I'm preparing for a new game, but I'm having trouble choosing accessibility over strategic decisions for it. So I researched some combat systems for my parameters, wondering which will fit what I want. If any can add to this or give me some advice, I would love it, as there's games I've never studied that some of you might have.

Combat Ideas

These ideas are formed on the basis that the player will be controlling multiple characters.

1. A turn based game ala Final Fantasy 10, where there is a visible ordered list of who goes next, along with actions either making turns come sooner or later along the queue, sometimes allowing one to go more than once before an enemy. This is due to cooldown times on actions and speed considerations of each character. Optional is allowing characters to switch out in battle with another character who is on the bench.

2. Baldur’s Gate kind of game, where it’s real time, with the characters in the party able to move around the screen in formation and perform their actions when battle occurs. The player can select a character with the mouse, and then click on their target to attack them physically with the equipped weapon. Or they can have them perform another action, such as using a skill, an item, or even moving them to a position on the screen. The player can also pause the game and allow the player to choose the actions of each of their characters to have them perform when the game is unpaused. Allows a hybrid between real and turn based combat.

3. A beat em’ up style rpg in similar vein to the Mana series (Secret of Mana, Seiken Dentetsu, Legend of Mana) and even the recent Dragon Crown by Vanillaware. This will allow a more action-packed battle system, in addition to supporting more multiplayer play. Players will have limited options to use as little buttons as possible, but the player can freely change out abilities and equipment outside of battle to prepare for future battles. Or, even allow changing of equipment or skillsets in battle with the cost of character stopping and going into a preparation charging state.

4. An ATB system styled after Final Fantasy 10-2. Players and enemies can act at the same time once their time bars are filled and actions are taken, allowing for tactics such as stopping an enemy before it reaches a person through interrupting with player actions or chaining attacks together for bonus damage. Cooldowns and charge up times are also incorporated into this system, increasing strategic decisions. An optional feature is allowing characters to move to pseudo areas on the field (undefined close, mid range, far within the boundary of the battle area), allowing for things such as range, aggro, and distance-related tactics.

So I researched some combat systems for my parameters, wondering which will fit what I want.

which is... ?

IE what are you looking for?

So I researched some combat systems for my parameters, wondering which will fit what I want.

which is... ?

IE what are you looking for?

I have two, as I stated: accessibility and strategy. A spectrum that I'm going back and forth from one end to the other in an attempt to see which will be more fun for the majority.

I have two, as I stated: accessibility and strategy. A spectrum that I'm going back and forth from one end to the other in an attempt to see which will be more fun for the majority.

accessibility over strategy every time for maximum mass appeal. but such a choice is only necessary when they conflict in a mutually exclusive way.

i assume you want strategy, but not at the cost of accessibility.

probably the best approach with maximum appeal would be a system with lots of strategy, where the player could choose from perhaps three levels of complexity and control.

the novice level would be the simplest, with maximum accessibility, and minimum learning curve. the expert level would give full strategic control, at the cost of a more complex user interface and combat rule set with a higher learning curve.

they may even be designed so each is a direct super set of the other. so once you master the game in novice mode, you switch to veteran combat mode, and add some more buttons, rules, and combat options to use. then you can switch to expert mode and see the full strategic combat system.

have your cake and eat it too! ; )

This question is strange, you're basically comparing completely different things.

It would be like me saying "I've got an idea for a game set in space. Should I make it an FPS or a top-down strategy?" - it makes no sense, the fundamental underlining gameplay is missing from your idea thus you don't really have a game idea at all.

I have two, as I stated: accessibility and strategy. A spectrum that I'm going back and forth from one end to the other in an attempt to see which will be more fun for the majority.

accessibility over strategy every time for maximum mass appeal. but such a choice is only necessary when they conflict in a mutually exclusive way.

i assume you want strategy, but not at the cost of accessibility.

probably the best approach with maximum appeal would be a system with lots of strategy, where the player could choose from perhaps three levels of complexity and control.

the novice level would be the simplest, with maximum accessibility, and minimum learning curve. the expert level would give full strategic control, at the cost of a more complex user interface and combat rule set with a higher learning curve.

they may even be designed so each is a direct super set of the other. so once you master the game in novice mode, you switch to veteran combat mode, and add some more buttons, rules, and combat options to use. then you can switch to expert mode and see the full strategic combat system.

have your cake and eat it too! ; )

That is a very interesting way of looking at it. But that would involve also creating three entirely different balance parts of the game. Of course, this just means it becomes a difficulty level, which isn't a bad thing, so I will keep this kind of option in mind.

This question is strange, you're basically comparing completely different things.

It would be like me saying "I've got an idea for a game set in space. Should I make it an FPS or a top-down strategy?" - it makes no sense, the fundamental underlining gameplay is missing from your idea thus you don't really have a game idea at all.

I have a clear vision for my game. But I'm not close minded to just think in a matter of genres. That's a trap. I know what I want to pull off and the experience I want to make the player feel. And so that's my list based off what kind of gameplay I want to give them, gameplay mostly involved in combat that will essentially influence a lot of the other design in the long run, yes. No matter how you dress it, the game should still be the same on a macro level.

I hope that made sense.

So, the goal of your thread is to brain storm various mechanical elements before deciding which will work best for the general storyline, look, and feel of your game?

In that case you shouldn't forget the more 'hands off' options, where as the player you generally have less control over much of the party, but rather set goals for your agents to then carry out.

That is a very interesting way of looking at it. But that would involve also creating three entirely different balance parts of the game. Of course, this just means it becomes a difficulty level, which isn't a bad thing, so I will keep this kind of option in mind.

exactly. its the lack of a well balanced wide range of difficulty levels in more hard core games (like strategy intensive titles) that makes them "inaccessible" to more casual gamers. that combined with steep learning curves.

i've recently been re-playing red baron II. when released it was praised for its accessibility, despite being a full tilt WW1 fighter sim. And it was well deserved praise too. The user can adjust opponent difficulty level from 89% to 125%, and toggle unlimited fuel, unlimited ammo, and mid air collisions. they can also choose from 3 sets of cockpit instruments, from realistic to modern, and 2 or 3 flight models from easy to realistic (snap the wings off in a sharp turn!). the various settings adjust the "realism % score" which affects how many campaign points you get for completing a mission. so basically, the more realistic and difficult it is, the more experience points you earn.