By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 24 June 2009
Edit Thread
Words Of Wisdom said:
Khuutra said:
Words Of Wisdom said:
Khuutra said:
Words Of Wisdom said:

@sapient:  Not all of those titles are sRPGs.  You're mistaking TBS for sRPG.

In most cases the distinction is completely arbitrary. Unit levels were in strategy games long before role-playing games existed.

Unit levels aren't the difference between TBS and sRPG.

Please, do elucidate the distinction for me.

In an sRPG your units are unique and go with you.  In a TBS, you make/create new ones.  

In Fire Emblem, Lyn/Kent/Sain all travel with you from map to map.

In Advance Wars, your Infantry and Tanks don't--you make more of them each time.

That's the big distinction between the two to me.

Ah, i was wrong... still there are a few Turn based strategy games where your units do follow you from map to map.  There was this one SNES one that was ruthless because of that.  Because not only did you have to win each map, AND make sure your higher leveled units didn't die, you had to make sure your higher level units were well balanced because otherwise you might not have any Level 5 fighters and you'd be helpless to fend off bomber strikes later on.

Additionally games like Romance of the Three Kingdoms where your officers carry over for an entire campaign... with later versions like 8 having all sorts of role playing and role playing aspects... even allowing you to take on the part of an officer in a country rather then the leader itself.