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)
SIDEVIEW: TURNBASED OR ATB?
Posts
markhansavon
View playlists
Close
Arandomgamemaker
1629
author=markhansavon
Go for the action battle system! x_x jk.
ABS? Yes, why is it NOT in this topic? Are people forgetting the beauty of
Secret of Mana?
Cozzer
0
author=Arandomgamemaker
ABS? Yes, why is it NOT in this topic?
Well, because the topic is "turnbased or atb?". :P
Personally, I still haven't found a RM game that manages to create a ABS that isn't a chore to play.
author=Cozzerauthor=ArandomgamemakerWell, because the topic is "turnbased or atb?". :P
ABS? Yes, why is it NOT in this topic?
Personally, I still haven't found a RM game that manages to create a ABS that isn't a chore to play.
avarice
author=Skie Fortressauthor=Max McGeeNess didn't enter. That was me. 8V
Think MAYBE this inspired your Boss Battle Contest Entry A LITTLE, Ness?
: P
I thought this community was past confusing the both of us at this point. It's been a couple years now! Ah well...
orz
I feel like a shmuck, not gonna lie.
stardust
246
I have to say that I'm not really picky when it comes to battle systems - as long as I feel comfortable using it. But I've encountered some ATB systems that make the battle really seem rushed, where you don't have enough time to really get into all the mechanics and planning your strategy.
I love the ABS-like variation of some titles from the Tales of series, if it doesn't get into mindless button-smashing
I love the ABS-like variation of some titles from the Tales of series, if it doesn't get into mindless button-smashing
AppleNinjaX
100
Turn based baby! I hate ATB cause you have to be super fast with your actions and make a strategy on the spot...Turn based lets me look around whatever I got without worrying about getting killed in the process
JustRob
30
I guess it depends on how good your game is. Take Chrono Trigger for example, the ATB in that game rocks hard because you can time your attacks, and you need to think quickly. But to be honest, most bosses don't require a lot of thinking.
I've yet to see any boss in an RPG Maker game that required any real strategy.
I've yet to see any boss in an RPG Maker game that required any real strategy.
author=pyrodoom
I love ATB, because really, turn based, it's just you, select what your player does, then it goes onto playing, and sometimes it takes so much pp and takes so long, that it ends up being a button spamming time.
Sure those problems are in ATB too, but it looks way better, and it allows a strategy to form, where, instead of strategy based off of spells, attacks, and gaurding, ATB uses all that plus characters, EX.:
Turn-Based player:"Well, I have this fire spell, and we are up against an ice monster, I guess I'll use that and just attack normally with my ice mage!"
ATB player:"Well, my ice mage is going up first, and all the spells she has, plus anything she will do other than gaurding and row, will heal ice type beings...but I don't want her to gaurd because she has incredibly low defense, and has low hp, meaning evem while gaurding she'll die! Maybe I'll use her turn by pressing the row button and switching the characters out. then I can attack the monster with fire!"
Sure it doesn't give you enough time for strategy, but at least it will allow you to make a better strategy than a turn-based battle does with the turn-based restrictions!
I'm not sure I understand your meaning here; why would a turn based system not be able to have the same options you mentioned in your ATB example? An active time battle system just adds an element of real-time strategy to the game.
For example, Final Fantasy X has options very similar to what you mentioned, but it is entirely turn based.
doomed2die
180
The problem with ATB is how it's pulled off.
I don't intend to do anything with an ATB until I finish JAVA and then learn Ruby and then master the RGSS2. (or 3). THEN I will most likely MAKE one or completely edit one to my liking. Why? Because you have to be familiar with the coding of to make good systems for an ATB battle system. That's a major thing because with the innovation streak and after having played 100 RPGS that do the same basic pattern, I crave new systems so I'd have to do that.
SO, there's 1 fundamental issue: Coders =/= developers and very few projects have very devoted coders so everything that developers want to do won't get coded in the end.
The other fundamental issue is simply this: They're too slow! Why do I have to wait 3-8 seconds for my next character's turn? Isn't ATB ACTION time battle? The whole point was to break the monotony of a simple turn based combat system! Yet, it falls into the same traps of repeated patterns and simplicity. It also falls back to the pattern of slowness which, in our fast paced world, people are conditioned to hate.
So, it's just terribly designed. A well done ATB forces a player to react to individual situations and micromanage each individual character before quickly moving on to the next. Not choosing 1 action and waiting for the next. That's exactly what makes me reluctant to play RM2K3 games.
The potential merits are, paradoxically, the polar opposites of their issues.
The potentials for codes in an ATB spawn a much larger variety. I could have cast times for my spells that transcend simple turn systems (wait 3 seconds, BOOM). I can delay before powerful attacks or slow down my opponent. I can steal my opponent's time and I can have cooldowns or limits. I can have a time threshold to complete requirements. Or take down a boss's armor for a limited amount of time to damage him within the threshold. The availability of a new, complex, and versatile resource (time) is what makes ATB's so potentially awesome.
The other great potential merit is what I noted earlier. In ATB's the games should be very fast paced (I can imagine a few exceptions but let's generalize for simplicity's sake instead of looking at every possible exception). It can force a player to micromanage one of his heroes, move on, micromanage the next, and move on. This allows a player to be on his or her toes for an entire fight and have a legitimately fast paced battle. Also, they have to account for the speed differences between their heroes now. Maybe that cleric decked out in plate mail isn't such a good idea now...
ATB's (in a fast paced environment) have to utilize the flexible element of time in their battles. Both the player's perception of time (their time management in managing their individual heroes) to the actual resource of measured time (cast times for example). The potential is massive but the potential for failure is... Calamitous. Simply put.
I don't intend to do anything with an ATB until I finish JAVA and then learn Ruby and then master the RGSS2. (or 3). THEN I will most likely MAKE one or completely edit one to my liking. Why? Because you have to be familiar with the coding of to make good systems for an ATB battle system. That's a major thing because with the innovation streak and after having played 100 RPGS that do the same basic pattern, I crave new systems so I'd have to do that.
SO, there's 1 fundamental issue: Coders =/= developers and very few projects have very devoted coders so everything that developers want to do won't get coded in the end.
The other fundamental issue is simply this: They're too slow! Why do I have to wait 3-8 seconds for my next character's turn? Isn't ATB ACTION time battle? The whole point was to break the monotony of a simple turn based combat system! Yet, it falls into the same traps of repeated patterns and simplicity. It also falls back to the pattern of slowness which, in our fast paced world, people are conditioned to hate.
So, it's just terribly designed. A well done ATB forces a player to react to individual situations and micromanage each individual character before quickly moving on to the next. Not choosing 1 action and waiting for the next. That's exactly what makes me reluctant to play RM2K3 games.
The potential merits are, paradoxically, the polar opposites of their issues.
The potentials for codes in an ATB spawn a much larger variety. I could have cast times for my spells that transcend simple turn systems (wait 3 seconds, BOOM). I can delay before powerful attacks or slow down my opponent. I can steal my opponent's time and I can have cooldowns or limits. I can have a time threshold to complete requirements. Or take down a boss's armor for a limited amount of time to damage him within the threshold. The availability of a new, complex, and versatile resource (time) is what makes ATB's so potentially awesome.
The other great potential merit is what I noted earlier. In ATB's the games should be very fast paced (I can imagine a few exceptions but let's generalize for simplicity's sake instead of looking at every possible exception). It can force a player to micromanage one of his heroes, move on, micromanage the next, and move on. This allows a player to be on his or her toes for an entire fight and have a legitimately fast paced battle. Also, they have to account for the speed differences between their heroes now. Maybe that cleric decked out in plate mail isn't such a good idea now...
ATB's (in a fast paced environment) have to utilize the flexible element of time in their battles. Both the player's perception of time (their time management in managing their individual heroes) to the actual resource of measured time (cast times for example). The potential is massive but the potential for failure is... Calamitous. Simply put.
I defintly agree that ATB can be limiting but if it's done right it could lend that little extra bit of anxiety during a boss battle and make that section of the game that much better. Finding that balance between "so fast that the player doesn't have a chance" to "fast enough to pucker my butthole" is hard to find.
