Chris

Suppression Mechanics

214 posts in this topic

One of the fundamental problems with the combat in X-Com and in Xenonauts is with the shooting - all it does is wound or kill units. This may sound trite, but it is an issue in that most weapons can fire in both single shot mode or burst fire mode.

In the current incarnation, assuming that you have enough APs to take a burst shot, you should always do that. It provides the highest average damage per AP spent. This doesn't really give you much in the way of tactical options. It's just simple maths as to what fire mode gives the best bang for your APs.

It was suggested a month or two ago that we look at the suppression system from JA1.13 for inspiration. Naturally I've been far too busy to actually do that, but the idea of suppression has grown on me enormously over the last few weeks as it provides an obvious solution to the problem above. With suppression implemented, we can have burst fire causing lots of suppression but not actually doing that much damage, while single aimed shots are much more effective at causing damage but don't cause anywhere near as much suppression.

It also means we can change the battlefield roles of some weapons a bit - for example, machineguns and the Ferret .50cal. In both cases it's been difficult to balance these to be effective but not overpowered. Giving them very high suppression but perhaps no more actual damage than the sniper rifles would make them useful support weapons but not overpowered in effectiveness.

Suppression would be something that is built up with each shot the affects the unit, draining the unit's APs first from his reserves (used for reaction fire) and then from the next turn. With enough units shooting at the same target, it would be entirely possible to pin them in place.

Initially I was going to suggest we tied this into morale, but on reflection I don't think that's a good idea. I don't think a soldier who is pinned in position by enemy fire is directly more frightened than one that is not, rather they are keeping their heads down to avoid getting shot. Perhaps we can add a small morale penalty for getting suppressed or pinned, but I don't think the suppression score should use the morale value.

Rather, I think each unit should have a Suppression score that is based on his Bravery stat, giving it a common root with Morale but a shared value. This will start at the soldier's Bravery value, which is anything from 50 upwards (as the lowest starting value for any soldier attribute is 50).

Each weapon fire mode will have a "suppression damage" value, and when a soldier fires a weapon at a target (irrespective of whether they hit it) the suppression damage will be applied to the target's Suppression score. This is affected by armour as usual, so if the unit has powerful armour it will not be suppressed by firing weak weapons at it.

Once Suppression reaches 0, any extra supression damage recieved is first deducted from the unit's AP reserves for the current turn (down to 0) and then from the AP in the following terms (again down to 0). Further suppression is wasted. Maybe we'll have a symbol appearing above the head of the unit to show it has been suppressed?

The Suppression score should regenerate a certain amount each turn, perhaps something like 20. That means three turns without being fired at would return any unit to their full Suppression "shield".

Anyone got any thoughts, suggestions or improvements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I posted in another thread, some ideas I had when suppression was mentioned, not overly developed just ideas.

Suppression should be influenced by bravery.

Maybe use the bravery stat for suppression damage as you would use armour for normal damage calculations?

Your courage is your armour.

Suppression points change the colour of your AP bar from the bottom as they accumulate (like stun damage on the HP bar).

As you enter that coloured part of your AP bar actions begin to take some extra AP to accomplish.

Represents your trooper trying to keep his head down as the suppression begins to affect him but will always allow him to take some actions.

When the AP bar is fully suppressed then the morale bar starts taking damage, again armoured by bravery.

You have taken as much as you can and your nerve is finally starting to go.

To apply a similar system to your idea Chris maybe you could have the suppression build up along the morale bar?

It is a visual way to represent the build up (rather than degradation) of suppression on that unit.

When it reaches the top it begins to affect the AP as you mentioned.

That would also mean a trooper who was losing morale for whatever reason would be easier to suppress as he lost his nerve.

Edited by Gauddlike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd have to find a way for suppression to work in an area, not just the unit you're targeting, so that a cluster of units being shot at will all be suppressed. This would be strange in an open area though. If you're being shot at in the open, you hit the deck and start returning fire. You wouldn't just lie there and wait to be hit. Maybe have a huge penalty to AP cost for movement, but not such a big one for shooting? I don't mean change the way it works, but so that when you are suppressed, it's less costly to return fire, than it is to actually move.

@Gauddlike - I don't agree with the fact that if suppressed long enough you'll crack every time, all the time. If you have good cover, sure, you can't move, but you're not being hit either. Just wait for your boys to flank em and hope they don't have grenades.

Edited by IceVamp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You'd have to find a way for suppression to work in an area, not just the unit you're targeting, so that a cluster of units being shot at will all be suppressed.

I'm thinking the same thing, maybe if a unit is in a 2 square radius of a shot's terminus and 1 square either side of a shot's path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Suppression would be something that is built up with each shot the affects the unit, draining the unit's APs first from his reserves (used for reaction fire) and then from the next turn. With enough units shooting at the same target, it would be entirely possible to pin them in place.

That's the one bit I don't like about the JA2 system. It's too mechanical, gradually paralyzing a unit.

When someone's shooting at you while you're running away, would you slow down?

Heavy suppression should have a chance to completely freak out a unit, often paralyzing it for a turn. Bravery and suppression level would influence that but it should be a random chance.

Getting a message that an enemy is "completely suppressed", as can happen in JA2, so that you can safely stroll over and put a knife into his heart - that's way too gamey.

Less brave soldiers (or aliens) should also be able to freak out / freeze when they are only a little suppressed. Random chance makes that possible.

Each weapon fire mode will have a "suppression damage" value, and when a soldier fires a weapon at a target (irrespective of whether they hit it) the suppression damage will be applied to the target's Suppression score. This is affected by armour as usual, so if the unit has powerful armour it will not be suppressed by firing weak weapons at it.

As gamey as that may be, the end result is pretty much on track.

In a burst, the first round is aimed. The rest? Kind of...

MG would (should! =) have longer bursts than AR so fewer bullets a likely to end up in the target while the sheer amount of bullets is a useful gauge of suppression.

Once Suppression reaches 0, any extra supression damage recieved is first deducted from the unit's AP reserves for the current turn (down to 0) and then from the AP in the following terms (again down to 0). Further suppression is wasted. Maybe we'll have a symbol appearing above the head of the unit to show it has been suppressed?

I wouldn't touch the target's AP.

Reduce it's accuracy, sure.

Being suppressed, you would still fire (largely) unaimed bursts into the general direction of the enemy, hoping to keep them at bay.

You just don't stick your head out to aim carefully.

A guaranteed paralysation of an enemy is way too exploitable. (as every JA2 v1.13 player has found out by now =)

The Suppression score should regenerate a certain amount each turn, perhaps something like 20. That means three turns without being fired at would return any unit to their full Suppression "shield".

That would be the best place for bravery to come into play.

While being shot at with a machine gun, a human's obvious reaction would be to keep his head down.

The difference would be that the brave one jumps up again once the salvo stops.

Bravery = suppression shield regeneration.

(terrible term but I can't think of a better one right now)

Suppression could just overlay the bravery bar, like starting to colour it from the top down.

Max bravery would still be visible (and used in calculations) but you could also see how much of it is currently "suppressed".

Regeneration could be a fixed % value of Bravery.

That way high bravery = higher total regen as well.

Modifying the % value is also less jerky than working with absolutes.

A chickenshit rookie isn't suddenly turning into the Hulk just because a sergeant is near. He might be 15% more brave...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm thinking the same thing, maybe if a unit is in a 2 square radius of a shot's terminus and 1 square either side of a shot's path.

I think it might be easier to check for units in x radius of the one you targeted. Though that would not suppress units far behind it that missing shots might also pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, suppression should affect an area. Or at least, suppression from burst fire should. I'm thinking that we may redo the way "burst" fire works so it doesn't use individual bullets like the single shots do but rather has multiple shots hitting inside a fixed area, although exactly where and what they hit in the area is largely down to random chance. However, everything in the area would take the suppression damage.

Machineguns would have a larger radius, and proportionately more hits to assign within that radius. That would make the machineguns very good at suppressing things and potentially devastating, but also pretty unreliable at consistently dealing damage. I think that would make auto fire a lot more awesome and fun than the current model. It'd also let us chew through ammo much more quickly, if a burst for an assault rifle was actually five bullets and a machinegun was throwing out more like fifteen in a burst. That means you might actually have to reload your guns at some point, and manage your ammo more effectively.

Bravery setting the upper limit fo the suppression shield as well as the % regeneration each turn would make sense to me.

I also sorta like the idea of units potentially freaking out under fire, but I am concerned it'd be adding another potentially confusing system into the mix when you already have that with morale. If there were small morale penalties for suppression, you can get the same effect without duplicating the system.

I think the AP sapping idea is good, though, and I'm fairly set on that (at least until we try it in the game). I think it makes a good back-and-forth mechanic where you can choose to try and kill the enemy, or just try to keep his head down. It'll also allow us to implement things like flashbang grenades to make storming entrances a little less dangerous than it currently is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit sceptical of changing a weapon to not fire bullets. I can see it from a balance perspective, and coolness perspective, as long as there are bullets shown. But.. if those bullets don't connect to targets because there's a chance to be hit by being in the area. I'm not sure I fully understand how you intend to implement this. Also, /realismrant a good MG gunner cut's his volleys to about three shots per squeeze. Because one want's to conserve ammo, and hit stuff. Spraying is super cool and fun though! These volleys come pretty fast with easy targets, and good gunners mind. So we could have MG's go drrrt, drrt, drrt and litter an area with bullets. /realsimrant

Adding suppression would be a huge benefit to the game I think. Proper tactics in ground combat. Wee!

Sniper fire should also have increased suppression btw. "Sniper!" and all that.

A potential freak out is plausible. I've never played JA2, but the kind of thing people are describing there is not very good. As soon as you figure out "the trick" every gc has been reduced to routine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It'd also let us chew through ammo much more quickly, if a burst for an assault rifle was actually five bullets and a machinegun was throwing out more like fifteen in a burst. That means you might actually have to reload your guns at some point, and manage your ammo more effectively.

That is important all by itself.

Machine guns are not overly heavy assault rifles. They eat ammo.

They aren't built that heavily for accuracy but to withstand literal meltdown.

I think the AP sapping idea is good, though, and I'm fairly set on that (at least until we try it in the game).

I think it makes a good back-and-forth mechanic where you can choose to try and kill the enemy, or just try to keep his head down.

I'd replace it with an accuracy reduction, maybe starting at half bravery / suppression and a max of 90% at full suppression.

The max ACC reduction value could be reduced by the soldier's bravery.

The veteran might only be suppressed down to 25% accuracy.

You could achieve mostly safety by suppressing enemies but they could still run away or land a lucky hit.

Guaranteed safety by paralysing them is lame.

It'll also allow us to implement things like flashbang grenades to make storming entrances a little less dangerous than it currently is.

Explosives like frags or flashbangs should be allowed to exceed "maximum" suppression and be the only means to achieve a guaranteed suppression / freeze.

Their quantity / handling / range are far more limited than guns.

A MG salvo might be loud but a grenade landing on the other side of your sandbag barrier makes your ears ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very much against the idea that it should reduce AP to 0 and cause complete paralyzation. I find it too exploitable as Gazz mentions.

Dunno if its possible to set supression to stop sapping AP when it reaches a certain % in the next turn. However Id very much prefere that over draining all of it.

What about makeing the actions of a supressed soldier cost more AP to perform? that way the supression could affect the next turn before completly draining a soldiers saved AP for reaction shots. Saved AP would act less as a buffer then the current method, if you want it to.

Would it be possible or are there code limitations to apply a temp modifier on the APcost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, suppression should affect an area. Or at least, suppression from burst fire should. I'm thinking that we may redo the way "burst" fire works so it doesn't use individual bullets like the single shots do but rather has multiple shots hitting inside a fixed area, although exactly where and what they hit in the area is largely down to random chance. However, everything in the area would take the suppression damage.

Machineguns would have a larger radius, and proportionately more hits to assign within that radius. That would make the machineguns very good at suppressing things and potentially devastating, but also pretty unreliable at consistently dealing damage. I think that would make auto fire a lot more awesome and fun than the current model. It'd also let us chew through ammo much more quickly, if a burst for an assault rifle was actually five bullets and a machinegun was throwing out more like fifteen in a burst. That means you might actually have to reload your guns at some point, and manage your ammo more effectively.

Bravery setting the upper limit fo the suppression shield as well as the % regeneration each turn would make sense to me.

First of all, fantastic. This will stop me having to mode the weapons file with every new incarnation just because I like the idea of chewing through ammo and the tactical level it adds.

Regarding your earlier comment. Not sure targets should remain suppressed for a fixed period of time. Perhaps only for one turn passed the one in which they were suppressed. It might get quite frustrating to have your unit unable to do anything for so many turns.

What about instead of paralysing or reducing AP like some others suggest you simply reduce the accuracy of the unit by an amount appropriate to their level of suppression and bravery. This negative accuracy modifier would increase each turn the unit remains under suppression. This would allow you to potentially move your unit out of the suppression zone but still make suppression a useful took for limiting combat effectiveness. In addition, it almost forces units out of cover. If you have a unit in cover under suppression, then each turn they stay there they are going to become less effective. This means they have to move - which means you could almost corridor enemy forces into kill-zones (a real-life used tactic).

In theory you could move into a suppression zone if it is active, but would suffer the same firing accuracy penalty. This means you can use burst fire to deny areas of the map to enemy units or at-least mean that if they enter that spot then they are going to be largely ineffective. I'm thinking a MG gunner suppressing a corridor here.

Most soldiers know to keep their head down when they are being shot at, but they also know that if they don't fire back in at-least token gesture they are very soon going to be flanked and get a grenade up their behinds.

Soldiers under suppression should not be able to fire suppression however. This would stop 1v1 situations where both are under suppression and neither one can hit anything.

Also, I think if you are talking about suppression areas, it should be more like a cone or corridor that extends to the front of the unit doing the firing. This stops enemy units simply walking forward two or three spaces and then opening fire completely unhindered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I think if you are talking about suppression areas, it should be more like a cone or corridor that extends to the front of the unit doing the firing. This stops enemy units simply walking forward two or three spaces and then opening fire completely unhindered.

This, indeed. The thing about not reducing AP or increasing costs of actions, is that suppressed units can simply walk away. Which would be kind of odd. "Yeah, I'm suppressed, but I'll be going over here now, so I'm not. Any more. Yeah." But on the other hand, they should be allowed to act. And it's not impossible to do a mad sprint from cover to cover while suppressed.. Just inadvisable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is important all by itself.

Machine guns are not overly heavy assault rifles. They eat ammo.

They aren't built that heavily for accuracy but to withstand literal meltdown.

I'd replace it with an accuracy reduction, maybe starting at half bravery / suppression and a max of 90% at full suppression.

The max ACC reduction value could be reduced by the soldier's bravery.

The veteran might only be suppressed down to 25% accuracy.

You could achieve mostly safety by suppressing enemies but they could still run away or land a lucky hit.

Guaranteed safety by paralysing them is lame.

...

...

Also, I think if you are talking about suppression areas, it should be more like a cone or corridor that extends to the front of the unit doing the firing. This stops enemy units simply walking forward two or three spaces and then opening fire completely unhindered.

Fully agree with these two. As a fellow JA113 player I completely agree that AP reduction isn't that great of an idea gameplay-wise. Accuracy reduction is superior imo.

In most games MGs are just inaccurate assault rifles with big magazines. I'd really like to see Xenonauts being closer to reality with MGs actually being better. If they weren't soldiers wouldn't carry them in spite of their high weight. With a MG you can send a lot more and bigger bullets towards your target in the same amount of time and nearly as accurate.

btw, could we maybe get bonuses to RFing at suppressed targets? That would be quite neat and also logical, since we are already aiming and shooting in their direction..

Edited by pack.wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the suppression area idea was just to add suppression to a unit.

Not for the area to be suppressed.

It is planned to be persistent, like stun damage.

If you are in the area to be suppressed then run to some cover elsewhere you will still be suppressed until you recover.

How about if you gave the machine gun two fire modes as well?

Keep the assault rifle as single and 3 shot burst.

Give the machine gun 3 shot burst and full auto.

Burst would be the more accurate mode or for ammo conservation.

Full auto would need to work out how many AP's the trooper had and work out how many rounds you could fire in that turn.

It would be much cheaper per shot than burst but much less accurate.

It would probably use all of your remaining AP for that turn.

It would allow you to get a lot of suppression into the enemy but probably do very little damage.

I see that as a template type attack.

Click full auto, drop the template where you want to suppress and click fire.

Your remaining AP are counted and the game works out you can fire 12 rounds.

It then sprays the area with 12 wildly inaccurate shots that each add suppression damage to units in the area.

Or click a target and each bullet adds suppression to any unit within a 4 tile radius of where it hits, either way works.

Edited by Gauddlike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little addon to Cris` suppression system idea:

1. Unit is under suppression fire - he starts to lose his suppression score.

2. He lost his suppression score, he starts to lose his AP left for this turn (reduced reaction fire).

3. He lost his current APs, he starts to lose AP for his next turn.

4. He lost half of his next turn`s AP, he starts to lose his morale.

This what we get:

a. we can reduce a unit`s reaction fire

b. we can force him to lose up to half of his next turn`s APs reducing his effectiveness

c. we can force him into freaking out if his morale is already reduced

d. suppressed unit has a chance to fire back, run away, find a cover if he is not panicking

e. makes bravery (morale) a bit more important for your soldiers

f. removes 'total paralization' effect from suppression (entirely moving it to morale system)

EDITED:

About flags/signs.

If a unit has lost his current APs (reaction fire not possible) a small text sign 'suppressed' should float above him.

If a unit has lost half of his next turn`s APS a small text sign 'pinned down' should float above him.

Both signs float for a second or so. Your soldiers can see if a unit has ducked/kneeled/made another suppression-related action and they can also see if their target is pinned down, so these messages are ok in terms of reality.

Edited by Okim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why people want suppression only to affect accuracy. If you've got a guy firing a machinegun at you and you dive behind the nearest wall, you don't then just get up and stroll away while the bullets are still flying. You stay down, pinned in place. You might peek over the top and return fire, sure, but you're not going to move from that location. Logically it should affect movement more than firing accuracy.

This is actually more how suppression works in Company of Heroes, now I think about it. It was fantastic there. Could it be "overpowered", and lead to units being wiped out when you moved an unsuppressed unit over and attacked the suppressed unit at close range? Yes, it could. That was the point of bringing an MG along as a support weapon. The key was not to get your units supressed. If you played the game as if the suppression mechanics were not in place then you'd obviously lose, but both players were aware of its effects then it made combat far more exciting than it was before.

Just to clarify, units won't be supressed for multiple turns, but their suppression shield would take time to recharge so they'd be easier to suppress again for a couple of turns after being suppressed until it has recharged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the game today on desura and really like the folder and file structure. Looks very good for modding.

Hmm! I realized I could make a summary of some of what's below : I would rather the suppression system not have effect on Action Points of any unit, but instead is part of behind the scenes AI decision making for aliens and other NPCs.

Would it be possible instead for the AI to take notice of the size/obvious power of shots coming at or near it (relative to defense or bravery of it, or some other combination including morale) , and change its behavior according to that? I'm assuming the morale and AI would otherwise be similar to x-com. AI choices seem like they could solve a similar purpose as stat based suppression. It wasn't fun for me in JA2 to look at stats, units pinned in place by accumulating suppression , that sort of thing. I'm just seeing lots of neat obstacles in xenonauts already, and I wonder if the AI would react by :

(all depending on 'personality' of the alien)

If small number of rocket attacks : find a large solid wall between itself and the soldiers, go behind it

If large number of rocket attacks : run into building or away to regroup with team aliens

If large number of small arms fire : put itself behind obstacle between itself and soldiers, or use smoke screen

If lots of fire from indoor area to outdoor area (and little or no flank fire), periodically peek at them and surround the building with teammates, then move in all at once.

If some other situation i hadn't thought of : shoot a hole in a wall and jump through, blow a hole in the floor in a two story building and jump in, run back to the ufo and set traps, run into the chinook and set traps, feign death on first hit - then use melee or throw grenade when troops get close.

I don't know what 's planned for morale, but to me the difference between this stuff and a 'demoralized' alien or troop is that a unit can't coordinate with any other unit when panicking, and a berserked unit can 't either and it could kill itself or teammates, or get lucky. I understand that suppression could work in addition to AI, but if it ends up mostly holding units in place, I would rather have other options if possible.

What if a cannon could be used to possibly scare an alien out of a building and into an area you have an ambush waiting? IIRC, xenonauts uses or will use accuracy-reduced-by-range. If various heavy weapons had a high rate of fire, the enemy reacted to (but maybe they would not be fooled twice) ..to large numbers of missed shots, and these weapons only had terrible accuracy at medium and long range, then I guess they could serve the suppression purpose and more.

edit : About accuracy of burst shots. I guess that the accuracy reduce by range stuff will help this, if burst is reduced most by range, possibly in addition to difference of this for each weapon. But maybe also weapons can have different damage-reduced-by-range amounts also.

"Scout/sniper-ing" was a thing I didn't like in xcom. I ended up playing more often so that I only allowed units who could directly see another unit to use burst or snap shot on it. If they could only see it indirectly, only aimed shot could be used. It made mobility and cover more important and less like playing a weird game of tower defense with movable towers. Pistols were more useful, even without accuracy tweaking.

Edited by local

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand why people want suppression only to affect accuracy. If you've got a guy firing a machinegun at you and you dive behind the nearest wall, you don't then just get up and stroll away while the bullets are still flying. You stay down, pinned in place.

IRL you probably want to crawl away because staying in place is a safe bet for dieing. When you're being suppressed, the flanking force is surely on the way to take you out while you're playing sitting duck.

Stun locking is a terrible mechanic in every game that it was ever used in.

When aliens use it, it sucks. When the player uses it, it's cheesy and unrewarding.

I've seen it in MMOs, in RPG, in JA2 - it never was good gameplay because it stops play.

Okay, so it's the easiest and most straightforward way to implement a suppression effect. Just apply the "damage" to a unit's AP, letting it go negative. No need for any additional shield or suppression stat. If that's the only consideration, fine. Nothing I can do about it.

An accuracy (and smaller reaction) penalty leaves the "play" in gameplay. You can't stroll up to the suppressed alien, stand next to it, and leisurely empty half a clip into it.

It may be a bit dazed and not fight back effectively but suppressed ot not, it's going to do something about your idea of a snuff movie.

Edited by Gazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with suppression affecting AP is the same as units that panic.

They suddenly become completely useless.

You have no control over them and just have to sit and watch them get finished off.

That is not fun.

Same goes for the other side.

If the enemy can't fight back then there is no tension.

Making actions take more AP, or making those actions less effective, lets you keep control of your troops and leaves some risk involved in taking on the enemy.

An accuracy reduction and an increase in movement costs while suppressed would seem to connect the suggestions so far.

Represents firing wildly without taking time to aim and having to move with more care.

Edited by Gauddlike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An accuracy reduction and an increase in movement costs while suppressed would seem to connect the suggestions so far.

The increase in movement costs is largely the same as "AP damage".

If you decide to move away from the bad place, you're more likely to run like hell than to walk carefully.

What would better model the risk while moving is an increase in damage taken while out of cover.

Suppressed units would have a motivation to stay in cover but the option to break out and face enemy fire.

This "vulnerability" would require high values of suppression to kick in but low enough that there is a chance it carries over into the suppressed unit's turn.

Thinking of vulnerability as a direct consequence makes no sense.

It's purpose is to model that the unit stands up and runs away while under fire, or gets pinned down out in the open while the MGs walk their fire onto it.

With things happening in different turns, this simply has to carry over from one turn to the next.

The problem with suppression affecting AP is the same as units that panic.

They suddenly become completely useless.

You have no control over them and just have to sit and watch them get finished off.

That is not fun.

Same goes for the other side.

If the enemy can't fight back then there is no tension.

In Everquest (MMO), entire parties were built around the mechanic of stun locking.

Someone pulls a huge horde of enemies towards the party.

An enchanter would AE stun an infinite amount of them.

4-5 wizards annihilate everything with AE damage.

Win.

The same worked with other classes in slightly different ways.

Or take Gothic 2. The simple fly was one of the most dangerous opponents in the game because it attacked so fast that it interrupted all your attempts to swing back at it.

The monster was never intended to have god mode but if you failed to nail it with a bow and it closed to melee range, a simple fly would veeeeery slowly sting you to death.

Game over. All you had left to do was watch the hero die or reload an earlier save.

Stun locking is never... ever... fun or challenging. It simply ends the fight while the other side is still watching it's execution play out.

Why bother with hit points, cover, reaction fire, or different kinds of weapons and armour when they are all made meaningless by being paralysed?

Guaranteed stun locking disables every other game mechanic!

Edited by Gazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is we're having is that suppression should both keep units in place, and not do it. At the same time. How about this then; While suppressed the AP cost for fire is slightly increased, the accuracy is moderately decreased. The AP cost to move is slightly increased. If you move and then fire, that unit's turn ends. Moving and then firing costs all remaining AP. This would simulate popping out of cover to fire, which would immediately illicit a hail of bullets. This now occurs naturally in the opponents turn. (If they decide to shoot) Next turn, you can fire again, and move back into cover. Or just make a run for it, or whatever, but still suffering from higher AP costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The increase in movement costs is largely the same as "AP damage".

If you decide to move away from the bad place, you're more likely to run like hell than to walk carefully.

What would better model the risk while moving is an increase in damage taken while out of cover.

Suppressed units would have a motivation to stay in cover but the option to break out and face enemy fire.

You move in your own turn, you are at risk of a rare reaction shot.

Even more rare for the enemy if you have spent all your AP trying to suppress them.

Yes that does make suppression useful in the turn of the suppressor, not much use otherwise.

Suppression would be a purely offensive action that basically just gives your troops a damage boost.

Increased AP cost for movement is not the same as AP reduction.

The main clue is in the word MOVEMENT.

If you lose your AP you have no options.

If you can move but you know it will take time then you can decide if you want to fire back, drop smoke, or risk that move to better cover.

If I was being shot at I wouldn't get up and run in plan view, I would keep my head down if I needed to move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality, suppression doesn't really lock you in the exact same place - it usually just stops you moving quickly (as you have to crawl). In addition it definitely stops you from firing back accurately as you will only be able to take token shots at the aggressor in an attempt to stop their suppression. Certainly you will not be as aware of what is going on around you so maybe this should be something that was implemented (a reduction in view range) as this is the real reason for suppression - while you wait for your flanking unit to make the kill.

If you are suppressed, your not going to be sitting behind the only rock in the world. You're going to have all sorts of other obstacles that you can hide behind or can use to block a direct line of fire not to mention the difference even small undulations in the terrain can make. As long as the unit in suppression they should still have some ability to respond. Lying still when you are being suppressed is a guaranteed way of getting killed. You are always supposed to move backwards and sideways on the deck.

So yeah, basically there should be an accuracy reduction and perhaps a movement penalty such as double cost movement actions (not an AP reduction).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would keep my head down if I needed to move.

The funny thing is that I agree in principle - but there are no crawling animations in Xenonauts.

You can't display it in any way that makes sense. Crouch-walking away in plain sight is just asking to get killed.

Barring that, the other (believable) way to avoid getting hit is running like hell, dashing for the next cover.

Yes that does make suppression useful in the turn of the suppressor, not much use otherwise.

Suppression would be a purely offensive action that basically just gives your troops a damage boost.

That's why this suppression effect has to carry over into the next turn.

The easiest way to do that would be to make "suppression decay" happen at the end of one's own turn.

Turn 8 Human: you suppress the sectiod for 80 points, maxing it.

Turn 8 Alien: sectoid runs back, trying to reach a healthier place.

Turn 8 interrupt human: Reaction fire nails it for 20 damage, plus bonus damage from max suppression level.

Turn 8 Alien: sectiod continues to a safer bit of cover. End turn. Sectoid suppression reduced by 26 points.

With reaction fire you get the full benefit of suppression because it's "immediate".

If you want to advance on a suppressed unit in the next turn, you have to do so while laying down further fire because the enemy has had one round's worth of suppression decay since your last turn.

Since your suppression only decays at the end of your own turn, too, dashing for better cover "under fire" would be hazardous if any other alien can get off reaction fire.

Sitting tight in your current foxhole would seem safer (you're not inviting reaction fire) but sarge has hammered into your brain that sitting tight is going to get you killed because the flanking move is going to come. And then you're hamburger.

Certainly you will not be as aware of what is going on around you so maybe this should be something that was implemented (a reduction in view range)

Good spot!

Very good addition to simulate "distraction".

It also makes reacion fire by suppressed units less likely. (you can't hit what you can't see)

You still couldn't walk up right next to suppressed units and pump them full of lead but suppression would make it much easier to pull a flanking move.

Useful tactics here we come! =)

Edited by Gazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Suppression would be a purely offensive action that basically just gives your troops a damage boost.

If suppression was to actually suppress the other sides movement, your guys would need to fire in their round not in their own. They would need to save saving AP for suppression fire the way they need to save them for reaction fire.

Someone in cover and under suppression fire sure still would be able to throw a grenade or shoot in the direction of suppression fire, but very inaccurately. He could accurately shoot someone from the opposite direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now