Jump to content

Max_Caine

Administrators
  • Content count

    5,139
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    35

Everything posted by Max_Caine

  1. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    Double post because I think this deserves its own post. Further to my comment about the interactivity of agents, I think there are possibly options you might give to agents to encourage using agents during the month as opposed to just a start-of-month/end-of-month choice. These are just some of my thoughts on the matter: Freezing Panic: An Agent might freeze the Panic score in a Region for X number of days, (say, 10 days_. However, once Panic is unfrozen any Panic gained for an equal number of days is subject to a score multiplier (say, 1.5x, rounding up). This would encourage use of an agent during critical moments in a month, perhaps at the start of a wave, or just before another orbital bombardment. Assignable Research Panic multipliers: Playing off the previous idea, a Agent might instead assign score multipliers to a set number of Regions with some negative, some positive for the Panic reduction that Research gives. for example, you might have 0.2x, 0.5x, 1.2x and 2x. For X number of research items, Regions have Research Panic adjusted by the score mutiplier. Perhaps X also governs the spread of the multipliers, with more research items giving fewer positive mutipliers and more negative multipliers. As it is known in advance how long it will take for any particular research item to be researched, a player can judge how quickly they can stack up scores using the multiplier. If there's a suffient disparity in time verses score of a research item and he desirability of the research item (weapon/armour upgrades should in this instance have the highest scores but be the longest to research) then you can have in-depth discussion about research Panic "builds". Reduction in proliferation time of a Technology: Something that would affect Ground Combat directly, one might direct an Agent to reduce proliferation time, perhaps from say 30 days to perhaps 20 or even 15. This would be done at the point of end of research, so could happen at any time.
  2. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    I wanted to get some real data before resuming this argument unfortunately my job (I'm a key worker in the transport industry) and the game (crashing mid Feb) makes it diffcult to present the consequence of reducing capacity over time. So I'll work with what I've got. The argument as presented is that it is immaterial if the total capacity for panic of a region goes down. So long as panic drops by even 1 point better then it is always better to choose the option that reduces the most panic even if it drops capacity. For the purposes of this argument I'm going to assume that I get 1 agent at the start of the game and that without capturing a VIP or some other method, I only get 1 agent at the start of the month. Furthermore, I'm going to assume that the agent only had the ability as presented in the orginal post - reducing panic. Therefore, the most opportune time to use an agent will 99% of the time be just before I get paid because at that moment I cannot gain any more panic that will harm funding. The other time that I would use an agent outside of that is just before a region is about to be lost to panic, that represents a last ditch attempt to keep the region. As an aside, unless you come up with more reasons to use agent, there's really no point in making agents interactive witha button and everything. You may as well just have the option to assign an agent before funding is calculated or as an option when a region is about to be lost. At the start of January my panic is: 30 / 20 / 30 / 20 / 20 / 20 At the end of January my panic is: 34 / 41 / 33 / 44 / 33 / 14 or : +4 / +21 / +3 / +24 / +13 / -6 I would draw your attenton to 2 regions which have seen a significant upswing in panic. At the moment, the panic is manageable - the use of an agent would drop 1 region of the two most paniced down to 31 or 34 respectively. If, however, two regions continue to see the same upswing every month or worse the question of reduced capacity is more significant. If two regions see an upswing of +20 Panic every month, then (frorm starting panic) it takes 4 months for a region to reach maximum Panic. If capacity is reduced even by 10, if a region sees an upswing of +20 every month it reaches maximum panic (from starting panic) in 3-4 months. In the most immediate terms, yes, it is always preferable to select the option that drops Panic by the largest amount, but in the context of a campaign, chouces with a permanent effect make resonate down the line. In short, it is possible to make the game harder by the choices you make earlier on. What I think would be helpful for you would be to have somone knock up a Panic simulator, with eveyrthing autoresolved so you can see the progression of Panic in regions. Once this interceptor bug is fixed, I'll be able to assemble a lot more data to show Panic progression over a set of months, so I can show you what reduced capacity means.
  3. Max_Caine

    Idea: Conceal Mechanic

    If you proceed along that route, then in terms of game mechanics you see-saw between a mechanic being OP, and a mechanic being utterly useless, the periods of usefulness and uselessness being as long as the designers see fit. I'd prefer a mechanic that I can use consistently throughout the lifespan of the game.
  4. Max_Caine

    Idea: Conceal Mechanic

    Regarding camouflage: it's an interesting concept, but I can see it being horribly abused. As Charon so rightly notes, LOS is more important than cover so switching everyone to camo as soon as possible would be the obvious choice. If the counter to camouflage is to produce abilities that neutralise camouflage then the counter to that would be to kill any neutralising agents first then you have free reign of the map. I think if something like camouflage were to work, it would have to be unstable, in a similar way to the way that Reapers' camouflage in XCOM2 is unstable so you can't consistently be camouflaged.
  5. Max_Caine

    limitation of M.A.R.S. and A.R.E.S.

    Needs more Dakka?
  6. Max_Caine

    limitation of M.A.R.S. and A.R.E.S.

    When the MARS was first introduced, it became clear pretty quickly that the MARS was a bit OP when deployed in multiples, especially when people sang the praises of the MARS and told stories of how their 4-team of MARS roflstomped the opposition. So now it's a hard cap of 1. You get a juicy bit of tech on the field without facerolling the aliens.
  7. On the armoury screen on the bottom left hand section, you have a list of soldiers. There's a tab for soldiers in the skyhawk and a tab for all other soldiers. Try clicking between the tabs to get a feel for it.
  8. This is probably better directed at Chris rather than me, and I'd love to see your opinions on other things Chris wants to introduce over on the Geoscape Strategic War thread. The only thing I'll say is that we're in a time of crisis right now, and the opinions of the hoi polloi have definitely shaped the thinking of our illustrious leaders.
  9. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    Let me rephrase myself, and let's work through your example. Let us say that one starts with a maximum Panic score of 100 per region. Let us say that when deploying an agent you have two choices. Choice A is twice as effective as Choice B but when using Choice A, you reduce capacity by 10. So, if a particular region has a score of 59/100 and you have the choice for that to be reduced to either 39/90, or 49/100 (a drop of 20/10 or 10/0 respectively), equilibrium would be maintained, both being 51 points away. The impact of Choice A is to see the panic bar maximum drop for that region in contrast to all other regions and to permanently have less capacity in that region in comparison to all other regions. Ergo, there's no short term benefit and the long term effect is damaging due to a reduction of capacity, which would always be clear as you can compare both current panic and maximum panic capacity for all regions at a glance from the main screen. Therefore, using your example, Choice A is worse than Choice B, so Choice A should never be chosen and my suggestion is terrible. To make my suggestion work, Choice A would have to be a much more significant drop that Choice B. If Choice A were three times more effective than Choice B then, using the prior example, 59/100 is 29/90 and 49/100, 61 and 51 points away respectively. To really make Choice A work, I would say that it would have to be four times as effective, so 59/100 becomes 19/90 and 49/100, 71 and 51 points respectively. It would seem that Choice A would then be an automatic choice, but the reduction in capacity can creep up very quickly.
  10. I'd like to see more mission variety as well, but missions have to be more than play differently - they also have to tie into the strategic map. Shooting down UFOs grants on the strategic level tech for research, materials for building and panic reduction. Completing Terror Sites/Raids prevents big jumps in panic. Destroying alien bases prevents a slow buildup of panic, grants tech for research and materials for building. What would these suggested mission types do on the strategic level, and why are they any different to the current mission types?
  11. Max_Caine

    [V11.3] Can not build at second base

    Are you having the same issues in v12.1?
  12. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    Well, that would depend upon the psychological feel you want to give to the game. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you want to give the player the sensation that at the start of the game, for every fire s/he stomps on, two more spring up. If there's a real sense of urgency, then that 49/90 could go to 49/80, or 49/70 very quickly.
  13. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    The War of the Worlds strategy/hybrid RTS have the kind of sensation that you want to invoke, Ninothree. Scotland and the North are hammered in the first few strategic turns by Martian landings. The human defenders don't have the manpower or industrial base to fight back, so you have surrender the North and draw a defensive line in the Midlands, bunkering down and fending off Martian forays until you've built up a sizable industrial and technical base and can lead an invasion into Martian held lands. This is quite cleverly done - when playing as the Martians, the Martian landings ensure that you grab a good sized portion of the map immediately, but your units land without any kind of support infrastructure AT ALL, so you can make a few quick grabs in the first 2 or 3 turns, but by then you have so many units without support you spend all your time nursing sick units until the infrastructure to support them is there.
  14. Max_Caine

    On a few minor details

    Well, locational damage as presented is a framework on which a more complex system can be built. However, I've personally never been keen on any locational damage system where you can deliberately choose a location than earns significantly more damage than other locations, because then that becomes the only location worth choosing. PP did this right - there is normally no spot on an enemy which which is a damage multiplier, but all that did was then change the focus to shooting off enemy locations that could do damage.
  15. Max_Caine

    On a few minor details

    Regarding Art Design of UFOs: https://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/index.php?/topic/20140-ufo-design/&tab=comments#comment-174487 Regarding stances (esp. going prone): https://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19551-going-prone/&tab=comments#comment-169767 Regarding locational damage: https://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/index.php?/topic/20979-new-damage-armour-system/
  16. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    I think there's more that could be done with Agents, especially with reference to War Events. One could spend an Agent to mitigate (not neutralise, just mitigate) a War Event, and then you don't have that Agent to improve Panic in a region later. EDIT: Context sensitive flowery text would also go a long way to making the agent button more engaging. You're not just pressing a button, you're "deploying to co-ordinate local relief efforts", or "hosting a summit on known infiltration techniques" or perhaps more sinisterly "silencing a vocal critic permanently". EDIT 2: Heck, thinking about it, you could have two flavours of Panic reduction. "Positive" Panic reduction which is plain vanilla as described in the OP, which simulates things like PR, working with leaders, etc. etc., and "Negative" Panic reduction, which provides a bigger Panic drop but permanently reduces the max Panic score. That simulates the darker side of the coin which includes things like smearing or assassinating vocal critics, suppressing information, clearing black sites, etc. etc.
  17. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    A quick question on the Aerial Terror Mission. Is a special kind of UFO going to spawn, or is it going to be more of a steambirds-esque grand melee with several classes of UFO swirling around?
  18. Max_Caine

    Geoscape Strategic War

    Are these going to replace Strategic Operations? It would seem that anything that StratOps can do, these features can as well.
  19. Ichthyic, you make a vague complaint, then when someone wants to listen to you. you walk away.Why won't you talk about something you felt passionately enough about to make your plea not an hour ago?
  20. Wouldn#'t those things be covered by the Release Announcements, Development Updates and Feature discussions? What is missing from those? I'm genuinely interested to know.
  21. They are finite. From the testing thread Chris talks about how there are 3-5 uplinks per region.
  22. I saw a post on Steam complaining that the terrain is not destructable. I testsed this on a Probe arboreal map, and found that while terrain was destructable, there were some issues. 1) Not all props have a weakened state. Barn walls, trees and bushes seem to have no weakened state 2) Not all props vanish when destroyed. Trees and bushes when destroyed do not vanish.
  23. Unless v12 is both early and an absolutely amazing version with no bugs or flaws and with nothing else to add whatsoever.....
  24. Opinions on the SMG These opinions are not original - I've posted them before. However, I'm now posting them in the context of being able to use the SMG as a Primary weapon as well as Secondary. Currently, SMGs struggle to compete with other weapon types There's nothing it does that can't be done better by the OG Primary weapons. It need a new niche, as well as staying within the bounds of authenticty and credability (I won't use the word "realistic" in a game where you fight 7 foot tall regenerating lizards from space). The SMG The SMG could be a contender for close quarters role, just as SMGs are used IRL but we have to be aware that the shotgun is also intended for this role so, while both weapons should compete, there shoudn't be a clear winner (otherwise you'd only ever kit out soldiers with one weapon type). Suggested changes: Remove single shot and aimed shot. Leave only burst shot and increase burst shot to 4. The shotgun fires one shot that splits into 4 pellets. To compete with this, allow the SMG to fire more shots per burst. Removing the single-shot modes tie into other later changes, so will be referenced there. Reduce cost of burst fire from 50% to 20%. This is probably the key difference that changes up the SMG. By making burst fire so much cheaper, you transform the SMG into a spray and pray weapon. Typically, a squaddie armed with a SMG with a reduced AP cost will fire 2-3 bursts in a turn. This makes it very good for storming prepared positions, e.g. breaching a UFO. It is this change why single-shot should be removed, because if you make burst fire cheapo, single shots loose their savour. Additionally, this makes the SMG one of the few first starting weapons where ammo management is important, because with the increase in shots for burst fire, it's very easy to dump the mag. Reduce damage from 20 to 14. Without changing damage the two previous changes make the SMG OP. But, if we reduce the amount of damage the SMG does per shot to that of a pistol, a single burst is unlikely to kill an alien, you'd probably need 2 or 3, unlike a shotgun which can kill in a single shot. This change also makes the SMG more authentic, as it is now using pistol rounds, as SMGs have historically done. Reduce range from 16 to 12. The SMG has a 3-tile advantage over the shotgun, but the range of the SMG should not compete directly with the assault rifle, I say reduce it to help shape its niche. Reduce suppression damage from 20 to 10. The increase in bursts makes the SMG suppression king, which is more the LMG's role. By halving the amount of suppression damage done the SMG is more likely to suppress at close range after several bursts, but not just one! In summary, I currently can't see any reason why the SMG should be kept. As a Primary, the OG Primaries outstrip it. As a Secondary, the pistol is the better choice. The SMG needs an overhaul, and by push it towards its historical role as a close-quarters high rate of fire weapon, the SMG could be preserved both as a Primary and a Secondary weapon.
  25. Oh dear, people on GoG are going to be disappointed.
×