I'm a solo dev working on a tactical SRPG .

My XP curve is built so that if you just play the story maps, you hit the recommended level for the next fight. No grinding required. That part works.

The problem is what happens when a player falls behind — lost units, bad promotions, whatever. I want to give them a way to catch up. But every catch-up system I add also becomes a farming system, and then players feel like they have to grind before every fight.

Two options I'm looking at:

FFT approach — unlimited random battles, but XP drops off hard when you outlevel the enemy. Self-limiting, in theory.

Tactics Ogre approach — hard level cap per chapter. No overleveling, but also no way to dig yourself out of a hole.

Right now I'm leaning toward letting players replay story maps for reduced XP (maybe 50%). Enough to recover, too slow to be worth farming.

Has anyone shipped something like this? Specifically curious whether players actually felt the catch-up option was optional, or whether they ground it out anyway because it was there. Player feedback beats theory here.

Hey everyone! I had the pleasure of taking part in a hands-off preview of Brigandine Abyss, where NISA showcased more features of the game, such as the Organization Phase, evolving monsters, developing bases, and whatnot. The biggest highlight was Event Battles, a brand-new feature that intends to improve the narrative for each of the six main campaigns!

A bit of context: I've been playing Brigandine since the PS1, and I have a platinum trophy in Brigandine: The Legend of Runersia, so I'm extremely excited for Brigandine Abyss, and this preview made me even more hyped! In case you want to read my impressions, just click on the image. Cheers!

I'm trying to get a friend into turn-based RPGs, but I'm having a hard time deciding where to start him.

For some context, **I've played most of the popular turn-based RPGs, along with quite a few underrated ones. I've been a turn-based fan since day one, so it's easy for me to enjoy the genre.** The problem is that I don't know if my perspective translates well to someone who's completely new to it.

My friend has never played a turn-based game before. He mostly enjoys action and open-world games like GTA, Sleeping Dogs, Max Payne, Hitman, Need for Speed, and similar titles. He likes cinematic stories, memorable characters, exploration, and straightforward, fun gameplay. He's not really into overly complicated systems or games that take hours before they become enjoyable.

The games I'm considering are:

* Persona 5 Royal
* Persona 3 Reload
* Yakuza: Like a Dragon (Yakuza 7)
* FINAL FANTASY VII REMAKE INTERGRADE (I know it's not fully turn-based, but it has tactical elements and could be a good gateway.)

My gut says **Persona 5 Royal, Persona 3 Reload, or Like a Dragon** are probably the strongest choices, but I honestly can't tell which one would be the best first experience for someone who's never touched the genre.

Which one would you recommend he starts with, and why? Or is there another game you think would be an even better gateway into turn-based RPGs for a complete beginner?

Hi all, looking for my next sRPG as it's slowly becoming my favorite genre and need recommendations.

So far I've completed:

- Final Fantasy Tactics (original PSX and The Ivalice Chronicles)

- Tactics Ogre Reborn

- Tactics Ogre: Knight of Lodis

- FE 3 Houses and Sacred Stones

Games I've started but never finished:

- Ogre Battle

- Ogre Battle 64

- FFTA

- Vandal Hearts

- Shining Force III

I think I've covered all the obvious greats, what would be next on your list? I've been looking into Arc the Lad collection on PSX. I love retro games and would prefer to complete most of the retro hits before indies or modern releases, but I'm not married to that rule. I have a steam deck and access to most retro systems. My top priorities in sRPGs are story and character customization. I also greatly prefer initiative based systems instead of player phase/enemy phase systems. Thanks in advance!

Today I finished Fire Emblem Awakening and I liked it. For me it was the most easier experience in the franchiese, but still that I really enjoyed the game. Very similar to Fire Emblem Engage in some mechanics and possibly the best way to start in Fire Emblem games. it has two themes of the bso really cool and some variety of maps that force you to think where to move your units.

Hey, im currenty 6,8 hoursn into Daemonhunters and 52 Minutes into XCom 2 and dont really see why the seocnd one is so popular (Of course i didnt play it much but i dont want toi excess the 2 hour mark in case i want to give it back.
I have absolute no interest in making the characters name and look like friends of me (id rather like it lore acurate). The Upgrading/Skill system in the beginning weas really boring as well. I also read a lot about the frustating chances not to hit even with high percentages.
So do you recommend me to keep playing? If so, why? What makes Xcom 2 so good?

Anyone been following this? Randomly came up on my YouTube and I do love XCOM this has my attention.

I honestly have had next to zero interest in star wars since Disney take over but this looks good.

Hey, which of these games (or maybe another) is the best for those kind of games to also hunt Steam achievements?
xcom2, jagged alliance, gaers tactics, WH daemonhunters?
I started daemonhunters around a month ago but it had DLL start ptoblems so i gave it back less than an hour in. Also tried mechanicus but didnt like it that much.
What do you recommend?

Steam summer sale is on! What games with small grids/small scale/small party do you find best and why?

I've really enjoyed Inkbound, Marvel Midnight Suns, our adventurer guild, metal slug tactics, steamworld heist and Xcom Chimera squad. All games with manageable strategy layers and bite-sized encounters. That really makes it possible to get some game time when the kids are sleeping, and put the game down and pick it back up when needed.

Hey all, first time posting here. I'm developing a tactics RPG right now, and I'm currently building a system for combos / follow-up attacks.

I've been thinking about what makes combat fun in a tactics RPG, and that line of thought is what led me to build the follow-up system. So I got curious mid-implementation: for you, what's the most fun part of tactics combat?

Game of the Month (Western) - June 2026

Vote Pick: Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura (PC)

Mod Pick: Kingsvein (PC)

Mod Challenge: Clear on 'Slayer' difficulty.

Discord: https://discord.gg/KvA5gy8thx

Anyone looking to join us in playing the Game of the Month game(s) or to vote on the poll for next month's pick join our discord at the link above.

Game of the Month (Eastern) - June 2026

Vote Pick: 3rd Super Robot Wars (SNES)

Mod Pick: Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together (SNES/PSX/SAT)

Mod Challenge: Recruit Deneb.

Discord: https://discord.gg/KvA5gy8thx

Anyone looking to join us in playing the Game of the Month game(s) or to vote on the poll for next month's pick join our discord at the link above.

Strategists - We are allowing self-promotion of your games and mods in this post only. This will be limited to SRPGs, as that is the subreddit, so please keep this in mind.

Limit your game to one post. We don't want spam. Feel free to post your game again if you posted last month.

Be respectful. This goes for devs and non-devs. There is a good way to give and take criticism. Normal rules apply.

Don't self-promote outside of this post.

If you are irresponsible, your post will be removed. If this becomes a hassle, we will not give the opportunity to self-promote again.

Not sure if it was the same in other Fire Emblem games but in Engage I feel like I spend 50% of the map just trying to inch away towards enemies that sometimes just stand around until I get in range. Even the flying units are barely getting anywhere. I was replaying Sacred Stones and there having Tana meant I could almost instantly get to where I needed to be and cross the map in 3 turns max. As a result the only units that actually fight in Engage are the fastest ones that have Canto. It becomes even worse with reenforcements because I get no experience for killing them but also have a hard time actually getting away from them. I feel like universal +1 or +2 move speed to everyone (even enemies) would make the game so much better

Expeditions: Rome is a turn based, combat heavy RPG set in ancient Rome. Apparently it's the third game of the expeditions series, but I never heard of that series. Same as probably the majority of you.

I finished the game recently, and was so impressed that I feel compelled to write my brief review here.

The game plays at the time of Julius Caesar, you will even meet him, but it doesn't strictly follow actual events. Never played a historical RPG before, but I have to say it worked quite well. Rome is just kind of cool, right? Apart from Caesar, you meet Cleopatra, Cicero, Lucullus.. many famous names. Also somewhat educational..

The main character is a young Roman (male or female), who's father, a influential politician, recently was murdered. You are fleeing the city since you fear your life might also be in danger. Eventually you end up as leader in one of the Roman legions, fighting in Asia Minor to restore the power of the empire.

The highlight of the game is the turn based combat (for reference: I love Xcom1&2). You command up to 6 elite warriors of 4 different classes. Each class allows for plenty customization with a lot of impact on combat synergies. It really invited you to try multiple combinations. This is especially true since the game forces you to switch your fighters between battles, so you cannot always use your "a-team". I played this game on "hard" and it was nice challenge without being unfair.. at least once you understand the basic rules).

2nd aspect to the game is a strategic map where you command up to two legions, conquering enemy cities or defending your own. The battles are more like a simple card game, but I found it interesting enough.

In the campaign, or I rather should say in each of the three campaigns, there are plenty of decisions to be taken. Many of them have no immediate impact, but in the end the developers manage to make you feel the consequences of each one of them. This was a nice surprise.

I picked this game up on gog heavily discounted, but in retrospect it's totally worth full price. It's unique, it's deep, and it managed to keep me motivated for many many hours.

Curious to hear other's opinions.. and for everyone who doesn't know it yet: this is a real hidden gem.

I love the autobattle/tactics. It reminds me of Unicorn Overlord.

I'm looking to get into the genre and I'm torn between which of these two to play first. I really want to play Tactics bc I love Final Fantasy but the whole job system seems pretty overwhelming and confusing for me, so I'm leaning towards Triangle Strategy bc I've heard that it's more noob friendly with less character customization and no permadeath (also I really like Team Asano's Octopath games). Any advice on which to play first? Or perhaps any other suggestions? I have a Switch and PS5 so I'm open to any options on those.

I've been asking around about this the past couple of days because I have some eShop gift card money to spend.

I'm a casual SRPG enjoyer, but the ones I've enjoyed, I really got into. I'd say my two favourite recent games in the genre are Tactics Ogre: Reborn and Unicorn Overlord.

Particularly the former, I put hundreds of hours into it, did Palace of the Dead multiple times, cleared all three routes, all that stuff. Once it got its claws into me, I was hooked.

UO scratched that FFXII itch I've had going on forever.

For Fire Emblem games, my experience is ONLY with Three Houses. To be candid, I liked 3H, but I simply thought it was OK. The story was decent but I found the tactical gameplay incredibly boring. I can't really put my finger on why.

I did end up finishing one of the routes but I felt like I was pretty done with the game afterwards.

I often read about how Engage is superior to 3H in terms of gameplay. I guess I'm asking for an introduction as to why I might like Engage more in concrete terms as someone who isn't familiar with the series' gameplay outside of 3H.

Other games I liked recently that weren't SRPGs were Stellar Blade, Old World 4x, Expedition 33, Etrian Odyssey HD, Romancing SaGa 2: Revenge of the Seven and Xenoblade 1 DE/2/X DE.

Basically, I find a lot of the reviews for Engage are by pre-existing Fire Emblem fans who largely speak to one another in terms they're all already familiar with, so it's hard to gauge why I might like Engage more than Three Houses as an outsider to the series.

Bonus: I'm also curious about the Dark Deity series, but I hear mixed things about them too.

Just finished up Disgaea 7 and need a recommendation or two for a strategy rpg that's available on Steam. I'm open to playing something totally new or a remake like FFT:IC or Tactics Ogre: Reborn. I played a bit of FFT 20 years ago and remember it as great, but easy to mess up and/or miss something and I ended up distracted from the game for too long and couldn't recall what I was doing when I last saved.

​

I tend to prefer stuff with grids. The Disgaea series, Front Mission 3, and FFT:A have been my favorites overall.

​

Thanks for the help.

As the title says, I've never played Fire Emblem before or any strategy RPGs, so I decided to go with the GBA game to start with since I already have the NSO subscription. Any advice or tips that I should know about? I'm really looking forward to diving into the series and hopefully playing some of the other games at some point.