop mechanic is either already on a monthly cadence or easily could be. Diplomacy has no need to be real time. Anomalies and archeology + systems that use its framework could easily be monthly. Even battles typically take 1 or sometimes several months. Is fleet maneuvering really that central to the game, given it ceases the second you enter engagement range?

(of course realizing this is all a thought experiment since the game won’t be rewritten)

 

[pthooie]

Stellaris is already turn-based. The turns are just very fast

I came here to say this (it also applies to all other Paradox games). Each day is already a turn. The fact that the turns proceed automatically does not make it an RTS; it's only a QoL feature that exists because you don't need to do anything on most turns.

The main advantage of a turn based strategy game, assuming a fast enough machine, is that it's more respectful of the player's time. You take in the current situation, make your decisions and actions, and then advance to the next turn. You don't sit staring at a resource number slowly ticking up until you can do something, or a research project slowly filling up a completion bar, like I often do in Stellaris when there is nothing else happening. It's disrespectful of my limited gaming time, compared to a turn-based game.

In the current system, this could be achieved to some extent with message settings, if they existed. With message settings, you would be able to configure auto-pause for various events according to your needs, so you could play at max speed without having to worry about missing something. This would not require changing any of the actual game mechanics.

 

[Verx90]

The real question is, what would constitute a turn? A day? A month? A year?

You can alter your fleets' movement multiple times per in-game day if needed, so if you wanted to keep that amount of control over the game, you'd be extending the length of a normal 2200-2500 game from a generous part of a day at Fastest to weeks. Real life weeks.

If you choose to make a turn's time greater than that, then you're losing that fine control that attracted a lot of people to the game in the first place.

Pretty much every single one of Stellaris' mechanics do not lend well to being restricted by turns. And if your suggestion is to change those mechanics to help them accommodate a turn system, then we wouldn't be playing Stellaris anymore. We'd be playing Civilization: Beyond Earth 2.

decisely a month . the game is already quite heavely builded around it, or multiple of it.


but yea, the time increase is one of the BIG con of TB , but i can't see the ... " meccanics that don't bond well with turns." apart from having the decision to be made of " simultaneos TB , or 1 at the time , that will create some .... problems ( like being simply the last one to make a move and lose a chance for something took over by someone else that simply did it before ( or the AI making evrything asap )

 

[Verx90]

Stellaris is already turn-based. The turns are just very fast

well...

I came here to say this (it also applies to all other Paradox games). Each day is already a turn. The fact that the turns proceed automatically does not make it an RTS; it's only a QoL feature that exists because you don't need to do anything on most turns.

i can see this going into philosofical problems ... .



all in all, you can still totaly pause evry day \ and make decisions and movement that will require thousands of days to be made... considering in turn based game you usualy end at 120\300 turns ... i can see that having days as the "turn" would trasform stellaris into a hell of TB .

even month are quite slow .

if stellaris was made TB they would have probably opted for 6 month\1 year system . to reduce the number of turns for game.