Jump to content

EternalSorrow

Members
  • Content count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About EternalSorrow

  • Rank
    Rookie
  1. EternalSorrow

    Community Discussion - Air Combat

    Ok, but is the X1 mini-game not manageable at the start? Most of people are talking about simplifications and making the game manageable by all kinds of players, but nobody talks about how to preserve it being fun. The truly interesting game will always require some minimal skill, the more depth the game has, the higher will be the entry level. I cannot understand players asking for the game which will be playing it itself -- that leads to the "auto-resolve" combat as the only option, and it doesn't matter, will it be equipped with the beautiful cutscene or 3 buttons "agressive/defensive/moderate" -- the difference is pretty cosmetic. I hope not. I don't see any reason to play the strategy game you cannot loose. Seems to very nice fit over the X1's combat system. You maneuver your crafts to get the fire solution from the right angle, trading between risk/reward. Taking down UFO from the six, for example, is the least risky way, but may lead to the UFO's engine system being hit and detonated. Or being hit on frontal convergence will kill the piloting crew and destroy few core components, but will leave most of the UFO intact. The X1's mini-game system allows to generate a lot of situations, when you try to approach the UFO from the right angle by distracting it with your another plane, and planning your course and firing angle to hit the UFO module precisely.
  2. EternalSorrow

    Community Discussion - Air Combat

    Strongly disagree. Too simple mini-game will become an uninteresting routine and lose it's depth. Xenonauts supposed to be a deep game with the lot of things to learn. X1's minigame was very nice way to spend few hours to think about your tactics, but not distracting from the Geoscape/Ground Tactic game part -- it already has the things you're talking about. Furthermore, X1 has a choice -- potentially more rewarding participation in combat by yourself, or auto-resolition, dealing more damage to your crafts/losing more ammo, but yielding a better result in comparison to a low-skill player approach. The game encourages your efforts, but lets low-skill/lazy player to skip the combat and still get decent result. I doubt there may be a better solution to satisfy all categories of players. Also cannot agree. I use all of those tactics depending on the my/enemies initial positions, fuel levels and ammo left from previous combat. For example, you cannot make Foxtrot rush on frontal convergence -- Corvettes and better UFO's have a lot of firepower concentrated on their front, you have to escape their fire arc firstly by distracting the enemy by another craft, or there's almost 100% chance to lose your MiG. By adding the low-fuel component, we're getting another choices -- leave the combat, try to outmaneuver the enemy and probably be out of fuel, or take a risk and rush the enemy. As people said, the player's aircraft should be a bit superior in comparison to UFO's. There's even a lore description in X1, why they do. But to make the game more deep, there should be a real necessity to produce advanced aircraft weapons to keep the superiority -- that's the way to reward the player for his efforts, punish for mistakes and make the difference between player's and UFO's progression curve lesser. So, I agree with you that similar to this mod mechanic should make the game better, without any changes in the aircombat-minigame itself.
  3. EternalSorrow

    Community Discussion - Air Combat

    Now, some suggestions to actually make my wall of text more useful. 1. Make better controls. The X1's GUI is pretty good and immersive, but it lacks keybinds. Keybinds are the fastest way to perform actions, any kind of the GUI cannot replace it. You'll be surprised how much the game may speed up by developing the proper controls. 2. Craft power-capped building system is an awesome idea. However, the course you've taken (reducing the player's role in combat itself) very probably will lead to these situations: 2.1. Very low diversity -- build-defined chance to win leads to the only one optimal build and another become trash and unused. 2.2. Trying to fix the problem above, you may find it's almost impossible not to make the game also too simple by lowering the role of the optimal build. 2.3. Order-based/cimematic combat results are too shallow to define, what's lacking in your build and how to improve it. But the system sits pretty well over the X1's mechanics. There's a large space in interchanging between speed/range/ammo/turn rate/etc already. 3. Pilots as separate entities, like soldiers, are also an awesome idea. However, you shouldn't sacrifice the determinism of the player's actions in combat to implement the pilot progression system. Random in firing/defending is a step back in comparison to the X1's mini-game about the proper positioning, so I'd rather suggest improving the craft's core characteristics with the pilot onboard. 4. You were talking about the situation, when the player have found the approach to the specific UFO and is abusing the same tactics. I've got several times in the situation, that my Condors were almost out of fuel, but I had to take down this UFO. The decision was to flee or agressively offence instead of luring/dogfighting. And that's pretty much of choice, depending on the UFO you're facing, your planes armament and state. Sometimes you can lower your thrust to save as much fuel as you can and turn on the afterburner while getting into the UFOs fire arc. Conclusions: The X1's system can generate different situations, which makes it valuable. To enhance this, it's needed to add some variables into the battle, like enhanced UFO behavior, randomised armament or behavior patterns.
  4. EternalSorrow

    Community Discussion - Air Combat

    I cannot understand people opposing the aircombat mini-game in the shape that we've seen in X1. Replacing it by the order or auto-resolve system means cutting of a complete layer of the game mechanics. It was very fun to take down large UFO's by conventional aircrafts using your own skill and tactical approach, and the mini-game was very helpful in immersing yourself into the battle. Let me explain why, and criticise the idea of removing this in favor to the cinematics: 1. The air-combat mini game is about positioning. Positioning is crucial in any kind of combat -- air, water, ground, name any another environment. Excluding the craft control element or replacing it by the too primitive analogue will exclude the massive part of the player's involvment into the victory. 2. The second advantage that makes the mini-game great is the absence of the randomness. The result of any player's action is predictable and any failure is always the player's failure. Adding the random into the player's actions results will add a lot of annoyance and ultimately decrease the value of the mini-game to the dice rolls. !!! It's important to notice that I'm not talking about removing the random at all. It's fair to randomise enemies, initial conditions and maps. The only thing to remember is that player's moves in the mini-game should be always predictable. Any other randomised mechanics won't be annoyable and will bring much more diversity and fun, rather than frustration. 3. Some people where criticising the real-time approach due to the pressure and forcing to make decisions quickly. But the presence of the tactical pause refutes this, since you have unlimited time to plan your actions. According to my experience, real-time with pause is the best way to compromise between the fast tempo and game process depth, since any player can play the game in his own way -- by using the pause a lot and playing TBS-like, or not using the pause at all. 4. "The commander shoudn't bother himself with the air combat, that's the pilots' job". But the commander's job is to develop and apply new tactical approaches, and the X1 mini-game provided very nice tools to do it. Rush with torpedo-carrying Foxtrots or tackle by the wolfpack of Condors. Use your fighters to take down enemy's escort by concentrated fire or luring them one-by-one. Take down the enemy by rockets or take a risk and saw him with autocannons. All of those tactics are not only viable, but are being applied at the appropriate conditions, thanks to the movement and fire-arc system. Any lore or logical inferences must be inferior to the gameplay and the player's involvement. In my opinion, the X1 mini-game was almost ideal by it's concept. It deserves development, not the oblivion, since it provides another layer of the gameplay, encouraging the player's tactial approach. Any try of reducing the player's participation in air combat will very probably lead to the routine and shallow game mechanic, much inferior to the X1's.
  5. Rebalance mod created to make base building less straightforward and bring some depth into the geoscape part. Funding rebalance provided to make more starting positions viable: - Cut off funding from the North Africa/Europe/Middle East/USSR region - North America starts with higher relationship value and yields a bit more of money - Indochina and Australia now yield significantly more money and their funding is much more relationship-dependent Economy and radar/aircraft tweaks to force the player to build more bases: - Radar range has been reduced from 800/1000/1200 to 600/750/900 - Buildings upkeep (except labs, workshops and medical centers) was halved - Storeroom and garage building cost was halved, hangar building cost was increased 2x - Condor/Foxtrot/Corsair/Marauder range reduced 1.5x, upkeep reduced to 50k/50k/50k/75k - Charlie range reduced from 48k to 18k Upkeep prices reduced to match the increased necessity in building new bases. The mod is not supposed to make the game harder or easier, just more deep. If you've seen something broken by the mod, please let me know. It's possible to load old saves (see Known bugs section), but you'll probably need to start new game due to the geoscape changes. Known bugs: - Sometimes it's not possible to interact with the map or base layout after the save loading. Solution: close and reopen the game, start a new game, place the first base and load an old save. The bug is not unique, it may depend on mods you are using. Possible issues: - It's possible, that mod may break balance on Veteran/Insane levels -- reduced radar range at your only base increases the element of "bad luck" in UFO's first rolls, and keeping relationships first month may be noticeably harder. This moment needs further testing. If you've played with the mod and found, that the game balance was broken -- please, let me know. Possible further changes: - I'd like to decrease radar range more (down to 500/625/750), but I doubt that it will bring more fun due to the complications with the UFO's tracking and interceptions. If you have any suggestions -- share them here. Steam Workshop Bases Revamped.zip
×