this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2026
110 points (93.7% liked)
StarCraft
391 readers
2 users here now
A Lemmy.world instance dedicated to everything Brood War or StarCraft II.
Rules:
- Abide by the Lemmy.world rules outlined in this link. These are instance-wide rules.
- Posts must be related to StarCraft in some way (i.e. fan art, esports, gameplay, guides, events.) Please note that we are temporarily also allowing posts related to Stormgate, Frost Giant's upcoming RTS. More info here
- No pornographic or lewd content. This isn't LemmyNSFW...
- Any accusations made against a commentator, pro player, content creator, Blizzard employee or other noteworthy personality must include substantive evidence.
- Encouraging users to contact sponsors and other stakeholders with negative feedback on another person/org is not permitted.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So, what's the difference between RTS and what the first two Fallout games did? Where every move and attack is paid for out of set points that replenish every turn (and can also be affected by various factors, such as your Agility skill).
I realise Fallout is not classified as an RTS, but it behaves like one. I know you aren't moving a multitude of troops, but it acts the same way and, while it's fine for others, it's not really how I wanna play a game.
I'm pretty sure Turn Based Tactics is the genre you're looking for. It's turn-based, not real time, and also it's tactics, not strategy (strategy is long term planning, and tactics is what's involved in a particular engagement).
Real-Time Strategy is explicitly not turn-based; things progress continuously without pausing. Warcraft 1-3, StarCraft 1 and 2, and the Command & Conquer series are all examples of RTS games. The other major strategy genre is TBS (Turn-Based Strategy) e.g. your Crusader Kings or your Civilization.
As the Fallout games (exclusive of Brotherhood of Steel) aren't strategy games, but RPG's, I'm not sure if there's a widely used initialism for the way combat works in the first two Fallout games— maybe TBC (Turn-Based Combat), although to me that evokes The Burning Crusade. Bethesda's Fallout games, arguably, have a variant of RTwP (Real-Time with Pause) combat, via the V.A.T.S. system.
Turn Based Tactics is the genre I think. I don't know when the last time I heard that genre be used by name though.
It can be an RPG and other genres. They are RPGs, but they're also parts of many other genres.
Yeah RTS stands for "REAL-TIME strategy", as in "specifically not turn-based" like many strategy games were when the term was coined.
And those 3 words together are a term now, with an established meaning. If it wasn't, you could argue about the "strategy" part, but then you could just as well argue that the new Fallout games are RTS - after all, it's real time and there's some strategy involved about where you go next, what you take with you, etc.
What you just described is simply not an RTS. RTS is StarCraft and Age of Empires. There are no turns. Fallout does not behave like an RTS in any sense.
What you are describing is a TBS like Civ maybe or TB Tactics like XCOM which yes there are elements in the latter to pretty much any TB RPG, or really any old school RPG where you kind of free explore the world but then combat becomes turn based.
The flipside of what you're saying, and one could say this but one perhaps shouldn't without a good shield, is that Civ is a TB RPG...
Hmm, technically you could make an argument there based on the Stories & Let's Plays forums on civfanatics.com.