Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
HOW DO YOU DESIGN YOUR BATTLE SYSTEM?
Posts
Pages:
1
:origin()/pre10/dff2/th/pre/i/2015/267/4/2/persona_5_mc_fanart__by_tri11-d9arw3g.jpg)
Shadowsong
View playlists
CloseThe last post I made about character skill sets seemed to be pretty popular so I thought I'd make another post along the same lines.
The question this time around is how do you design your battle system? While designing my game I looked a lot at the SMT series of games. I liked the focus on elements and the press turn system I think it's called from Nocturne. I also drew some elements from WoW when it came to designing boss fights and encounters.
So I'm curious, what do you do when designing your battle systems?
The question this time around is how do you design your battle system? While designing my game I looked a lot at the SMT series of games. I liked the focus on elements and the press turn system I think it's called from Nocturne. I also drew some elements from WoW when it came to designing boss fights and encounters.
So I'm curious, what do you do when designing your battle systems?
BlackWolf1992
234
I tend to think about how I want my battles to play out, 99.9% of the time I go with a sidebattle view because I just like it the most. I then think about how I want the system to play out be it turn based or Active Time Battle. Really, I use to hate ATB systems as I tend to be really slow in my thinking. Now, I like them but only if I know the game somewhat well.
After I know what I want there I tend to think more in roles and classes. Warrior (tank), Mage (Magic user), Thief (DPS), etc.
After I know what I want there I tend to think more in roles and classes. Warrior (tank), Mage (Magic user), Thief (DPS), etc.
One of the most important things, is to make sure that it's fun or engaging in some way. Testing it out, so you can see whether or not the player will become bored after engaging this game-within-a-game 20-30 times.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
I'm not sure how to answer this question in less than 100 pages.
There are a lot of elements I like from a lot of different games, but I guess one of the more important things is figuring out which ones will work together well? Mostly that's a matter of picking two systems that I have a hunch might play well together, and then trying to find a game that used two similar systems, and then analyzing how they interacted.
For example, how would World of Warcraft style skill rotations interact with JRPG style elemental weaknesses? Will it add more variety to the player's rotation depending on the situation, or will it just feel like 80% of your skills are disabled all the time? How would that interaction be changed if the player could change their party, or equip and unequip specific skills? I can find games that do each of these things, but it takes some research to find a game that combines them all. And sometimes even after playing a game, it takes some thought to figure out which of the game's problems were caused by this combination of systems, exactly how they caused the problems, and why the game didn't fix those problems (usually because some it would cause other worse problem).
These are the sorts of things I think about when playing games, though. I don't start making a game and then start researching ideas like this. I have them swirling around in my head all the time, and when enough of them come together, I start trying to put them into a game. Sometimes once I start, I realize that there are pieces missing to the puzzle in my head, and the game falls apart. Sometimes it turns into a game.
There are a lot of elements I like from a lot of different games, but I guess one of the more important things is figuring out which ones will work together well? Mostly that's a matter of picking two systems that I have a hunch might play well together, and then trying to find a game that used two similar systems, and then analyzing how they interacted.
For example, how would World of Warcraft style skill rotations interact with JRPG style elemental weaknesses? Will it add more variety to the player's rotation depending on the situation, or will it just feel like 80% of your skills are disabled all the time? How would that interaction be changed if the player could change their party, or equip and unequip specific skills? I can find games that do each of these things, but it takes some research to find a game that combines them all. And sometimes even after playing a game, it takes some thought to figure out which of the game's problems were caused by this combination of systems, exactly how they caused the problems, and why the game didn't fix those problems (usually because some it would cause other worse problem).
These are the sorts of things I think about when playing games, though. I don't start making a game and then start researching ideas like this. I have them swirling around in my head all the time, and when enough of them come together, I start trying to put them into a game. Sometimes once I start, I realize that there are pieces missing to the puzzle in my head, and the game falls apart. Sometimes it turns into a game.
Gredge109
4151
I'll come up with a core mechanic or theme of how I want battles to operate. In one game, I designed the abilities to basically be parts to a puzzle that the player had to figure out. In another game, which was a boss rush, I designed the boss abilities first, then designed the character's skills to give them a suitable toolset, as well as to diversify their personalities a bit.
In another, I designed a system around 1v1 duels, where the player had to use skills to swing things into their advantage while pecking away at the enemy's health, and balancing their offensive and defensive skills to try and get a hit in, while mitigating the enemy's hit. This last game never got finished (because the rest of the game just kinda' fell apart), but the battle system was probably my favorite I've made. I'll probably bring it back into another game, later on.
Another game I'm working on, focuses on a duo, one who is primarily your heavy hitter, and the other who is your support specialist. I've discovered its actually a lot of fun to design a battle system around two player characters.
In an upcoming game, I'm keeping it rather simple. One character is primarily an attacker who focuses on finding gear to make their basic attack hit harder and harder, while providing a little extra support for the rest of the party. Another member is primarily a caster, with a large skill pool to supplement it, as they'll want to cast skills frequently. Another one has no skills, and is basically a designated item user. They're intentionally not all balanced, but that's not a problem if the encounters are balanced.
In another, I designed a system around 1v1 duels, where the player had to use skills to swing things into their advantage while pecking away at the enemy's health, and balancing their offensive and defensive skills to try and get a hit in, while mitigating the enemy's hit. This last game never got finished (because the rest of the game just kinda' fell apart), but the battle system was probably my favorite I've made. I'll probably bring it back into another game, later on.
Another game I'm working on, focuses on a duo, one who is primarily your heavy hitter, and the other who is your support specialist. I've discovered its actually a lot of fun to design a battle system around two player characters.
In an upcoming game, I'm keeping it rather simple. One character is primarily an attacker who focuses on finding gear to make their basic attack hit harder and harder, while providing a little extra support for the rest of the party. Another member is primarily a caster, with a large skill pool to supplement it, as they'll want to cast skills frequently. Another one has no skills, and is basically a designated item user. They're intentionally not all balanced, but that's not a problem if the encounters are balanced.
Aegix_Drakan
6037
I always focus on "what creates a good combat puzzle?"
I try to make my characters all have skills that will be useful in several situations, and that often work well together.
It really is that simple for me.
For individual games I might try to distribute responsibilities among the party (Illusions of Loyalty divided the healing and lockdown skills across several members, whereas The End divided tanking among several characters), in others I try to make each character feel unique in some way (In Mayhem Maiden, each character has a specific role like Mage-DPS-Tank-Flex, but each one has their own unique mechanics like combos or automatic turrets etc).
I find this focus on making all skills useful in some situations goes a long way towards keeping combat fun, as there's rarely any "magic bullets" to spam, and winning more often comes down to how well you understand the characters rather than raw stats.
I try to make my characters all have skills that will be useful in several situations, and that often work well together.
It really is that simple for me.
For individual games I might try to distribute responsibilities among the party (Illusions of Loyalty divided the healing and lockdown skills across several members, whereas The End divided tanking among several characters), in others I try to make each character feel unique in some way (In Mayhem Maiden, each character has a specific role like Mage-DPS-Tank-Flex, but each one has their own unique mechanics like combos or automatic turrets etc).
I find this focus on making all skills useful in some situations goes a long way towards keeping combat fun, as there's rarely any "magic bullets" to spam, and winning more often comes down to how well you understand the characters rather than raw stats.
Jakoo56
91
I spend way too much time on the battle systems. But i make sure that every battle is fun and not tedious.
For battles in general, I like making battles dangerous to keep the player awake at all time. If the player is not carefull he's gonna get crushed in 3 turns. I do that to make sure the player is playing and not watching. Of course in rpgs if you overfarm then it all becomes easy but that's the player's choice. I'm super mean with bosses, if you're not prepared you're gonna have a bad time. But once you beat it you get that adrenaline rush which is the best part about beating a boss.
For characters i make them all unique. I want people to think of a character and not of his class. To me, the battle is one of the most important part of a character's personality. If you have a kind and shy girl slashing waves of enemies like a brute it doesn't make sense. I give each character a speciality that reflect it's personality so that they don't feel like "Just another healer" or "Just another sword user".
I also like to splash in some random elements like a spell that has random effects or 1/2 chance to hit a spell BUT it hits twice as hard. Stuff like that so that every playtrough is different.
For battles in general, I like making battles dangerous to keep the player awake at all time. If the player is not carefull he's gonna get crushed in 3 turns. I do that to make sure the player is playing and not watching. Of course in rpgs if you overfarm then it all becomes easy but that's the player's choice. I'm super mean with bosses, if you're not prepared you're gonna have a bad time. But once you beat it you get that adrenaline rush which is the best part about beating a boss.
For characters i make them all unique. I want people to think of a character and not of his class. To me, the battle is one of the most important part of a character's personality. If you have a kind and shy girl slashing waves of enemies like a brute it doesn't make sense. I give each character a speciality that reflect it's personality so that they don't feel like "Just another healer" or "Just another sword user".
I also like to splash in some random elements like a spell that has random effects or 1/2 chance to hit a spell BUT it hits twice as hard. Stuff like that so that every playtrough is different.
Rhuan
110
I'm currently in the process of designing a battle system - and it will probably be awful at least at first...
I've considered the following points:
1. What's the concept for the game -> what sort of combat system would work
2. What games have I played with that kind of system -> what would be a good starting point
3. What did I like (and what did I not like) about the systems I've played also where do they and don't they fit with the concept
4. What's possible
My current draft is as follows:
1. concept for game will involve a small army of individually overpowered soldiers fighting increasingly larger armies
-> I want a way to have numbers be significant -> not standard party vs party combat
-> I want to have individuals and a level-ing system
-> this is sounding like a strategic RPG/turn based strategy
2. Fire Emblem jumps out immediately.
3. Fire Emblem -> I liked everything other than the random numbers. How can I fix random numbers -> Xenoblade style QTEs or Shadow hearts style?
Fire Emblem doesn't show the overpowered-ness of units in the way I'd like - it is purely based on higher numbers I want a mechanical difference -> bring in some kind of AP system (think Fallout 1) so the more powerful units can take extra actions in a turn?
4. I should be able to do all the above things so no issues here.
-> Let's make it.... (still just scratching the surface here but hey I know the path)
I've considered the following points:
1. What's the concept for the game -> what sort of combat system would work
2. What games have I played with that kind of system -> what would be a good starting point
3. What did I like (and what did I not like) about the systems I've played also where do they and don't they fit with the concept
4. What's possible
My current draft is as follows:
1. concept for game will involve a small army of individually overpowered soldiers fighting increasingly larger armies
-> I want a way to have numbers be significant -> not standard party vs party combat
-> I want to have individuals and a level-ing system
-> this is sounding like a strategic RPG/turn based strategy
2. Fire Emblem jumps out immediately.
3. Fire Emblem -> I liked everything other than the random numbers. How can I fix random numbers -> Xenoblade style QTEs or Shadow hearts style?
Fire Emblem doesn't show the overpowered-ness of units in the way I'd like - it is purely based on higher numbers I want a mechanical difference -> bring in some kind of AP system (think Fallout 1) so the more powerful units can take extra actions in a turn?
4. I should be able to do all the above things so no issues here.
-> Let's make it.... (still just scratching the surface here but hey I know the path)
Milennin
2060
I suppose, the most important thing for me when making the battle system in my games is having some sort of MP management system. I hate potions, they're boring to me. I want my characters to be able to take care of themselves without needing potions to cast spells. And so, I like having all sorts of things help regenerate MP throughout battle, so players can plan turns ahead and formulate strategies around spending and regaining their MP.
Secondly, I abolish the elemental weakness system and make every type of skill work equally on every enemy. I don't want my fire guy's skills to feel useless just because we are in a fire dungeon, up against a fire boss.
I want character skills to be effective in a lot of different situations, usually through giving them secondary effects or just making it so their conditions are met frequently in encounters. This also helps keeping a character's skill list relatively small without making them feel boring to play.
Other things I like is having characters that can do more than just one thing. Like, I don't want my healer to be able to just heal. A tank should be able to do more than just absorb damage. Each character should have more than one way to play them effectively.
I always have a very minimal focus on the use on items. At the most, I'll have items that can revive a downed character or a few simple restoration items as a safety net for players who aren't doing well. Even then, I like to cap my items (max. 5 of each), so players can't just hoard a bunch of them.
Secondly, I abolish the elemental weakness system and make every type of skill work equally on every enemy. I don't want my fire guy's skills to feel useless just because we are in a fire dungeon, up against a fire boss.
I want character skills to be effective in a lot of different situations, usually through giving them secondary effects or just making it so their conditions are met frequently in encounters. This also helps keeping a character's skill list relatively small without making them feel boring to play.
Other things I like is having characters that can do more than just one thing. Like, I don't want my healer to be able to just heal. A tank should be able to do more than just absorb damage. Each character should have more than one way to play them effectively.
I always have a very minimal focus on the use on items. At the most, I'll have items that can revive a downed character or a few simple restoration items as a safety net for players who aren't doing well. Even then, I like to cap my items (max. 5 of each), so players can't just hoard a bunch of them.
RyaReisender
200
Designing a battle system for me really isn't more than having a core idea of how it should work.
Then I just design and balance everything around that.
The core rules should be simple and the fun comes with the details.
A good example is Chrono Trigger. The design is basically just "Let's use the ATB system but add a combo feature to it" and that's all there is to it. The strategical interesting aspects come with the good monster design like a monster that switches between physical and magical immunity. Details like this I usually create during development rather than in the original design.
Then I just design and balance everything around that.
The core rules should be simple and the fun comes with the details.
A good example is Chrono Trigger. The design is basically just "Let's use the ATB system but add a combo feature to it" and that's all there is to it. The strategical interesting aspects come with the good monster design like a monster that switches between physical and magical immunity. Details like this I usually create during development rather than in the original design.
Pages:
1
