General News - New Jagged Alliance Game

ChienAboyeur said:

Why do you make it a personal thing?
Feel free to see tactics where there is none. Keep in mind though that seeing tactics where there is none makes tactics existing only in your mind.

Click to expand...

Can say the same to you. And because this leads to nothing I will keep it at that.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

The "Real-time vs. Turn-based" discussion leads for me into only 1 solution :

There is almost exclusively Real-time combat left. Which represents a bias.

No-one gives those who want Turn-based combat what they'd like.
Which is also an bias : Not to do things.

Cynically speaking : The "Real-time combat crowd" has won. Congratulations.

Exceptions : Indies.
But do they really count in the "Grand Scale" ?

Click to expand...

Fortunately Turn Based just found it's way back in. Of course Wasteland 2 and Shadowrun Returns are "indie" somehow but already huge titles.
Also there is the Divinity Series which puts the focus on turn based combats now.
The "Dark Eye" is a big license, at least in Germany. And while with Drakensang they "tested" real time, the remake of the old game will have turn based combat, and also the new one will have turn based combat as well.
X-Com: After a odyssee of Real-Time Failures, with Xcom: EU they switched back to Turn based combat.
There is also Might and Magic with their newly announced game which will be turn based as well.
And now Jagged Alliance.

So I would consider that as grand comeback.
On my "games to get" list there are 18 turnbased strategy, tactics and RPG games scheduled for 2013 alone. These are great times for fans of turn based combat - and for 4X Strategy Games

Yeah turn based gaming has been making a huge comeback lately in both RPG and strategy titles. In the next few weeks alone there are at least 2 TBS titles that I'm looking forward to. It's definitely a good time to be a turn based fan.

Kordanor said:

Fortunately Turn Based just found it's way back in. Of course Wasteland 2 and Shadowrun Returns are "indie" somehow but already huge titles.
Also there is the Divinity Series which puts the focus on turn based combats now.
The "Dark Eye" is a big license, at least in Germany. And while with Drakensang they "tested" real time, the remake of the old game will have turn based combat, and also the new one will have turn based combat as well.
X-Com: After a odyssee of Real-Time Failures, with Xcom: EU they switched back to Turn based combat.
There is also Might and Magic with their newly announced game which will be turn based as well.
And now Jagged Alliance.

So I would consider that as grand comeback.
On my "games to get" list there are 18 turnbased strategy, tactics and RPG games scheduled for 2013 alone. These are great times for fans of turn based combat - and for 4X Strategy Games

Click to expand...

Kordanor said:

Can say the same to you. And because this leads to nothing I will keep it at that.

Click to expand...

Of course you can. The very same way somebody can see tactics when there is no tactics.

That is the base of magical thinking. Anyone can label things for what they are not. It does not change things so.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

The "Real-time vs. Turn-based" discussion leads for me into only 1 solution :

There is almost exclusively Real-time combat left. Which represents a bias.

No-one gives those who want Turn-based combat what they'd like.
Which is also an bias : Not to do things.

Cynically speaking : The "Real-time combat crowd" has won. Congratulations.

Exceptions : Indies.
But do they really count in the "Grand Scale" ?

Click to expand...

Real time is no guarantee of tactics. If it is about getting combat, well, maybe they won. If it is about getting tactics in combat, it is a totally different story.

I think on the contrary that the turn sequence "IgoYougo" might get a second wind because it is a tried and tested design and that players are very conservative in nature.
"YouGoIgo" cannot induce tactics in gaming. Real time might. Therefore, by going for a "UgoIgo" sequence, any developper expresses clearly that the game, even if labelled as tactical, has no tactics in it. Bringing tactics to gaming is demanding and will require the necessary resources allocations, which might be harder to find these days.
On the reverse, with a "UgoIgo" turn sequence, the recipe is known and comes with various advantages, one being not the least of removing the requirement of learning tactics to the AI.

"Real-Time" always means "fast play".

On a table top board, there is not such a thing like "fast play". Every round takes ages (depending on how many units are there and how many players are invovled).

In tzerms of "how long does a battle last ?" , Rea-time combat games are a "snack" compared to the immense time needed for tacticle turn-based battles.
Which can encompass even days or weeks - depending on the size of the battlefield, the number of units and the numbers of players included.

In the end, it's a battle between "quick thinking" and "slow thinking".

Of course, there's Speedchess, too. But not everyone wants to play that.

Tactics go with speed of execution. Tactics is time related. That is the way of tactics.

Apparently, one consequence of illegitimately labelling games for what they are not is to bring confusion in terms. Tactics never last weeks. Strategy, on the other side...

Beside, it is not even real time vs turn based games. Jagged Alliance 3: back to action is turn based. Baldur's gate 2 is turn based. The soon to be released Leviathan warships is turn based.

It is about sticking to the antiquated "ugoIgo" turn sequence over other solutions (including over kind of turn sequences)

"YouGoIgo" cannot induce tactics in gaming. Real time might. Therefore, by going for a "UgoIgo" sequence, any developper expresses clearly that the game, even if labelled as tactical, has no tactics in it.

Click to expand...

I am just quoting wikipedia here about military tactics:

Military tactics, the science and art of organizing a military force, are the techniques for using weapons or military units in combination for engaging and defeating an enemy in battle.[1] Changes in philosophy and technology over time have been reflected in changes to military tactics. In current military thought, tactics are the lowest of three planning levels. The highest tier of planning is the strategy, which is about how force is translated into political objectives, or more specifically how you bridge the means and ends of war together. An intermediate level, which converts strategy into tactics is the operational level that deals with formations of units. In common vernacular, "tactical" decisions are those made to achieve greatest immediate value and "strategic" decisions are those made to achieve the greatest overall value irrespective of immediate return.

Click to expand...

About tactical wargames

Tactical wargames are a type of wargame that models military conflict at a tactical level, i.e. units range from individual vehicles and squads to platoons or companies. These units are rated based on types and ranges of individual weaponry. The first tactical wargames were played as miniatures, extended to board games, and they are now also enjoyed as video games.

The games are designed so that a knowledge of military tactics will facilitate good gameplay. Tactical wargames offer more of a challenge to the designer, as fewer variables or characteristics inherent in the units being simulated are directly quantifiable. Modern commercial board wargaming avoided tactical subjects for many years, but since initial attempts at the subject appeared, it has remained a favourite topic among wargamers. Perhaps the most successful board wargaming system ever designed, Advanced Squad Leader, is set at the tactical level.

Click to expand...

There is no "realtime" or "turnbased" in the definition of tactics, neither is it exclusive as you want it to be. Tactics is the handling within a level of operation, a scale. And strategy is the handling within a bigger level/scale - the big picture.
But neither is limited to turn based or real time.
If I take Jagged Alliance 2 and Hearts of Iron 2: JA2 is the "tactics game" because of it's scale, doesn't matter if its realtime or turnbased. HoI2 doesn't become a tactics game because it's realtime. It plays on the strategy level and is a strategy game.

There is no definition of real time tactics or turn based tactics.

There is only tactics. That was the point made all along the thread. Nowhere I conveyed the idea that the use of a system guarantees the delivery of tactics.
The benchmark is clear: a system does not support the use of tactics, there is no tactics.

The turn based sequence "ugoIgo" simply does not support the use of tactics, there is no tactics.

And there is another interview about the new game at:
http://pockettactics.com/2013/04/18...on-the-jagged-alliance-flashback-kickstarter/

A very interesting/amusing snippet is:

But you can’t have real-time combat in a Jagged Alliance game. It was good that it got a lot of new players in, I’m not dissing those guys for doing it. They went with what was the safe route at the time. But after XCOM, they saw that the market was ready for turn-based.

Click to expand...