Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 94 of 95 1 2 92 93 94 95
Joined: Oct 2020
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by DurneFea
Any news on this? It seems most other games lets the player choose. I dont even need it to be all that balanced in RTwP, i just want the action..!

In patch 6 i was looking over the shoulder on my new sorceres and doing a fireball on target while beeing out of range for combat. IN REAL TIME. It was the best ever! So obviously it can work with RTwP.!
What kind of news do you expect? RTwP is 99.9% not happening. It's hard to imagine Larian implementing it even if they fixed the clunky controls (and we have no indication of them wanting to do that), let alone with the current toilet-chain system.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Toilet chain?

Joined: Nov 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Imora DalSyn
Toilet chain?

It's a forum nickname for Larian's atrocious 'toilet chain' party control/movement system. I do believe it was coined by forum poster Tuco.

Joined: Nov 2020
U
stranger
Offline
stranger
U
Joined: Nov 2020
I know this comment was posted in 2019, but I just had to comment on it!

Originally Posted by Sordak
Turn based combat is a better system and i dont think there is even an argument of the contrary to be made.
RTWP is a terrible system that leads to Basic attacks following a turn based models while spells are cast in real time, this leads to an even stronger case of caster supremacy, one of the prime problems with non 4E DnD.

To assert that no argument of the contrary can be made is indicative of your narrow-mindedness on the topic. And you have no reasonable grounds to assume that RTWP leads to a stronger case of caster supremacy, either. Spells can't be casted at any time, and you completely ignore the disadvantages of casters in a RTWP environment. For example, you have to be able to time your AOE attacks in RTWP at the right moment, since everybody is moving in real time. In a turn-based system, you do not have to do this.


Originally Posted by Sordak
But to entertain the point a bit more.
RTWP simply is a combat system that is very unrewarding and leads itself to lazy encounter design. In an RTWP system, the player never has to commit to any plan of action, instnatly beeing able to cancel any descision and change it for somehting else, it leads to a lot of frantic pausing.
It also invalidates the initiative system from DnD and will lead to a devaluation of one of the primary stats.

Very unrewarding? To who? You? I find it rewarding, as do many others. It's more immersive, it's more chaotic, it's more unpredictable. The last two happen to make it, overall, a more difficult system. I also fail to see how it is a "lazy encounter design". Lazy in what way? I'd love to hear an explanation on this one.


Originally Posted by Sordak
The only reason people like RTWP is because of some conservative clinging to the Infinity engine games. Temple of Elemental Evil is the most accurate implementation of any DnD system into a video game engine to date and it used turn based combat. of course it also was a broken mess and took years of modding to make it play properly, and thats why the system was never adopted.
Think of it that way. Did the Infinity engine games play like the gold Box games? no they didnt.
So why should future DnD games be held back by past glorioes, Larian isnt even using the same base ruleset as infinity engine games.

I think it's remarkably ignorant to assume there is only one reason why RTWP is liked. You were given a multitude of reasons. You're just not being receptive to any other point of view because you want to be "right".

Originally Posted by Sordak
Furthermore, look at the companies that keep making these kinds of games. Beamdog has basically dug up the corpse of baldurs gate and implemented a bunch of thingst hat already existed as free mods, and to add insult to injury made it impossible to buy the original verison of the game anywhere.
and then theres PoE by Obsidian, a game series that since has also implemented Turn based combat because quite frankly its a better system.
You dont go around stealing ideas from failed competitors. They failed for a reason. Both of these companies wanted to make BG3, and WOTC shut them down because they couldnt move past their own nostalgia goggles.

Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity implemented turn-based combat not because it is a better system, but because they wanted to give people options. Your statement is a classic case of confirmation bias. They started with RTWP for a reason. Also, Obsidian almost created Baldur's Gate III back in 2008 when Atari had rights. They were close to signing a deal, but it fell apart last minute because Atari was bought Nameco. They then tried to reach out again to Wizards of the Coast, but WOTC turned them down. It had nothing to do with the RWTP combat mechanic, either. In fact, Larian Studios reached out to Wizards of the Coast once before, and Wizards of the Coast rejected them after they developed Divinity I; they stated that Larian didn't have enough credibility. Which is the same reason Obsidian got rejected, as they had mostly new developers that WOTC didn't recognize. It was basically a different company. I am willing to bet that if WOTC witnessed Pillars of Eternity II before giving Larian Studios rights to Baldur's Gate, they would have chosen Obsidian. Of course, Larian Studios then reached out again after Divinity II, and they were accepted. Again, it had nothing to do with the combat mechanics, and more-so to do with the credibility of the company. Another classic case of confirmation bias on your part.

Originally Posted by Sordak
The fear of creating new types of gameplay comes from a certain kind of game. Tripple A RPGs, Skyrim, Fallout 4 and the like are known to "dumb down" games. And this is correct. But does OS2 look dumbed down compared to any other CRPG?
The fear is unfounded

How is it that you can assert that real-time combat is "dumbed down"? Real-time combat requires faster thinking and faster reaction times. Also, games like Skyrim don't even have a targeting system. It makes no sense to claim that real-time combat is "dumbed down". This is just a patently absurd statement to make. Utterly ridiculous.


Originally Posted by Sordak
And to put a Bandaid on all of that. IF, and i don think it will be that way, but IF we get a turn based System, im 90% sure well get an RTWP option.
OS2s engine already allows to attack and cast outside of combat. Turns already are associated with a number of seconds in the game engine.
If they use the same combat system, theyll sureley implement RTWP as an option to satiate the Nostalgic Boomer Fans.

And now you're just hurling ad-hominem attacks here. Nostalgic Boomer Fans? Real-time combat systems aren't just a product of nostalgia. In fact, it is turn-based that is old-school, seeing as how these games stem from tabletop games, which require taking turns. With the introduction of a computer, we can move past turn-based, and do real-time combat, which happens to be more immersive and realistic. Yes, it has a pause function, as all games do. But it is definitely more realistic than enemies sitting around doing nothing when you're right by them, because they have to "wait for their turn", even when the game isn't paused.


Your argument is a perfect example of what narrow-mindedness and ignorance look like.

Last edited by USPatriot; 16/01/22 11:39 AM.
Joined: Nov 2020
U
stranger
Offline
stranger
U
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Iuris Tantum
How is pausing in the middle of the action any more realistic than TB? If anything TB is more realistic because the pace is even throughout the encounter, instead of being constantly interrupted by pauses.

Again, very late to this party, but this is another one I feel is necessary to comment on.

Real-time combat is definitely more realistic.

In a Turn-based system, the enemy literally waits for you to hit them before they hit you. They just do it because that's the mechanics of the combat system, not because you can pause it. It's entirely unrealistic for your enemy to sit there and wait for you to make a move before he/she does. Yet somehow RTWP is less realistic because you have the option to pause? Logically, your argument is flawed.

Joined: Dec 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Dec 2021
Originally Posted by USPatriot
Originally Posted by Iuris Tantum
How is pausing in the middle of the action any more realistic than TB? If anything TB is more realistic because the pace is even throughout the encounter, instead of being constantly interrupted by pauses.

Again, very late to this party, but this is another one I feel is necessary to comment on.

Real-time combat is definitely more realistic.

In a Turn-based system, the enemy literally waits for you to hit them before they hit you. They just do it because that's the mechanics of the combat system, not because you can pause it. It's entirely unrealistic for your enemy to sit there and wait for you to make a move before he/she does. Yet somehow RTWP is less realistic because you have the option to pause? Logically, your argument is flawed.

The goal here isn't realism, its adapting the 5e DnD system (which they aren't doing a great job at but that's neither here nor there). DnD is turn-based. At least in this aspect they are being true to the source material. There are plenty of "realistic" (ridiculous even using that term when it comes to fantasy hack n slash) games out there for you if turn-based isn't your thing.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by WebSpyder
Originally Posted by USPatriot
Originally Posted by Iuris Tantum
How is pausing in the middle of the action any more realistic than TB? If anything TB is more realistic because the pace is even throughout the encounter, instead of being constantly interrupted by pauses.

Again, very late to this party, but this is another one I feel is necessary to comment on.

Real-time combat is definitely more realistic.

In a Turn-based system, the enemy literally waits for you to hit them before they hit you. They just do it because that's the mechanics of the combat system, not because you can pause it. It's entirely unrealistic for your enemy to sit there and wait for you to make a move before he/she does. Yet somehow RTWP is less realistic because you have the option to pause? Logically, your argument is flawed.

The goal here isn't realism, its adapting the 5e DnD system (which they aren't doing a great job at but that's neither here nor there). DnD is turn-based. At least in this aspect they are being true to the source material. There are plenty of "realistic" (ridiculous even using that term when it comes to fantasy hack n slash) games out there for you if turn-based isn't your thing.

But isn't DnD trying to emulate "realistic" combats ?
Ofc, in the reality of such a world and with rules because playing any tabletop game in real time is just impossible.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 16/01/22 08:17 PM.
Joined: Dec 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Dec 2021
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
But isn't DnD trying to emulate "realistic" combats ?
Ofc, in the reality of such a world and with rules because playing any tabletop game in real time is just impossible.

Um... no. There are lots of DnD rules that totally belie any sense of realism.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by WebSpyder
Originally Posted by USPatriot
Originally Posted by Iuris Tantum
How is pausing in the middle of the action any more realistic than TB? If anything TB is more realistic because the pace is even throughout the encounter, instead of being constantly interrupted by pauses.

Again, very late to this party, but this is another one I feel is necessary to comment on.

Real-time combat is definitely more realistic.

In a Turn-based system, the enemy literally waits for you to hit them before they hit you. They just do it because that's the mechanics of the combat system, not because you can pause it. It's entirely unrealistic for your enemy to sit there and wait for you to make a move before he/she does. Yet somehow RTWP is less realistic because you have the option to pause? Logically, your argument is flawed.

The goal here isn't realism, its adapting the 5e DnD system (which they aren't doing a great job at but that's neither here nor there). DnD is turn-based. At least in this aspect they are being true to the source material. There are plenty of "realistic" (ridiculous even using that term when it comes to fantasy hack n slash) games out there for you if turn-based isn't your thing.

But isn't DnD trying to emulate "realistic" combats ?
Ofc, in the reality of such a world and with rules because playing any tabletop game in real time is just impossible.
Yup. TB combat is not a *rule* or a *mechanic* of D&D. It exists in D&D ONLY because you cannot play ANY tabletop game without players taking turns. So it is an artifact of tabletop gaming, NOT D&D.

That TB combat exists in numerous other tabletop games is testement enough to this point, for example chess. When chess was originally developed (in ancient India), the king wanted a realistic simulator of battlefield combat. But obviously, that technology did not exist at that time, so the king had to SETTLE for a tabletop game in which two players would take turns. Well, we don't have to settle. We have the technology today to do it correctly.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Except that instead of controlling 1 person, you have to juggle 4-6 all at once. THAT'S what makes it so difficult... RTWP that is. That's also why I still like TB. RTWP still isn't realistic entirely because you have to manage 4-6 people who have half intelligence. Half the time, if you don't micromanage them, they do something stupid.

Joined: Oct 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by GM4Him
RTWP still isn't realistic entirely because you have to manage 4-6 people who have half intelligence. Half the time, if you don't micromanage them, they do something stupid.
What would you prefer instead? That the game plays flawlessly for you on its own?

I understand if someone finds RTWP cumbersome, but saying it's "unrealistic" because of this doesn't make sense.

Taking the responsibility of controlling multiple characters on yourself means you accept that, "not controlling a character" means "you're telling them not to do anything". If they're "doing something stupid", that means you're relying on AI, which in turn means you're deferring your responsibility to someone else. And if that someone else happens to be incompetent and you're unhappy with their performance, that's also on you. You know what they say, "if you want something done right, do it yourself."

Basically you're asking, "hey I don't want to control everyone on my own, I want someone else to take half the job, but I also want them to do perfectly, against the endless amount of possibilities of things that can happen in combat." Cmon bruh...


"We make our choices and take what comes and the rest is void."
Joined: Dec 2021
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Dec 2021
Dragon Age games did it best. Micromanage if you want, or decide the way your companions should act and rely on it if you don't. It's a damn shame nobody has tried to steal their customizable AI system.

What I would give for the ability to set up routines and conditions to be executed automatically during fights... frown

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by Try2Handing
Originally Posted by GM4Him
RTWP still isn't realistic entirely because you have to manage 4-6 people who have half intelligence. Half the time, if you don't micromanage them, they do something stupid.
What would you prefer instead? That the game plays flawlessly for you on its own?

I understand if someone finds RTWP cumbersome, but saying it's "unrealistic" because of this doesn't make sense.

Taking the responsibility of controlling multiple characters on yourself means you accept that, "not controlling a character" means "you're telling them not to do anything". If they're "doing something stupid", that means you're relying on AI, which in turn means you're deferring your responsibility to someone else. And if that someone else happens to be incompetent and you're unhappy with their performance, that's also on you. You know what they say, "if you want something done right, do it yourself."

Basically you're asking, "hey I don't want to control everyone on my own, I want someone else to take half the job, but I also want them to do perfectly, against the endless amount of possibilities of things that can happen in combat." Cmon bruh...

I prefer TB. I can actually get familiar with each character's abilities and see what each person does as if I am each one of the characters. RTWP relies heavily on scripts or major micro managing - constantly pausing in order to ensure the characters are doing what you want them to be doing.

My point is that neither TB or RTWP are truly "realistic.". Sure, RTWP may be MORE realistic in many ways, but the unrealistic part is that you are 1 person trying to control 4-6 all at one time - having to think for them all constantly - unless you rely on scripts. In my experience, scripts suck, and not one game I've played with RTWP has good scripts. I even tried Pathfinder with RTWP just to see if AI scripts may have improved since BG2 or NWN2, and no. They haven't. I can't play that game RTWP. A pack of freaking wolves will kill my party unless I pause constantly and micromanage each character and remember who has done what and when and who has finished a spell or a swing and who hasn't. Especially when your characters are not all together, trying to keep track of 4-6 at one time is a major pain - and again, unrealistic.

Example. I have 6 PCs. In real life, I would only be the MC. I might issue orders if I'm the leader, but I'd ONLY control me. Gale would rely heavily on his magic. I wouldn't have to tell him to cast freaking Mage Armor and then Blur and then Fireball, or have to tell him where to cast it and when. I'd only control me in RL. I wouldn't have to tell Wyll to Misty Step behind the gobbo leader. He'd make that decision himself. Lae'zel wouldn't have to be told to go for Ragzlin. She'd just do it, and she'd attack with everything she had. Her own intelligence would decide. Shadowheart would, on her own, hurl Guiding Bolt at Ragzlin. Astarion would dive into shadows and fire his crossbow. In split second thinking and timing, I would only have to know me and decide for me, relying on everyone else's own intelligence to keep them alive and well.

In RTWP, I can't really BE ALL the characters, putting myself in ALL of their shoes. I have to rely on idiot AI that half the time lets them die because it isn't smart enough to cast a healing spell when a character needs one or hurl a powerful damage spell at a good time. In my experience, characters with scripts cast Fireball when enemies are almost dead, so they waste the spell, or they heal after someone is dead, or they run away into more enemies because I didn't notice that they were being attacked because I'm one person focusing on my main who is surrounded and instead of the character saying, "Help! I'm being attacked," she ran off into more orcs when she could have cast a spell to save herself (ahem Qara in NWN2, multiple times), or Minsc is just standing and doing nothing for 15 seconds while everyone is dying because I didn't notice him doing nothing and the script decided he had nothing better to do, or I command a character to do something and midway they stop and do something different because the script told them to instead of what I wanted them to.

I'm sorry, but I HATE RTWP. The only game that kinda did it okay was KOTOR. At least I could pause and cue up multiple actions and then unpause. But many times even that was frustrating, and you could only ever control 3 characters at a time.

The only truly "realistic" combat systems are like Skyrim. You are in one person's shoes and everyone else controls themselves. But even those are frustrating because your henchmen are still usually idiots who get themselves killed all the time.

What I always thought someone should do is a round based realtime system. Basically, you tell each character who to target and with what. Then you cue the round selection is done and the game plays the round out for you. When the round is done, you select actions for the next round.

So, you tell the MC to attack Ragzlin with your flaming sword. You tell Lae'zel to attack the ogre with her greataxe. You tell Gale to use fireball on a group of cultists. You tell Wyll to attack Ragzlin from behind and Astarion to find cover, use a bonus to Hide and shoot. You tell Shadowheart to cast Guiding Bolt at Ragzlin. Then you hit Start and watch your characters move and do what you commanded as the enemies move and do as the AI commanded. They all move and act simultaneously based one one round of commands.

Let's say the MC kills Ragzlin alone. Too bad. All characters targeting him still do so because they were already in the middle of attacking him. While Gale is casting, cultists with higher initiative shoot him down. He never finishes his spell.

The difference is that the game stops automatically every 6 seconds and you aren't plotting exact courses across the battlefield. You select what your target is and what action and bonus action you are taking IF you can take it. If you target an enemy that runs away, you may not attack that round like you want, but the point is it stops and resets every round. Still, even with this I find lots of flaws - pathing being the main one.

Anyway, at least with a round based realtime, I'm not trying to track what action is finished yet and which is still being performed for 6 characters, and trying to keep track of health and position and so forth constantly and all the other issues I have with RTWP.

Last edited by GM4Him; 18/01/22 10:27 AM.
Joined: Nov 2020
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Half the time, if you don't micromanage them, they do something stupid.
That was my recent experience with rtwp in Pathfinder WotR. I've tried playing tb as much as possible, but some battles had just too many toons participating. Rtwp made the "artificial stupid" quite noticeable due to a combination of bad pathfinding, bugs and everyone ignoring aoes.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by MrToucan
Dragon Age games did it best. Micromanage if you want, or decide the way your companions should act and rely on it if you don't. It's a damn shame nobody has tried to steal their customizable AI system.

What I would give for the ability to set up routines and conditions to be executed automatically during fights... frown
+1

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by ash elemental
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Half the time, if you don't micromanage them, they do something stupid.
That was my recent experience with rtwp in Pathfinder WotR. I've tried playing tb as much as possible, but some battles had just too many toons participating. Rtwp made the "artificial stupid" quite noticeable due to a combination of bad pathfinding, bugs and everyone ignoring aoes.

Oh my gosh! AOEs! Yes!

I still remember playing NWN2 and fighting against a couple of Red Wizards. Boom! Boom! AOEs blowing up every freaking character who just stood there taking it because they didn't "think" about how maybe they should try to split up so they wouldn't continuously get blown to pieces by fireballs. I can't remember how many times I had to do that fight over simply because I couldn't figure out, at first, what the flip was killing everyone so quickly. Half the time I would die before even knowing what hit me. Good times!

At least with TB, I get hit by a fireball and my team is mostly dead because I kept them grouped together, as soon as it's my turn again, I can scatter them so it doesn't keep happening. I can be intelligent and strategic about it.

So yes. I do like RTWP in theory. I like that everyone and everything are moving at a fast pace and if I run towards a goblin he can retreat from me and keep his distance, making it harder to catch him and hit him, which is more realistic, but ultimately the more characters you have to control with RTWP, the harder it is and the more you have to hit pause constantly so they don't do stupid stuff and die. I'd much rather have TB than pause every 2-3 seconds to try to make sure I'm not dying.

Oh, and another pet peeve... I tell my wizard to cast a spell, then focus on my other characters. I think he's cast a spell and tell him to do something else. I unpause. He starts chanting, cancels the spell and does something else, wasting a spell slot because I didn't realize he was just about to cast his spell.

Again, at least with the cue system in KOTOR, that usually didn't happen because at least they'd complete the cued action first and then move on to the next. If you REALLY needed them to do a healing action or something, you would have to cancel the cued up action first so that the healing action or whatever would take priority. That, at least, made it so that you could track and better manage actions. Most RTWP games don't even give you that much.

The ONLY time I actually prefer RTWP in an RPG is for really baby fights. If I know I don't really need spells or complicated actions, and I just want my characters to default run up and hack things down, I'll switch to RTWP (in games like Pathfinder which have the option). THEN I'm like, "Thank God for RTWP. That baby fight would have been so painfully slow and pointless without RTWP." Most fights in BG3, however, I don't feel like I'd be doing that very often. I'm fairly certain RTWP would increase the difficulty of each fight exponentially, and there's no way I'd survive against the Gith Patrol or the Phase Spider Lair. And I would certainly not want any option for party of 6 with RTWP. No. 4 would be too much to handle especially as characters reach higher levels.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Except that instead of controlling 1 person, you have to juggle 4-6 all at once. THAT'S what makes it so difficult... RTWP that is.
This is a reasonable point, especially when you word it as a personal difficulty issue (and not a tactical or realism issue). I have never had any difficulty handling parties of six in RTwP cRPGs. But then I struggle handling a single character in action hack and slash games. So I can appreciate that things are difficult/easy for people differently.

Originally Posted by MrToucan
Dragon Age games did it best. Micromanage if you want, or decide the way your companions should act and rely on it if you don't. It's a damn shame nobody has tried to steal their customizable AI system.

What I would give for the ability to set up routines and conditions to be executed automatically during fights... frown
+1000
Yup. Many people complain about the DA games' combat system. I consider them to be excellent, especially in DA:O. They do compromise by going down to a party of four, which I don't like, but RTwP + robust customization system for companions' AI is definitely the answer to a good combat system for party-based games.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Except that instead of controlling 1 person, you have to juggle 4-6 all at once. THAT'S what makes it so difficult... RTWP that is.
This is a reasonable point, especially when you word it as a personal difficulty issue (and not a tactical or realism issue). I have never had any difficulty handling parties of six in RTwP cRPGs. But then I struggle handling a single character in action hack and slash games. So I can appreciate that things are difficult/easy for people differently.

Originally Posted by MrToucan
Dragon Age games did it best. Micromanage if you want, or decide the way your companions should act and rely on it if you don't. It's a damn shame nobody has tried to steal their customizable AI system.

What I would give for the ability to set up routines and conditions to be executed automatically during fights... frown
+1000
Yup. Many people complain about the DA games' combat system. I consider them to be excellent, especially in DA:O. They do compromise by going down to a party of four, which I don't like, but RTwP + robust customization system for companions' AI is definitely the answer to a good combat system for party-based games.

I will say, IF someone could make a really good RTWP system that I felt really was intelligent and I didn't have to micromanage it so much, ideally, RTWP would be more exciting. Still the tradeoff is that you don't really get to step into the shoes of all characters in the party. You don't get to think much from each character's perspective.

Joined: Nov 2020
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
I still remember playing NWN2 and fighting against a couple of Red Wizards. Boom! Boom! AOEs blowing up every freaking character who just stood there taking it because they didn't "think" about how maybe they should try to split up so they wouldn't continuously get blown to pieces by fireballs. I can't remember how many times I had to do that fight over simply because I couldn't figure out, at first, what the flip was killing everyone so quickly. Half the time I would die before even knowing what hit me. Good times!
Lol, I remember that combat "dance" from NWN. One step to the left, one step to the right, and step right into that spider web... laugh

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Ukraine
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Ukraine
Why wouldn't Larian use the Pathfinder - Wrath of the Righteous experience, which features both real-time and turn-based modes?


Join the Minthara Baenre fan club

"If a country, choosing between war and shame, chooses shame, it gets both war and shame." - Winston Churchill .
#CloseTheSky
Page 94 of 95 1 2 92 93 94 95

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5