Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Komandos

  1. I don't mind that the developers do what they see fit. I only ask you not to introduce into the program code those restrictions (Xenonauts 1) that prevent players from modifying the game in such a way as to add the canonical platoon size (X-COM: 1-2-3) to the battle. In order not to be surprised later that the players treat Xenonauts not as a full-fledged successor to X-COM: 1-2-3 and prefer to play openXcom with 600x300 graphics.
  2. I do not know English well, and perhaps I misunderstood the main idea, but: In X-COM: 1-2-3, money limited all resources (including soldiers) only at the beginning of the game. Having established production, the player earned more money than he could spend. The number of soldiers was limited by the amount of memory that the game supported. (1994 game). When the number of soldiers reached 350, the game reported: "The allowed limit of the number has been reached." In subsequent modifications (openXcom) - this restriction was completely removed. In JA2, a player, even with a lot of money, could not hire more than 18 warriors (all 18 could participate in one battle). In subsequent modifications: JA2 v.1.13 - this number has been increased to 32 soldiers. In total, 56 characters were available in the game. In Xenonauts 1 (late game) I had about 4*16*9=576 soldiers in 9 bases. I hired so many - because I had money and it was nice to feel like an army, not a police station. I don't think that in Xenonauts 2 money will become a serious limit on the number of soldiers, because in all these games, money could not prevent the player from reaching the software limit on the number of soldiers.
  3. It's very good that the game allows you to choose the battle tactics and the style of play that interest you and do not limit you to choosing only the option that the developers themselves prefer.
  4. During the war, money ceases to play the role of a regulator of the economy. A country under martial law is switching to a coupon system and rations. In countries where there is a war - inflation. In the army, the number of soldiers in military units is regulated by the "Regular structure of the regiment". According to military logic, the player should be awarded a new rank for the successful completion of combat missions, as a result of which the player receives the right to command an additional number of troops.
  5. The fact that after the "shots" the soldiers will "reload" for some time at the base is a good idea. Xenonauts are weapons in the hands of mankind. In order for the "production" of quality soldiers to be sufficient, their presence in battle must be redundant. In essence, Chris is trying to get a large number of experienced soldiers, leaving a small number of them in combat.
  6. Artificial and illogical restrictions are needed by players in the same way - like a driver-racer, a car with square wheels is needed to enjoy the complexity of the new track.
  7. You will never be able to create a sense of the seriousness of the threat in the player if the effort of 8 people out of 8 billion living on the planet is enough to win. If the plot was about small "space criminals" (that do not pose a great threat to humanity) for the detention (liquidation) of which a detachment of 8 policemen was created, then I would agree with your point of view.
  8. If the Xenonauts are going to compete with the new XCOM and UFO ET, UFO ET2 and are not going to take away the attention of players who prefer the game concept of the original X-COM:1-2-3, then this is your full right.
  9. If one interceptor of the player, from the first months of the game is able to cope with one UFO. If a squad of 10 soldiers, from the first months of the game, is able to defeat 10-20 alien soldiers without much loss, then an alien invasion cannot look serious. In the first months of the game, in order to defeat aliens, you need at least a numerical superiority over the enemy in all types of battles. Now the opposite is true - humanity is superior to aliens in all types of combat.
  10. The previous interface, in comparison with this one, looked bad. This one is much better. 2. Morale is good.
  11. This system is called: "auto - leveling". It resets the strategic advantage achieved by the player, which makes the achievement of strategically important goals (for example, achieving numerical superiority) less valuable for the player. Auto-leveling deprives the game of strategy, and therefore auto-leveling is of little relevance in strategic games. Aliens initially have a qualitative (technological) advantage. Humanity initially has a quantitative advantage. This should be taken into account when adjusting the balance. Therefore: The game should not penalize a player for having a numerical advantage. The game should penalize the player for being stupid enough to go head-to-head with the aliens as an almost equal opponent.
  12. In xenonauts 1 - opponents do not differ in a variety of tactical behavior. Here I agree with you. Something needs to be changed. Add a random behavior generator (at least) for unpredictability. Add a wider range of possible actions. However, if you make the enemy AI in such a way that the AI will regularly knock out 4-6 soldiers out of the 10 that the game allows you to take on a mission, then leveling a soldier in battle becomes meaningless. The average life expectancy of a soldier will be 1-2-3 sorties. This means that the average experience of fighters will not exceed 1-2-3 sorties. It is impossible to get around this problem without using the combat organization of soldiers in the way it was organized in the ancient Roman Empire: The Romans were sent to battle dsucha number of troops that was three times the number that was necessary to defeat the enemy. The Gastati were the first to enter the battle. (Inexperienced warriors). If this was not enough (there was a threat of heavy losses), then the “Principles” (Experienced warriors) were connected to the battle. If these warriors were forced to retreat in the face of the threat of heavy losses, then the Triarii (Veterans) entered the battle further. This was already considered a serious battle. And about serious battles in ancient Rome they said: "The battle reached the triarii." The complexity of the battle in the game should be determined not by the “thickness of the skin” of the aliens, not by the number of casualties on the part of the player, but by which groups of troops (from among those who arrived on the mission) the player is forced to use. A difficult battle for a player is a battle in which the player is forced to lose Veterans. Without returning to the canonical number of soldiers in the mission - this cannot be implemented in Xenonauts. Xenonauts departed from the canon.
  13. Xenonauts 1 was very tolerant of modding support, but there were restrictions that prevented players from setting some base constants the way they were in the original game. Because of what the tactical part of the game did not correspond to the canon. (Provided the player with an abbreviated version of the 1994 original's capabilities.)
  14. In Xenonauts 1, the developers did not always leave room for the fulfillment of the desires of the players: to see those gameplay elements that were in X-COM: 1-2. It would be nice if you could create a mod that adds these missing gameplay elements (which are present in the original X-COM:1-2, but missing in Xenonauts 1 and likely to be missing in Xenonauts 2). Many fans of the original X-COM will be very grateful to you.
  15. Yes. The player does not always need 20-35 subordinate soldiers to complete a combat mission. The player often does not need soldiers at all - the player can easily destroy UFOs on the ground with aerial bombardment. But in order for the player to get a versatile experience and a wide range of sensations, the game must provide him with different opportunities according to his own preferences.
  16. I listened to a lecture on anthropology on YouTube. So: 10-20 million years in a row, our ancestors lived in groups of 20-35 individuals. And only 15 thousand years ago (before the invention of a productive economy) they also lived like that. Everywhere on the globe, the optimal size of a group, school class, military platoon is 20-35 people. It can be considered as much as you like the Stone Age, a relic of the past, but such is our nature. A person is psychologically comfortable in a team of 20-35 people. Yes, I know: you can make a game where even 8 people will be enough (the size of a family over the past 10 thousand years). You can make a game where even 4 people will be enough (family size - the last 50 years). But if a game with 1994 graphics (600x300), with poor animation, with poor balance, with an "irrationally large tactical group" - still gathers more people on the forum than a game with better graphics, better animation, where all attempts to take "irrationally a large number of warriors" - are securely locked for the player, then it is worth considering where the developers go against the basic needs of the players.
  17. I understand that the tactics used in platoon (today) in games are: irrational and ideologically unjustified, but the old X-COM: 1-2-3 (1994-1996) is still a classic that people play. New games in this genre (with small group tactics) are still a one-time use product.
  18. If I need to play a small team, then I will take any RPG game, or I will put a small number of soldiers on the ship "Avenger" (X-COM: 1). I can also edit Xenonauts 1 so that one soldier is enough for me to win the final mission. However, I prefer to change the game so that I have a full platoon under my command, which is only available in the original X-COM:1-2-3 and nowhere else. However, I can't change the Xenonauts to command as many soldiers in combat as they did in the original X-COM:1-2-3 game.
  19. I have said this many times and I will repeat it again: small group tactics (1-12 soldiers) are present in all tactical games. (And also in all RPG games). The choice of games is huge, the competition is big. Platoon tactics (16-36 soldiers) are only present in X-COM:1-2-3 (which are still popular). It is enough not to make barriers to increase the number of soldiers in personal modifications of the game (to keep the maximum number of originals) - and fans of platoon tactics will be added.
  20. I only played Xenonauts 1 because I could modify the game to my liking. Without modification, I managed to complete only two dozen combat missions, after which I realized that the original game settings make Xenonauts not interesting for me. The field of view is too small. The range of the weapon is too short. The platoon is too small. The firepower of an individual soldier is too small. As a result: the soldiers walk in a dense crowd (Like hedgehogs in the fog), killing each other with "friendly shots".
  21. The 1994 X-com game has very poor graphics. Bad balance. However, thanks to the addition of the ability to modify the game widely (openXcom), people still play the 1994 game. Thanks to the modification - each player gets what he wants. (not what the developer wants).
  22. If you look at the playability that openXcom has to offer and look at the Xenonauts' software limitations (which will make it harder for players to create new mods), it's safe to say that the game is missing its chance. Personally, I don't care what balance the game will have: good or bad. I'll make the right one myself. But it is important for me whether the game will be convenient for modifications and whether the game will forget the software limitations that Xenonauts 1 had (for example, I could not create my own transport and recruit a team of more than 16 people). If anyone is interested in my opinion.
  23. Soldiers in the army are "sorted" by platoons, squads, branches of service (other). Why is the player not allowed to sort his soldiers into squads, platoons? Or like this? Selecting soldiers with a gray, red, green, blue (other) marker - and when sorting the general list - the colors of the groups in the list do not mix. Or the ability to view and sort the list of soldiers of only one color.
  24. With such rules of turn-based combat - the battle resembles a game of hide and seek - whoever was discovered - he died on the next move (if he did not change position). Yes, and the size of the map is cramped - there is really nowhere to hide. You need to change the rules aside: one turn = one volley + turn of the turn as in the game "Heroes of Magic and Sword 5" (the move depends on the initiative (speed) of the soldier.). Я так считаю.
  25. There is a game "UFO: Two sides". Has the ability to play with a person via the Internet. Losses in battle - almost all soldiers. It is rare that someone wins and he has at least 50% of the soldiers left.
  • Create New...