Xentax

I was playing earlier today (Iron Man, if it matters). Quit out, came back from dinner, and my save game is gone - looks like Steam updated the game with this build in between. Is it expected that this final release breaks saved games from the immediately prior version? EDIT: Actually, if the 1.0 is still only on experimental, I guess I'm running the RC build still? I was getting the Steam trading cards throughout the day today but my save game only poofed in the last 2 hours.

Hmm...sounds like I want to start all my guys with heavy armor and MGs and let them sink or swim (almost literally). Overall, I don't think there's anything "wrong" (as in, broken and HAS to be changed) with the current mechanics - and the per-mission cap on gains is a good way to avoid insane meta-gaming. If I was going to tweak it further, I think it'd be on the strategic side. In addition to the existing 'basic training', how about letting you mark a stat for each soldier as their 'advanced training regimen'? For that stat, for that soldier, their per-mission cap is 3 instead of 2, and/or they have a lower threshold to raise that stat. Maybe late-game research could give you the ability to mark 2 such stats for each soldier? And of course you can change it as you like. So if you want to build focused characters (pick a sniper and max out his accuracy, then reflexes, then everything else; meanwhile a heavy gunner focuses on strength, then health, then action or reflexes), or work on having every soldier have good minimum stats - it's a strategic choice you manage *strategically*, rather than tactically.

Good answer on the stat gain - I'll check out the details. As for a near-miss at long range - I actually *liked* that about X-Com - it's realistic and dramatic. As for the 'aim way past them so a miss might still hit them' - that's just silly. I know it's unreasonable to expect the game to model bullet drop (and of course that's irrelevant for lasers), but I'd rather see that accounted for directly than make the guns spray excessively. My thought is to map the deviation at the shooter's position, not the target's (would have thought it's already like this) and to have the deviation be a stat of the weapon. So a precision rifle will have a tight group - at short ranges, yes it really is hard to miss. The precision weapons have (or should have) a high minimum per-shot action cost to reflect their nature. Conversely, beyond an automatic weapon's optimal range a hit is very low probability and significant deviation (and the risk of collateral damage) is to be expected. Another option is to tie the precision weapon's accuracy to be very good if crouched and little-better-than-assault if standing. But I vaguely recall that already being discussed and dismissed...

- Feels like weapons got *too* inaccurate in one specific way: The 'spray' on a miss. I think the current percentages are good; but for example, I had a sniper take a snap shot at ... roughly 12 squares, 31% chance to hit. The angle of the miss was something like 30 degrees off target. Even with a 'no scope' shot, that seemed excessive; it might actually be OK for a 'from the hip' shot on the automatic weapons though. Perhaps a max deviation for the precision weapons? - Troops don't seem to gain APS unless they use up their total - or at least, more than the amount you'd reserve for a snap shot. Is this deliberate? As it stands, I don't like the choice being between "overextend" and "don't increase in AP". Ideally you'd get a very modest bonus (1 or maybe 2 AP) early on if you spend most rounds with a snap shot left, and maybe 1-2 more if you used up your AP in several rounds. Having said that, I think the early game is shaping up great. I love the wider variance in early ground maps.

I hit the same problem - killed it with the Hunter, next turn it centered on the explosion and hung there.

AFAIK they will only react-fire to aliens, but they could still hit a civilian in the process. I'm also not sure if units with AOE and thrown weapnos (rocket launcher, grenades, etc.) will react-fire those; pretty sure they will not.

Tuninator - that's why I argued against any direct player-civ interaction, having it become tedious would be a step backwards. But, in terror missions (at least!) the aliens ARE actively hunting civilians. Therefore, giving the player a choice (spend more time units near civilians = civilians move towards areas you've "cleared") is a potentially interesting gameplay dynamic. You can be fast and aggressive and try to find the aliens before they kill any/many civs, or you can try to find the civs and get them out of the way. If the latter strategy works you'll get a higher score but it'll take longer and your units may be more exposed (plus a higher chance of accidentally killing civs yourself).

I think you're right on track Chris. If construction or research times are a factor, having them "in progress" when the game starts as someone suggested would work. E.g. you could have the 4th Hangar under construction but not set to finish if you want their total construction time to stay meaningful. As in, Xenonauts know they need a heavy hitter. There's a research project ready to start to find one; in the meantime, base techs are building a place to house the prototype once it's found and obtained. On a related note, I think you should find something for techs to make off the bat too. Otherwise, since Xenonauts scientists are instant hire/fire, there's no reason NOT to just fire all the techs and hire more scientists until there's something to make. Perhaps make med kits manufactured instead of infinite - after all, some of their kit is unique to treating laser and plasma burns, right?

The other reason - even in the original X-Com was "Alien Infiltration". As in, they co-opt the government; whether it's mind-control, duplicates, hostages, whatever. I don't think it was "I, for one welcome our SnakeMan overlords..." The original X-Com project itself was still a secret (even if "the world is at war with aliens" isn't, some details are always classified). It would be pretty easy to have a vichy-style government convince its people it's still doing the right thing. After all, once that government flips, I have no doubt alien "terror-style" attacks in that country come to a halt (yay, our government is protecting us!). Meanwhile, alien bases are built to attack elsewhere and internal 'disappearances' don't make the news... Not all that different from our own history, in the end. (Edit: Grammar)

AnotherDevil makes a good point about not even necessarily knowing what's going on, especially at night. That's why I propose to make it all chance based and affected by proximity. A civ in 'mode 1' would run away from whatever they perceive as a threat, which would include your units and their fire, unless/until they got close enough to 'figure out these might be the good guys'. I think it's also reasonable for a subset of civs to try to stay in whatever building they're in (maybe they keep closing the doors if you'd opened them too ). After all that may well be the safest option - if you get to that building before an alien does.

The language thing is legit, but humans are still recognizably humans, even if they have weird guns and uniforms you don't recognize. If you're running away from an ALIEN and a human with a gun points THAT WAY, you'll do that if you can control your panic long enough to think about it... I'd like to see civs in two AI modes: 1. Panic: They run away from the latest perceived threat (last alien they saw, or last dead unit or other civ, or last explosion/gunfire, etc. This would include reversing direction if they turn a corner and they see ANOTHER such scare. 2. Herded: They move towards the nearest safe zone or the chopper. Being near your units increases the odds of them entering mode 2 during the off-turn. Maybe your units have a stat that improves this? Seeing an alien die/disable may also prompt them to enter mode 2 and head towards the source of the shot. Seeing a live alien, seeing one of your units or another civ die, explosions/gunfire that they can't see the origin of, etc. increases the odds of them going into/stay in mode 1. If this friendly NPC AI stuff is really going to happen, that kind of behavior ought to be doable as well... EDIT: If no soldier stat is relevant, Civs could have a hidden (and wildly varying) morale stat that affects how likely they are to be in/stay in mode 2 instead.

I liked having "moddable" weapons in the UFO series (e.g. laser sight, scope, silencer, etc.) but I don't think those are must-haves if they're a distraction from moving to higher tiers. But, if game-play testing discovers too big of a gap between two given tiers, having modded versions for the lower tier might help fill the gap.

Yep, both true. I raise the MG issue because 1) I assume it's never too soon to start talking about balance, though it may be too soon to start acting on it; and 2) Consider taking the UI on % to hit further. If each shot in a 5-shot burst has a 14% chance to hit, that's a 53% (1 - .86^5) chance to hit with at least one shot. I think a player's a lot more likely to spend the AP if they realize it's 53% chance to do *some* damage.

Pretty much what Gorlom said, balance issue. Even with a to-hit around 14%, One or two hits land and it dies. It's better than the sniper rifle at range if you compare damage vs AP used. For a simple trial, run the same mission twice, once with snipers and m-16s, and again where everyone has an mg.

Cross-posted to a new thread from here by request. Updates in-line. Research Screen, Weaponry category is mispelled "Weaponary" (extra 'a') Weapon AP reservation setting not remembered across turns (causes extra micro at least IMHO) - Same for auto vs. snap shot - Ideally, you could set a default per soldier; then the tactical battle would remember whatever it's been changed to last for the duration of a battle. Weapon AP reservation kicks in even if the requested action is to fire a shot (should only prevent movement/inventory - again, IMHO) (Edit: Probably by-design; I wouldn't mind an advanced game option to 'allow shot to consume reserved shot' or something, but it's Pri 3ish) Not 100% sure, but seemed like weapon AP reservation was showing reserve when actually not, on a turn where the soldier was not panic'ed but had panic'ed the previous turn. Not sure if intended or not: An alien was facing away from my LZ; I shot and missed; when a second soldier got a bit closer the alien spun 180 and fired. I was expecting reaction fire only; not turning to that degree as well (45 might be ok, but 180?). Jackal Combat armor seems to be slightly color-shifted while the heal animation is playing. I've yet to NOT kill early-game aliens with a single burst from the Machine Gun. Even with a low (~14%) chance to hit. Not sure this much power is adequately balanced by the weight, but granted I haven't gotten very far into the campaign. I couldn't find the last enemy on a mission; I pulled all my units back to the Chinook but couldn't figure out how to dust off...? (Edit: Gorlom clarified how the control victory condition works for me. Thanks! Edit: Deleted, part of below First Corvette ground battle, the game stopped responding at the first hidden movement phase. Music kept playing, clicking the mouse made the normal little click as if it was my turn, but I couldn't escape out or anything; had to close the app.