Komandos

I propose to make sure that soldiers with stripes (medals) for injuries can provide medical care to others faster and better. I believe that the awards (medals) in the game should give the soldiers more bonuses of all kinds. For example: Service Medal ( "Awarded for active participation in ten combat missions."): +1 to the soldier's visibility radius; Long Service Medal ("Awarded for active participation in twenty combat missions."): +2 to the soldier's visibility radius; Distinguished Service Medal ("Awarded for active participation in thirty combat missions."): + 3 to the soldier's visibility radius; Military Cross ("Awarded for eliminating five alien combatants in a single operation." [Kill at least 5 aliens in a single ground combat mission.] ) +5% chance of critical damage The number of awards must be increased

I agree that the lethality of alien weapons should not be 100%, so that the player has the opportunity to get a situation (game experience) with wounded soldiers and providing medical care to these soldiers. As for the losses among soldiers: I would suggest introducing three (3) types of units into the game (on the player's side): 1 - robots. Cheap units that a player can lose on the battlefield in very large quantities. 2 - Soldiers. The units that the player tries to save, but to win the battle, he can sacrifice them. 3. Commanders. Units with a lot of different properties and characteristics that the player will try to develop in the same way as characters are developed in RPG games. Commanders have additional (compared to soldiers) functions and abilities. The loss of a commander is a very serious loss, and for the sake of saving the lives of commanders, it is better for the player to lose the battle (evacuate). For one battle, I would suggest 2-3-4 commanders. The rest are robots and soldiers. The player's task is to educate a whole team of commanders (officers) for the final.

Death by one shot was the main source of adrenaline and excitement in the original UFO: 1-2. With the invention of thick armor, and after the discovery of "heavy plasma", combat missions became less dangerous and emotional.

Healing too quickly and easily reduces the adrenaline level in combat missions. If the player does not have any serious problems in battle and the player cannot face unusual situations in battle, then how can the player get adrenaline in such battles?

There are practically no gambling elements in the game. Even tactical battles do not cause the excitement of battle, everything is so predictable there. There should be a lot more uncertain situations in the game. For example: a player needs more chances to die from a single shot. Etc.

In X2, aliens can specially carry a bunch of various junk on their UFOs to confuse Earth scientists and load them with unnecessary work.

At some point in the game, aliens begin to "spam" xenonauts with various technologies that do not lead to any results, but force scientists to distract themselves from studying really important technologies and get lost in the study of not too important technologies.

I suggest adding the color coding of the player's soldiers (squads).

Before entering the alien lair, in which your soldier is 99% likely to be shot, it is necessary to initiate explosives several turns ahead. If a soldier is killed, the explosives will explode.

In X1, parameters such as: "range of weapons", "radius of visibility of soldiers" were easily changed in special files and each player could set such conditions of tactical battles that he liked the most. I hope it will be the same in X2.

It was meant that the range of the weapon does not affect whether the "squadsight" effect will work in the game or it will disappear completely. Even if the range of the weapon is equal to one tile, the soldiers still have the opportunity to move themselves to 33 tiles (maximum), which means to approach the detected alien (by all soldiers in turn) and destroy the alien in hand-to-hand combat.

I'm not suggesting reworking the game mechanics. I just point out that the game is not able to get rid of "squadsight" in principle. Due to the game mechanics that the game already has. Changing the range of the weapon will only change the density of the formation of soldiers and the range of defeat by your soldiers of enemy soldiers.

If you think that there is enough space in your inventory to store basic supplies, then why worry that some player will want to take more with him than he needs? Moreover, the soldiers have a limit of carrying capacity in terms of physical strength.

X-DIV" had the problem that there were a lot of aliens, and the player had few soldiers. And in order to quickly defeat the aliens, there were not enough supplies of equipment. If the player did not take an additional amount of equipment with him, the match would have lasted not 3 hours, but 6 hours. Additional supplies did not increase the fight to 3 hours, but on the contrary reduced the fight to 3 hours.

The main risks of losses are associated with the unloading (deployment) of troops from the shuttle. The initial location of the aliens may be unsuccessful for the player's soldiers. Losses at the beginning of the battle are absolutely unrelated to the number of items in your soldiers' personal inventory. The second main source of personnel losses is the attack on UFOs (UFO assault). Soldiers are forced to engage at close range, where individual reaction, rate of fire and power of weapons play a leading role. This fight is very fleeting and does not require a lot of equipment. Whether the player loses the battle or wins depends on the initial alignment of forces, and on how correctly the player understood the main task of the mission. The number of items in the inventory only helps soldiers maintain combat capability longer during long missions or emergencies. The aliens have no tactics that can defeat the player's soldiers.

There is no strategic limit on the number of ballistic weapons and ammunition in the game. But the game prohibits soldiers from using this unlimited supply in battle, even if the soldier has enough physical strength to take more items with him.

If the game already has restrictions on the total weight of portable items (which depends on the individual strength of the soldier), then why make restrictions on the size of the inventory? After all, this leads to the fact that a physically strong soldier is able to carry exactly as many things as a physically weak soldier is able to carry. It turns out that the physical strength of soldiers, from a certain level, does not give a physically strong soldier any advantages over a physically weak soldier. What is the point of such a role-playing system?

One person claims that adding aliens will complicate the game, and the game should be easy. Another person claims that expanding the inventory will simplify the game, and the game should be difficult. I agree with both: 1. The game should not tire and exhaust the player. 2. The game should set difficult and interesting tasks for the player. But I am against the fact that the complexity of the game is achieved by artificially limiting the tactical capabilities of the player's soldiers, and not achieved by increasing the tactical capabilities of the enemy. What prevents aliens from throwing grenades into the smoke screen? Or start firing a cloud of smoke from a machine gun? What prevents aliens from using a cloud of smoke? And if, in order to complicate the game, it is permissible to limit soldiers to the number of smoke grenades, without paying attention to the physical strength of the soldier and the carrying capacity, then why can't the weapon be limited to the number of shots, without paying attention to the actual size of the clip? The player ALWAYS defeats the opponent in a ground tactical battle. And if the player ALWAYS wins, then why not make the battle itself: fun and interesting, and not tedious?

squadsight can only be removed in two ways: 1. Each soldier has his own individual turn, which depends on the level of his "initiative". (Just like in "Heroes of Might and Magic"). 2. Use a "phase-by-phase" turn. When all the soldiers receive a command for the nearest period of time and start moving all at the same time.

Anything that makes the game interesting for the player is a reasonable idea. We play for the sake of interest and a lot of unusual (diverse) opportunities (situations) that the game can create.

the "squad's sight" exists regardless of the range of the weapon. With a small visibility radius and a short firing range, the player also uses "squadsight", the only difference is that the soldiers are now forced to move in a denser formation. A denser formation does not allow effective use of shelters located on the ground. (Soldiers are constantly forced to neglect shelters in favor of a more dense arrangement of soldiers.) A YouTube video shows how players line up ranks and "phalanxes" of their soldiers in order to achieve a "squad sight" for the largest number of their soldiers. And a small radius of visibility increases the time needed to survey the entire landscape.

It is enough to increase the number of places in the living quarters and there will be a place for an additional hangar.

Four shuttles at once on the same military base, so as not to equip the shuttle before each special battle in a new way.

What's the problem so that I can't increase the range of the weapon? What's wrong with the fact that soldiers can be farther apart from each other in order to support each other with firepower?

In the game "Diablo" and one person is enough to clear the dungeons from the enemy army. In the Fallout game, all tactical battles could be won by one character. Maybe 6-8 soldiers is still too much for one player? What do you think? Reduce the number of soldiers needed for the battle - to a single person, so as not to strain the player with unnecessary management?