Why simultaneous turns?

[KayAU]

A couple of days ago, I started a new game of Humankind. I am happy to see the recent improvents to the game, but I was reminded of one thing which has annoyed me since the beginning: simultaneous turns. This is something I personally would have wanted an option to turn off, but I am curious as to what other players think about it. While I understand that it reduces turn times, I don't see any other advantages, and it seems to create a sense of urgency which I feel is somewhat at odds with the narrative focus of the game. While I am off reading flavour text, studying the map, or inspecting my cities, my units could be ambushed and I would get into a fight I didn't want. It also feel like it is just strange that reactions and being able to move units quickly should be part of a turn based strategy game. But perhaps there is some merit to this way of doing things which I am just not seeing?

 

[Siptah]

I think simultaneous turns more interesting and also fairer. If the player goes always first, as in civ, the player always has the advantage. Since the introduction of a cooldown on AI actions, I don‘t have many problems with simultaneous turns, and don‘t find them stressful. Sure, it is sometimes to my disadvantage, but sometimes also beneficial. That said, they need to reduce the attacker‘s advantage in battles, especially at sea and in the late game - then simultaneous turns would be even fairer.

As to turning them off, afaik that‘s almost impossible to implement.

 

[Pfeffersack]

I don't like them as well - and I also don't think they are particularly fair: They introduce a RTS element in a TBS game and the CPU has the advantage of being able to make moves everywhere on the map at the same time.

Sure, there is an advantage for the human player when consecutive are used and the AI goes last - but I would be even willing to leave the AI that "first position" (which means that they move first and might even win "races" where the participating reach the goal the same turn), if I just could get rid of that annoying interference of AIs doing stuff in my turn in my lands.

 

[KayAU]

Yeah, I would be fine with the AI going first. Or the order could be randomly drawn at the start of the game. I just want to do my turn in peace, without any real-time action taking place while I'm doing turn based strategy stuff.

 

[Revolutionist_8]

I absolutely hate it personally. It just feels really weird and odd. Turn-based strategy games should be like chess, you made a move, and now you have to bear the consequences. It compels thinking and judging situations before they happen, how they may or may not unfold, which is really fun and intriguing.

But this monstrosity is I don't even know... if I want to play RTS I'll play RTS.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I was reminded of one thing which has annoyed me since the beginning: simultaneous turns.

Wow - that's a deal breaker for me! 4X games are about careful thought and planning not trigger responses.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

The only way simultaneous turns make sense in a TBS is if they are planned simultaneous turns (like in the Diplomacy board game)

 

[Siptah]

I still don't understand the problem, but apparently it stressful for some people. If you want to, you can just let the AI play and it is the same as if you would be last every turn. Comparing it to an RTS is a clear hyperbole imho - it's not like the AI can overtake you or you can miss out on a lot of things because you play slow and take your time, it's still clearly a turn-based game that doesn't advance until you decide that the turn is finished. And except for the unit movement, your decision can also be reverted during a turn.

On the other hand, if a modern game manages to keep turn times short (< 20 sec, Humankind never takes longer than that for me) without simultaneous turns, it's welcome. But the last games I tried failed at this, making the late game unbearable. As someone who doesn't have that much time to play, I prefer to actually play for 50 minutes instead of 30 when I have an hour of playtime.

 

[Pfeffersack]

I still don't understand the problem, but apparently it stressful for some people. If you want to, you can just let the AI play and it is the same as if you would be last every turn.

Maybe the last patch has changed something about it...but the last time I played my trouble with this was that even after my turn was running for minutes the AI would still "insta-react" on my movement and forcing my units into ambushes...

 

[Siptah]

Maybe the last patch has changed something about it...but the last time I played my trouble with this was that even after my turn was running for minutes the AI would still "insta-react" on my movement and forcing my units into ambushes...

yes, this admittedly still happens when you move to a tile adjacent to them. Kinda (zone of control)^2.

 

[Revolutionist_8]

I still don't understand the problem, but apparently it stressful for some people. If you want to, you can just let the AI play and it is the same as if you would be last every turn. Comparing it to an RTS is a clear hyperbole imho - it's not like the AI can overtake you or you can miss out on a lot of things because you play slow and take your time, it's still clearly a turn-based game that doesn't advance until you decide that the turn is finished. And except for the unit movement, your decision can also be reverted during a turn.

On the other hand, if a modern game manages to keep turn times short (< 20 sec, Humankind never takes longer than that for me) without simultaneous turns, it's welcome. But the last games I tried failed at this, making the late game unbearable. As someone who doesn't have that much time to play, I prefer to actually play for 50 minutes instead of 30 when I have an hour of playtime.

Just one example: I pressed END TURN, so it's the AI's turn. I wait for 5-10 sec, so they do their thing while I'm observing. So okay, it's my turn now, right? I move one of my armies closer to the AI's border, where there are no visible enemy army. It's still my turn, but *PUFFF*, *le sudden AI army moves (so it wasn't there, it moved) closer to my army. Now my army has 0 movement points left, and I have to press the END TURN, so it's going to be the AI's turn again.

Another example: my scout is being attacked by an Independent People army. I retreat, no problem (off-topic: why my armies retreat sometimes the opposite direction 5-6 tiles, another time in a 45° -ish degree north only 1-2 tiles, in similar terrain... like wut...). Now, if that Independent People army is on hot-pursuit and is chasing my scout, if I press END TURN and wait, my scout gets attacked and killed.
BUT!
If I press END TURN and don't wait and instead click on my scout and move him in the opposite direction myself under 1-2 sec like an RTS pro, then there is a fairly high chance that my pursuer can't reach my scout and he will live.

The above scenarios happened to me multiple times over 60+-ish hours of gameplay and even with latest patch (I thought I had read something about Turn syncs or something, but I've just checked the patch notes and didn't find anything related).

Probably no need to explain why such scenarios are extremely frustrating and just plain annoying. I just don't understand why the devs went with this monstrosity...

 

[Siptah]

You do know that there is a button that immediately triggers all movement orders that you queued up once the new turn starts, right?

but yes, I agree that it can be annoying. It‘s the stressful/rts-like complaint that I can’t get my head around.

 

[Pfeffersack]

yes, this admittedly still happens when you move to a tile adjacent to them. Kinda (zone of control)^2.

Yeah, that is one case where this is prone to happen - but not the only as @Revolutionist_8 points out.

My hope was that this line in the patch notes...

AI: added a delay on AI movements when claiming a Territory, retreating and when the player attacks its units.

...meant something positive. But reading over it again, it does change nothing about the basic thing (AI acting in your turn) - you will likely only get a window of time where you can be faster.

 

[CoconutTank]

I remember bringing this up long ago, as far back as the edgar allen poe beta or whatever it was called, and also got push back from some folks here and on the games2gether forums. The push back seems to be much weaker now though.

If simultaneous turns was specifically for multi-player, I could see how that would work and would be welcome. For single-player sessions, simultaneous turns falls flat for me, and it doesn't speed up my sessions by any meaningful amount. I don't usually get ambushed by the CPU as much these days, but the most annoying part is when I try to move a unit to intercept or attack a fleeing unit, and the game seems to be unable to decide where that unit actually is, or if I'm actually allowed to intercept the unit.

 

[Atlas627]

You ever have to wait a few minutes for the AIs to go in lategame Civ? This prevents that.

Also, placing your units so they have some movement left in case the enemy moves later in the same turn is now a new tactic. It's just a different way to play.

 

[CoconutTank]

I don't really recall the AI taking that long to do their turns in late game Civ6. They certainly take up much less time than players do, if one is concerned about overall session length. In my experience for both games, city management is horrendously long starting from about midway through the game, and unit management can become horrendously long as soon as one researches organized warfare in HK. Neither game properly addresses the amount of time it takes to micro cities, and the unit micro is often more exacting in HK.

Edit: Back to the original subject, it's usually the rebel units that are the most belligerent and most likely to start unexpected fights in my experience, moreso than other civs' units. Rebels can pop up in many places and run around everywhere, and rebels from other civs can cross borders and attack one's units too, so anticipating rebels is a pain in the butt.

 

[KayAU]

I vaguely recall reading something about Civ 6 fully rendering AI unit movement even if they are hidden in the fog of war, which meant that it could significantly impact turn times if you didn't have quick movement enabled. Still, even if it would increase turn times, I would turn simultaneous turns off if I had the option.

Leaving my units with some movement points left so I can react to enemy movement may be a tactic, but this is really not the kind of gameplay I am looking for in my turn based strategy games. It still requires that I am paying attention to that unit, and that I am able to react quickly enough if something does happen. If my attention is on something else, inside or outside the game, the movement points will not necessarily help me.

Look, I'm not saying simultaneous turns makes Humankind an RTS game, but it is an RTS element, and I really don't think it fits in with the rest of the game. If I am playing an RTS, I will be intensely focused on the game, and trying to pay attention to everything that is going on. If I get ambushed, that is just part of the experience, and if I need to react to something outside the game, I will have to pause it. In a TBS game, however, I normally have the time to think about everything before acting, and I can focus on whatever I like, whether it is planning the layout of my cities, examining trade deals, moving units, or just looking at the terrain. The game is always paused, so if I am interrupted, I can just turn my attention away with no ill consequences. This is part of why I like TBS games so much. Again, I am not saying this one real-time element makes Humankind an RTS game, but I do find it annoying, and I think it detracts from the overall experience.

 

[Pfeffersack]

You ever have to wait a few minutes for the AIs to go in lategame Civ? This prevents that.

Also, placing your units so they have some movement left in case the enemy moves later in the same turn is now a new tactic. It's just a different way to play.

If dead turn times are the "real" reason - why doesn't the AI than does its things as soon as processing power allows in my turn? Instead they wait with (at least some of) their units, keep movement left themselves - and spend it depending on what I do. It feels a bit like chess with that one weird rule that I'm allowed to move all my pieces once in "my turn", but my opponent having the same right simultaneous. And that inevitably makes time/move order inside the turn a factor - in some cases it pays out to be first, in others to be last. And the AI has the "RTS advantage" here of being able to act the same time (or with a delay not measureable for the human player) on different parts of the map or with multiple stacks.

Yes, it is a different way to play, I get that some people enjoy it and no, that doesn't mean HK a RTS game...but I still don't like it and I would wish to have consecutive turns as game option.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

A couple of days ago, I started a new game of Humankind. I am happy to see the recent improvents to the game, but I was reminded of one thing which has annoyed me since the beginning: simultaneous turns. This is something I personally would have wanted an option to turn off, but I am curious as to what other players think about it. While I understand that it reduces turn times, I don't see any other advantages, and it seems to create a sense of urgency which I feel is somewhat at odds with the narrative focus of the game. While I am off reading flavour text, studying the map, or inspecting my cities, my units could be ambushed and I would get into a fight I didn't want. It also feel like it is just strange that reactions and being able to move units quickly should be part of a turn based strategy game. But perhaps there is some merit to this way of doing things which I am just not seeing?

It's not my kind... Ai always ambush me... If I don't patrol an area steadily, it will ambush me.
I can't stand it, but it's fun.

What you don't see is that HK has implemented a dynamic world ina staTIC 4X GAME QUITE SUCCESFULLY.
If it was water? It would be awesome. Think about getting in a storm within multiple turns that could drown you instead of a static Vortex that hoovers above you all the time....
The immersion is totally different. It's also like a no-fly-zone kind of approach. units has a radius of respond to attacks. I will trigger a mine bomb if I would move over it, within my turn.
It's not really RTS... CIV III had cavalries damaging passing adjacent units... again, HK takes more from CIV III than CIV VI , V, or IV....

HK wins big time here.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Wow - that's a deal breaker for me! 4X games are about careful thought and planning not trigger responses.

It's a bit overstretched, but it's more like a dynamic world coming to life. Animals can Ambush you. Move around. It feels alive.
It's nice. Even if I hate when I move one archer away from a garrison and the AI immediately jump in and wipes the floor clean.... bc I moved that
one Archer away... but once you know this is it. You don't MOVE your Archer, and wait for reinforcement first!