I created an account just to reply to this forum post.
I absolutely agree with Staaa's Message above.
I suggest more brainstorm on this before we completely eliminate the initiative based turns.
Being a fervent FFTA2 player, still playing to this day, i believe team-based tactical games (in the likes of Fire emblems) don't have the same thrill and strategic thinking as the initiative based games.
I am also looking for a similar gameplay sentiment or experience as the original FFT games. I liked the previews so far and have been eager to play the full version. However, this does indeed slow my intentions of purchasing this game. Other backers and players waiting for a game in this category have longed for something similar to FFT and have yet been pleased with a proper game.
I however feel you, from a developement perspective, that it might be challenging to implement one or the other: either option and You will probably displease someone out there that prepurchased the game.
Here's however a suggestion that might please both sides..
Include both options.
It sounds weird but...
I would see this as an opportunity to add a twist on the difficulty or playstyle if the user can choose one or the other. You already workes on both systems, so keeping both could be something very appealing from a business side:
I believe you could grab most of the tactical lovers in the market if you include both: a way to use a stat to determine your turn order, or use that stat for something else during team battles.
As a quick example of what i mean, in team battles, there could be escape prevention mechanism (like in FFTA?), when a unit tries to go away from a unit in an adjacent tile, there is a % chance of failure that increase if the adjacent unit has more of that stat). If you fail, it ends the turn of that unit.
where as in initiative battles, you dont have such mechanic but the same stat value is used instead for initiative/turn order.
The game strategy change drastically, but the story/effects could easily stay the same.
I leave it to your imagination to use whatever mechanic is necessary to balance both playstyles as you see fit, but now that the cat is out, you cant abandon one or the other now. I think this is one of the best solutions.
I would go as far as accept that one of the playstyle/difficulty comes in a future free patch (3 months later for example). But announcing it prior to release would at least bring back the heat of the previously most excited players.
I would love to see LittleOrbit revert on that decision after reading this feedback.
Response to September 2021 Kickstarter Update
in Feedback & Suggestions
Posted
Hi,
I created an account just to reply to this forum post.
I absolutely agree with Staaa's Message above.
I suggest more brainstorm on this before we completely eliminate the initiative based turns.
Being a fervent FFTA2 player, still playing to this day, i believe team-based tactical games (in the likes of Fire emblems) don't have the same thrill and strategic thinking as the initiative based games.
I am also looking for a similar gameplay sentiment or experience as the original FFT games. I liked the previews so far and have been eager to play the full version. However, this does indeed slow my intentions of purchasing this game. Other backers and players waiting for a game in this category have longed for something similar to FFT and have yet been pleased with a proper game.
I however feel you, from a developement perspective, that it might be challenging to implement one or the other: either option and You will probably displease someone out there that prepurchased the game.
Here's however a suggestion that might please both sides..
Include both options.
It sounds weird but...
I would see this as an opportunity to add a twist on the difficulty or playstyle if the user can choose one or the other. You already workes on both systems, so keeping both could be something very appealing from a business side:
I believe you could grab most of the tactical lovers in the market if you include both: a way to use a stat to determine your turn order, or use that stat for something else during team battles.
As a quick example of what i mean, in team battles, there could be escape prevention mechanism (like in FFTA?), when a unit tries to go away from a unit in an adjacent tile, there is a % chance of failure that increase if the adjacent unit has more of that stat). If you fail, it ends the turn of that unit.
where as in initiative battles, you dont have such mechanic but the same stat value is used instead for initiative/turn order.
The game strategy change drastically, but the story/effects could easily stay the same.
I leave it to your imagination to use whatever mechanic is necessary to balance both playstyles as you see fit, but now that the cat is out, you cant abandon one or the other now. I think this is one of the best solutions.
I would go as far as accept that one of the playstyle/difficulty comes in a future free patch (3 months later for example). But announcing it prior to release would at least bring back the heat of the previously most excited players.
I would love to see LittleOrbit revert on that decision after reading this feedback.
Thank you
-Guillaume
Canada