Komandos

If the Reapers are given more AP (Action Points), then all soldiers on the battlefield should be given a larger radius of vision. When a unit jumps out "from over the horizon", manages to get close and deliver several fatal blows, then it makes no sense to build a "front line" of soldiers. Such a "front line" will require a lot of soldiers or very powerful weapons. In one of the mods of the game "OpenXcom" there was a modified unit (Chryssalid), which had a huge range. The player had to line up 14 soldiers in two tight ranks (the first row is sitting, the second row is standing) to stop this enemy unit with dense fire. And do not move from the spot until all the Chryssalids through many moves (turn) themselves run out to ambush. Of the 14 soldiers, only 6-8 soldiers opened the "reaction shooting". Of these: only 3-4 hit the enemy. At the beginning of the game, the player has only 8-9 soldiers. Only 4-5 will be able to shoot at the reaction. Only 2-3 people will be able to hit the target. And if the Reaper jumps out on a squad of 4 soldiers, then he must be killed with one shot.

If the editor of missions and tasks appears, then with the help of the community (modifications) it will be possible to increase the variety of missions and tasks.

Only the monotony of the gameplay can break the player. If we bet on tasks (combat missions) that will differ very little from each other, then sooner or later there will come a time when tasks (combat missions) they will not be interesting to the player. If we are betting on difficult tasks (combat missions), then sooner or later there will come a time when the player will get tired. The "final terrorist tasks" (waves of terrorist attacks) should not be complicated and monotonous. On the contrary: "Final terrorist waves" can be very, very easy (like gambling) and, like gambling, periodically bring the player fantastic winnings!!! Fantastic victories !!! Give the player a lot of different and diverse victories and trophies. But with all the pleasure for the player - there should be so many of these "final missions" (one day), and the response time to them should be so short that the player will not be able to visit them all. Panic will reach the limit and the player will lose strategically. It will be a strategic defeat of the player, (time pressure), even if on each tactical task the player will receive so many trophies and variety that he will be ready to die of happiness.

If, after using drugs, a soldier has the status of "sick" for a few days (similar to the status of "wounded"), then it would be good.

When an enemy hits a player's soldier, it would be convenient to display: how many action points the soldier lost as a result of injury. If in case of death: a soldier loses all action points, then why can't he lose part of action points when wounded?

I suggest adding more mental states to the game (such as: "berserk"; "panic"; "suppression") that affect the behavior of soldiers and their individual characteristics. I suggest adding the following mental states: "inspiration". Inspiration can come to a soldier for several rounds if the enemy is successfully killed. In this state, all characteristics increase. "Fear". Fear can take hold of a soldier for several rounds if the enemy is unfamiliar or there are many enemies. In this state, all characteristics are reduced.

Drugs are like a loan: you borrow one amount, and you need to give another (with interest). And perhaps some of the soldiers will be against the use of combat drugs. I believe that it is advisable to add several types of "wounds" to the game: - Wounded (Low health points). - Weakened by drugs. (Little Action Points and Health) - Weakened by stress (fatigue). (Little Action Points and Health, bravery) - Weakened by alien control (low bravery)

When hitting a unit, it is necessary to remove part of the Action Points from the unit. The animation shows that the unit at the moment of hitting it - makes movements, lowers and raises the weapon again, but the action points of these movements are not removed.

Do you think that several player fighters can easily shoot down any number of UFOs within a few hours of combat? Without refueling, without reloading weapons, without repairing damage?

Instead of an orbital laser, I would suggest the following mechanism of strategic defeat of the player: At the end of each month, the aliens make a massive raid and land terrorist landings, which the player must eliminate within one day. (If the player ignores the mission, the panic on the planet increases). However, with each new month, the number of simultaneous terrorist operations of aliens is increasing. And one day there comes such a massive alien raid when the player is forced to ignore some of the terrorist missions that have arisen (since the player physically cannot have time to visit all the tasks within one day). For example: it can be 10-20-30 simultaneous terrorist attacks in different parts of the globe. Even if by this time the player will have 6 bases and each base will have one tactical team, the player can have time to visit only 6-12 terrorist missions during the day. The player will have to ignore all other terrorist missions. As a result, the panic will increase, and the player will lose all regions and funding. The principle of the game "Tetris": with each new level of the game, the number of combat missions (terrorist missions) that the player must complete at the same time increases! And it doesn't matter if it's night or day - the player will have to fly to eliminate all threats in the allotted time. For example: at the end of the first month of the game, aliens commit 0 terrorist missions. At the end of the second month of the game - 1 terrorist mission. At the end of the third month of the game - 2 terrorist missions. (Table) 1 Month of play - 0 2 Month of play - 1 3 Month of play - 2 .... .... 12 Month of play - 11 ... ... 24 Month of play - 23 ... ... 36 Month of play - 35 ... ... It will even be possible to arrange competitions - who will be able to last the most days (months) in the game.

Tactically: The X-com Apocalypse is more outdated than the earlier TFTD.

Hand fragmentation grenade (xenonauts soldier) - completely destroys the brick walls of buildings in the blast radius. Simultaneously: Some aliens survive within the blast radius. (The brick evaporates, but the aliens remain alive). Fragmentation grenades in the game should not cause the walls exactly the same damage as a powerful land mine. The walls are too fragile.

If such a brave guy is not allowed to fight just because he took too many weapons with him, then I wouldn't be surprised if the level of panic in the game starts to rise too quickly. This is the only way a real warrior should look before a fight.

If a civilian sees an alien, he must run away and hide from him.

The aliens walk alone. Xenonauts walk in a tight group of 9 soldiers. Therefore: when meeting 1-2 aliens with 9 xenonauts, the xenonauts will make 4-9 times more shots than the aliens. Thus: an experienced player, on a large map, is able to defeat an opponent who is 4-9 times more numerous than the player. Since the size of the cards is small, the density of aliens up to 40 units per location (Xenonauts 1) allows 10 units of the player to make more shots at aliens (in total) than aliens are able to shoot at the player's soldiers. Since the armor strength and weapon strength of the aliens are higher (the aliens require more hits from the player than the aliens need to destroy the player's soldiers), I reduce the allowable alien density from 40 units to 30 units. Thus, (with the most approximate calculations) it turns out that in all missions (tasks) where the density of aliens is less than 30 units per location, an experienced player always wins. (Xenonauts 1) At the same time, the player will lose at least half of his soldiers. (Xenonauts 1) The most difficult will be only the first rounds of the battle, when the density of the aliens will be maximum. In the game Xenonauts 2 there are no missions (tasks) in which the density of aliens exceeds 30 units per location. Therefore, there are no missions (tasks) in the game Xenonauts 2 that an experienced player would not surely win.

I could understand people who are against the player taking extra equipment with him, as this will help the player win more tactical battles (will upset the balance of the game). However, the balance of the game is such that the player playing the game for the second time (the player who knows the game) wins all tactical battles even without additional equipment.

The player overloads his soldiers and then drops the equipment on the floor in the first round, not at all to worsen the game. On the contrary: the player is thus trying to make the game better for himself, and in order to be able to enjoy the gameplay more. This is what I was saying about internal game logic taking precedent over real-life logic if it makes for a better game.

I don't see any problems (for the balance of the game) in the fact that players can overload their soldiers, and then drop additional equipment on the floor, during the first round. I see the problem in the fact that the player cannot take the necessary equipment without this method. Players want to be able to take more equipment with them, and this opportunity should be given to players (preferably in a way that is more convenient for players). The player on the base has an unlimited supply of equipment. Why, with such resources, should a player save equipment consumption on the battlefield? At a given time, the player can load into the plane: either 9 soldiers; or 8 soldiers and one tank (combat platform). The combat platform is a heavy thing and is capable of destroying walls with its weight. At the end of the game, the player will have heavy armor capable of breaking obstacles with its weight. And planes should easily lift all these heavy objects into the sky. If you create restrictions (limit) on the carrying capacity of aircraft, then with a tank (combat platform) and heavy armor on soldiers, planes may not take off at all. Yes

That is why soldiers drop backpacks with large reserves before the battle. And the command never sends 8 soldiers into battle with a limited supply of equipment, having the resources and the ability to send 16-24 or more. I know that the developers are trying to come up with difficulties for the player that the player will have to overcome. But it is not necessary to add these difficulties to every mission, and especially in those missions where the player has every right to prepare well for the task and take everything he needs with him.

This is a real tactical device. If any tactical technique that gives a tactical advantage is prohibited from being used, then what is the meaning of tactics and the "tactical constructor" that is the game?

You mix the concepts of "limit" and "give to the player" into one pile. If the player cannot throw an additional box of grenades into the helicopter (Following the example of how a soldier can do this in reality, wanting to take more grenades with him), then this refers specifically to restrictions, and not to obtaining unnatural opportunities. It looks something like this: if I made a remark for you, "the fact that a unit does not have the ability to move at all looks unnatural," and you would answer me, "if a unit is given an unlimited limit of movement, then it looks more unnatural." It's not that aircraft should have the same unlimited warehouse as a military base. The point is that aircraft should also have inventory.

What's wrong if a soldier takes into battle not two grenades, but four, and leaves a backpack with additional grenades on the floor of the transport? How can this spoil the balance of power in a game where aliens are able to win only with the help of numbers and endless reinforcements?

What balance in the game can this upset? The balance in which the player must kill one alien with one grenade, and the second with one burst from a machine gun (and nothing else)? If the player takes more equipment with him, he will have the opportunity to kill two aliens with either two grenades; or two bursts from a machine gun; or one grenade and one burst from a machine gun. How can this upset the balance of the game? I understand that the developers want to create difficulties on the battlefield that the player's soldiers will overcome. But it seems to me that it is better to create difficulties by increasing the capabilities of the enemy, rather than limiting the capabilities of the player's soldiers.

Naturally. No one during the battle sits in the trenches with these huge backpacks on their backs, but leaves them in an armored vehicle or on the ground.