07/07/02
RTS vs TBS
  
    So many people seem to advocate Turn Based Strategy based on the idea that Chess 
is TBS and Chess is and old game. Also because it is an old game it is automatically 
hailed as being good by default, by these same people. Myself, I'm not really one for 
Chess. Or TBS for that matter. You see the real world, by which I mean the world we 
live and exist in, does not work in turns. It works in "real time". In the middle of 
a battlefield you don't see the soldiers all moving on their respective turns based 
on what their speed stat is. They move at once. You can have two or three or a hundred 
guys all attacking one guy at once in the real world. It's not, one guy swings then 
stops as the opponent walks away from him.
  
    This brings us the point of RTS (Real Time Strategy) being superior in every aspect 
to TBS (Turn Bull Shit). In case you are not familiar with these two concepts in the 
world of computer gaming, perhaps a few examples are in order. RTS games include games 
like StarCraft, Command and Conquer, and WarCraft. You can select a dozen or more units 
at once and tell them all to attack at once. This sort of game has many practical 
applications like hit and run, or ambushing. Also it better simulates a real battle 
where you don't have the leisure of thinking and planning every move for ten minutes. 
If a swarm of Zerglings (MY swarm, for example) is storming down on you, you will 
have to react accordingly and quickly or your base will be totally torn to shreds. 
If you happen to choose the correct action in thi example, your base will however 
still be torn to shreds because NO ONE CAN DEFEAT MY FUCKING ZERGLING BROOD.
  
    In the other corner we have TBS, which includes games like, Chess, Final Fantasy 
Craptics, and Advanced Wars. I use these examples because they actually represent 
some level of variation in the TBS formula. Chess always alternates between players. 
You move a pawn, he moves a pawn, you move a knight, he moves his rook, etc. It's 
always your turn, his turn. FFT represents a pretty random set up where you may move 
3 or 4 people, then it may be his turn to move 1 or more people, based on stat levels. 
Advanced Wars represents "Mass TBS". That is, you move all your units and do all your 
actions on your turn. Then he uses his points, and does all his actions in one turn.
  
    Anyway, like I have mentioned previously, RTS is much closer to a real world 
situation. I suppose Turn based is a bit closer for mass scale war simulation, but 
RTS is much better suited the more personal we get with the units. If you are 
controlling a squad of individuals (FFT), there is no reason that half of them should 
be standing around watching while one of their ranks gets slaughtered by Imps leading 
you to have to replay and restart OVER AND PVER till you hate the game and everything 
about it with a passion. It's very difficult to execute any strategy in TBS since not 
only do you have to guess at the infinite number of solutions you opponent may decide 
to implement you your trap but your opponent will have all the leisure time he needs 
to notice and realize the trap is there instead of acting on instinct and falling for 
it hook line and sinker.