Which do you think is better? Info inside...

Right now I'm making a turn-based combat rpg. I was wondering what you think is better less battles so the story can go along faster. Or More battles so that you can fight and kill things a lot.

Depends, if the battles are REALLY fun, and not very repetitive, then I would say more battles. But, you should ALWAYS start with a cinematic, just to understand why your fighting in the first place.

Yep, as linkmaster said, depends on what you can do better, the complex, non-repetitive, tactical etc whatever combat, or good story with interesting characters... But in any event, the two should be balanced, because even the best fighting system is no good without a story to support it, and even a good story needs gameplay to back it up.

no stupid mass fights, no boring long story

if the story is cool, put alot in but try to skip the part "boring 30 mins cinematic"
if the fights are fun, keep em coming :-) but .. like running every 10 seconds into a group of gnolls and select "Attack" and watch a boring animation <- skip that part

I know what you mean... but I do like SOME huge battles as long as they're good.

As many battles as you can have before they start getting boring, and before people start wondering if theres a story ^_^

Remind me never to play one of your RPG's Zotax. :P

Keeping repetative battles down to a minimum is always a challenge in rpg's because you can only find so many worthy causes to engage in an actual cinematic fight. Skipping random battles all-together isn't really an option because you don't get the chance at hero xp, but they do get rather boring. An interesting way i've seen this problem solved in another rpg my friend is making is the use of a battle choosing system where you select if you want to do battle or not.
He also has around 200 different creeps, which is the most i've really ever seen anywhere. The creeps adjust their health and damage according to the level of the hero and the game status using JASS adjuster code he found online. It makes it more interesting since w/ 200 creeps being spawned randomly in battles it's really difficult to get in the same battle twice.
Just some things to think about:)

An option you could consider for random battls is that not have it like final fantasy but more like chrono trigger/cross where the enemies walk around and if you touch an enemy you have to fight it.

Have a non-sterotype story line with unexpecting twists and unusual circumstances.
As long as enemies are different, not just stonger versions, battles wont be a bore. And dont do like final fantasy and have hell long animations as i often watch them once then get annoyed the rest of the time. If you must, have an option to turn off animations. (since animations are don mainly with triggers it shouldnt be too hareto insert another condition)
On that same note long cinimatics, regardless of if it contains a lot of action or a long winded speech, are boring if not correctly structed to draw players into the plot.

Thats just my thoughts.

I like big battles but not all the time and not so it lags.

And it's called best not better...

Big battles aren't totaly bad, but i prefer story much more. If the map is all about "I'M GONAN BEET TEH CRAP OUTAT JUU WIT MAH HUEG WSORD JEJEJE!!!11!ONE+!!1", It isn't too interesting. Nothing to kill the mood better than a crappy story and poor balancing. But still, I don't have nothing against a good battle which needs good tactics to win. Though only if they have a good reason to be fighting, some reason connected nice and tight to the plot. But then again, what is RPG without random battles? ^_^

Anachronox - one of the best, funniest (and I mean most amusing, not necessarily most enjoyable, although it was), classy, and just downright fun RPGs I have ever played, it is firmly up in my top 3 games of all time and, I'm fairly sure, will never be replaced. It didn't have random battles, it was just very very good. There is something to be said for non-random battles, it's just hard to get it right.

Random encounters are probably best avoided, they work for a very strong and well done story, something a WC RPG is unlikly to have, you just cant convey enough emotion in cutscenes etc....

I find the best WC RPG's are the ones that dotn forget their roots, take RazorClawX's wanderers of sorceria (a superb campaign btw
www.campaigncreations.org) Its not technically an RPG, but it has enough RPG elements combined with soem pretty cool RTS moments that it works, well.

so basically balance is the key, try ti have as much combat as you can, while maintaining a decent story to thread it all together, long entertaining cutscenes also work if you place them dirrectly after a challenging battle.

It also really depends on the strength of the battles too. For example Dungeons and Dragons the battles are generally always life threatening...or should be, and therefore there aren't too many of them. They also tend to take a long time. On the other hand, final fantasy battles, can sometimes take no longer than a single spell to finish all of the enemies. Consider the length of each battle before you decide how many you want to put in.