BIGGGGG feature needed in Tactical Battles!

Good idea! Second that!

All those games had wait, because they were one side moves - the other side moves.

With a continous ini system one needs to decide, what the effect on ini would be.

E.g. unit order unit 1 - enemy 1 - enemy 2 - unit 2 - enemy 3 - unit 3 - unit 1 - enemy 1 - enemy 2 - unit 2 - enemy 3 - unit 3

What should the effect of wait be?

How should the list look afterwards?

I've played other games with a similar initiative system, and when you waited instead of moved, the unit's next move would still be down the list, but not as far as it would have been if it hadn't waited.

So, using carn's example unit order, if unit 1 waited, it's next turn might appear between unit 2 and enemy 3, and it's subsequent turns would be moved back as appropriate.  

You might think of Initiative as a value that a unit gains each turn (turns being one unit makes a move).  The unit with the highest amount of that value goes, and when they do, that value is then reset to 0 and it has to accrue again.  This makes units with higher Initiative go sooner and more often than units with a lower Initiative, which is how the game works.  So, thinking of the system like this, when a unit waits, instead of losing all of that value, it might only lose half, so while other units get to go ahead of it, its next turn is earlier than it would have been had it moved.

You remember which game it was?

HOMM V maybe. If it is coded such way, then the change in initiative order would have to show prior selecting it, otherwise it would be too much guessing, as the actual ini values are not shown.

The tactical battles lack many more features that are defacto standards in modern games with similar encounters, namely:

- adjacency bonuses/penalties (in Fantasy general, archers proficed automatic cover to engaged adjacent melee units)

- unit facing + flanking

- meaningful use of terrain

- actual walls in city combat

- ai capable of understanding the combat rules (i.e. not casting web on ranged troops, etc.)

Actually the Dungeons and Dragons RPG has always had such a combat system.

All Players and NPC roll for initiative. A "Round" proceeds through the initiative list form highest to lowest (dex, feats and spells can boost your initiative).

If you're a Rogue and gain a flanking bonus, it's often best for the high initiative Rogue to delay his action unit after the slow Fighter has taken his turn and hit a target. The rogue then moves behind the same NPC and gains flanking bonus and sneak attack.

This DnD system has been around for almost 40 years and is well play-tested. I'm amazed how so many gaming companies keep screwing up simple things.

As an aside if you like tactical turn based combat, the game Temple of Elemental Evil (based on DnD 3.5) is very good as long as you apply the Circle of 8 Mod pack.

FE initiative differs from DnD initiative, there are no rounds. The time is continous with each unit having to wait before it can act for a time dependant on its initiative. For example a ini 10 vs a ini 30 unit, the ini 30 unit gains 3 actions for every 1 of the ini 10 unit.

With a round based system wait is easy, with a continous it at least requires some thought.

@kamamura

Your suggestion 5 is in contradiction with 1 to 4, AIs are dumb, the more complex the tactical rules, the more the AI is a failure at using them. Furthermore, i doubt that these features would improve game experience, especially i would suspect unit facing be a bad idea.

lol yeah I see that ^ one a lot on my archery champion in the back. Is kind of weird and wasteful when I have two roaring cave bears bearing down on the webbing unit.

Yeah I wish the game had that as well instead of the archer unit standing outside of the gate to get pulverized.

I agree with you on the last one, but I disagree that the rest should be part of FE. You could also note that Disciples I/II has combat that is even simpler than FE. I think FE found the sweet spot for combat complexity for a fantasy-based 4X game.

Don't get me wrong; I've played war games, both board and computer, and I have enjoyed more complex combat systems. However, for this game where you have so many combats and combat is just part of a much bigger picture, I want a system that is fun, quick, and not too complicated.

How exactly would you implement this in FE's initiative-based system?

Either you take your turn when it comes up or you lose it.

Darxim, a few posts up, covers this pretty well.

My only fear is that it would be used to do "gamey" things, like wait for the AI to move its units closer so that you can get a first strike.  Which is not really the point. 

In my mind a legit use for this would be for example when you have two units charging complimentary spells: one to lower spell resistance, and one to do spell damage.  Now through a fluke of initiative, the spell that does damage is ready first... it would be nice to say "wait" and let the resistance spell go first.

Waiting would still leave you vulnerable to attack (no defense bonus), and give your opponent more time to counter-spell or stun you. I think, properly implemented, it would be a very good mechanism.

Hmmm

FE has an interesting system. I believe all units gain initiative at the rate listed into a pool, and the first unit that is >= 100 takes its turn. Upon taking the turn, 100 initiative is subtracted from that units initiative pool. This seems to eb the way things work after I looked at the Flurry ability from the Master's Affliction mod. The MA Flurry ability gives a +100 initiative self buff that lasts for 4 turns, causing the unit to fill its initiative pool instantly after acting three times in a row.

This creates a system similar to one you might see in an active time battle system rpg, such as Chrono Trigger, but with a tactical grid. Using Chrono Trigger as an example, one could wait in real time until every member was ready to perform dual/triple techs, or just use abilities in a different order than the characters' speeds.

So what we need is a command that lets the unit wait a certain amount of initiative, since initiative is basically time for all intents and purposes. The real question here is, should the waiting unit still gain initiative while waiting? If it were to continue gaining initiative, you could let a unit store up turns by waiting until the unit gained 200, 300, 400 initiative, then unleash those actions all at once. This would invalidate casting times. On the other hand you could just let the unit sit at 100 initiative while another unit accumulates initiative to 100. After the second unit takes its turn, have the waiting unit's turn come up again. I'm in favor of that more since letting a unit wait incurs a time cost, and prevents the loophole explained above.

To be honest, I would really love for another expansion to FE that adds a height factor to tactical maps, as well as some more mechanics like FF Tactics, where init facing matters. Basically just pull ideas from FF Tactics, since that game's tactical combat is superior to this one. Not that that's a bad thing since some people like it that way. I'd just like my games of FE to have a deeper tactical game, and I think making it deeper will allow the rpg side of things to become deeper, and by extension, the empire building and rest of the game.

Also, initiative should really be renamed to speed, to avoid the D&D confusion some players have brought up.

If you want to see tactical combat done right, including supply lines, entrenchment, terrain, specialist attachments to batallions, etc, play a game called Unity of Command. I was very pleasantly surprised - the system is simple at core, but the armies engage as armies, not as detached groups of units where positioning and frontlines do not matter.