Nope.
But think about this:
Two guys fighting A and B, using your time-limited turn system. Player C comes by. What does he see?
He sees two guys standing like statues while the timer ticks down for one of the guys. After a little while he sees an action, say player A fires his pistol at the other guy. Then player C observes player B like a statue and after a little time, he fires his.
Great, player C says, and he dashes in between these two statues and drops four kegs of C-4 plastic explosives between the two of them. This, not being combat, takes no time. All four of them set for a 2-second delay, much shorter than the timer for combat.
Both A and B are blown to bits and player C gathers the loot.
See what I'm getting at?
The only way to prevent this from occuring is to have ALL players functioning in the same time system, and for online games, people don't want to wait, so it must be real-time.
-Xotor-
>Well actually implementing turn-based into an
>online game would not be
>that difficult, at least for
>some aspects of it.
>
>Basically the game is real-time, with
>a turn-based subsystem for combat.
> When you are walking
>around doing whatever, it is
>in real-time, essentially just like
>fallout or any online RPG.
> It will remain real-time
>for everything except combat (barter,
>talk, exploration, etc)
>
>The Days would be compressed so
>that a day in FOOL
>would go buy every 6
>hours (just an example) Though
>this is not important for
>the combat part of the
>game (which needs to stay
>turn-based) It is just some
>more game related crap.
>
>Anyway back to the combat.
>In fallout combat is essentially
>timeless, when it is your
>turn you can take as
>long as you want.
>For FOOL the turn-based would
>be timed. So if
>you are battling it out
>with someone else (two human
>players) each will have a
>given time to complete their
>tasks/use AC points. So
>lets just say for this
>example each player gets 2
>min per turn. This
>method would coexist in a
>real-time environment with no problems
>(none that I can see
>at this moment) as the
>turn-based would still be real-time
>you would just be limited
>to turn-based tactics, action point
>etc.
>
>So if you were to be
>walking buy and saw two
>people in combat they would
>pretty much just be standing
>their, possibly have a little
>image over their head to
>signify they are in combat
>or something, as you could
>have for barter and talk.
>
>
>Some problems I can see are
>what is to happen if
>some people are in combat
>and another walks up and
>decides to join in.
>He will not be allowed
>to immediately start using his
>AC points and, but will
>be worked into the Combat,
>and will become the last
>person to shoot.
>
>Example.
>
>Person A. starts fight with person
>B. A and
>B are going at it
>and along comes person C.
> C clicks on person
>A to attack. Person
>A and B are alerted
>that another player (person C
>is joining in the battle)
>If it is Player B's
>"turn" the sequence will go
>from Player B to Player
>A and then to Player
>C. This will allow
>Players A and B to
>complete their turns without being
>totally overrun.
>
>Some other things:
>
>*There would not be hex spaces
>for movement it would all
>be done by distance
>(one action point = 3
>feet or something like that)
>
>
>*Players would be allowed to leave
>combat if certain criteria were
>met
> >One would be distance from aggressor. (So if you are being attacked by someone who is a rather large distance away from you, {don't know what this would be, lets say 50 ft or something, could be more just an example} you cold just run away after they used up their turn and no longer be in combat.
>
>*If the aggressor does not inflict
>any damage, or rather small
>amount (as an example like
>15 or less) the person
>who is being attacked could
>just run away in as
>if they were in the
>"real-time” mode
>
>*Also if you were being attacked
>and were not confident that
>you were going to make
>it, you could simply hit
>the "end combat button" and
>run away, though you would
>be penalized for this.
>It would all depend on
>your health/Stats. So if
>you just didn't feel like
>fighting, but were not out
>of range, or had been
>hit for over 15 points
>you could hit this and
>return to "real-time" mode and
>simply run off. For
>an instance like this you
>may only loose a small
>item, some money, stims etc.
> Now if you were
>going at it with a
>bunch of people and were
>near death you could do
>the same thing. But this
>time you may loose some
>more valuable items, perhaps armor,
>nicer guns/items. This would
>not be a constant thing,
>you could be within inches
>of your life and loose
>something of lesser or medium
>value. Could possible be
>stat driven? The more danger
>you are in of loosing
>your life, the greater chance
>you have items of greater
>value would be dropped.
>
>Well this is would not solve
>every hang-up of the FOOL
>problems, but I think this
>is a plausible means of
>using real-time and turn-based together.
> Well just an idea
>anyway.
>
>-Zack
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
good idea though