Shadeth

This is actually really good. If you plan your base, and you know the transfer time of hiring a scientist, then you can get them to arrive when it is completed, vs having an empty lab doing nothing while you wait for their slow asses to get there.

The civilian shotgunners remind me of drunk Texas rednecks. I kin of think it is funny how fearless they are.

Speaking of this, exactly why didn't they make the map a globe? Don't tell me the technology isn't there... they made it work in the 90's, certainly we could have a 3d sphere map in this game? Do some people not like it? I actually prefer the globe map as it is more realistic.

Nice catch, and yes, they should fix this, to be more tactically realistic.

Yeah it is really weird, and may explain why the buildings seem flat inside. real buildings have stairs, if these do not, that limits the design of the levels a lot.

Hey @Chris I just thought of a potentially interesting idea for the medal, Gallantry Citation | Completed a mission where 50% soldiers were casualties I posted my criticism of that objective a couple days ago, but no real suggestions as to what else it could be! I was thinking on it while going to bed and I have what I feel is a good idea. What if the objective was "Complete a mission with only 4 soldiers deployed"? Or maybe 5-6 on lower difficulties? That would be a challenge, one for experienced soldiers for sure, and it doesn't allow someone to cheese it just killing people on purpose like you can do for the Gallantry objective right now. Might rename it to "Alpha Team" or something too, but I really don't care about the name so much as the objective and mechanics to earn it. Doing a mission with only 4 dudes and winning would feel awesome. Going in, killing half the team on purpose, and winning to get the medal on your select soldiers, would feel dirty.

yeah, I mean, if they don't even have a gun, WTF are they doing running INTO the alien ship? I have seen it happen. Makes zero sense. Hope the civilian logic is improved a little.

I personally have a big issue with the objective of this one: Gallantry Citation | Completed a mission where 50% soldiers were casualties If you are a min/maxer and trying to build the BEST soldiers, you'd want you A-team to get all the medals. Yet, the best way to ensure your best soliders get this is simply to go on an easy mission like a small craft shot down with 50% of the team as rookies, intentionally get them killed or kill them at the start, then complete it with your veterans. Boom, easy medal. But for killing your team on purpose, it seems like it might as well be a psychopath medal. I don't really care for it. I would rather almost any other objective than this since if you want to get all the medals, this encourages you to kill soldiers to complete it. Some people might get it on accident on a tough mission, but overall it would make sense just to sacrifice some noob units on purpose, which is just weird.

I am down with ship missions, as long as it isn't a 2-part mission! Those missions were brutal in TFTD, going into the second half with whatever ammo you had left, and some soldiers already AFU, and clearing the ship holds all the hallways and rooms and engine rooms, ugh. Those missions were honestly a little too hard and long.

I was also very confused by that (plot research game effects) and I still am. It says it gives you more funding, which is great, but does it mean bigger UFOs will start coming right after (that I might not be able to shoot down), so I should wait to research it?? Or is that more depending on how many calendar days have passed? Anyone who knows, please let me know! Thanks.

Honestly all of your ideas are pretty cool, but THAT ^^^ I would LOVE to have! Something like the Drill or Thermal Lance in X-COM 2 terror from the deep. I love having at least one melee dude on my team. New weapon could maybe be called "The Jaws of Death", a play on "The Jaws of Life" EMS tool.

Just wanted to add my opinion. I think the shield should have a fixed amount of health (maybe buffed with research), so that it could take multiple small weak shots, or maybe just one or two massive damage shots. Vanishing after two of any shots does not make any sense and is not a good experience, nor is it even remotely realistic. I didn't even realize it worked like this until reading this post, no wonder the mechanics of it are not intuitive.

I have not played through enough multi-layer maps to know, but what happens with this game engine if you, say blow out all the walls of a subfloor? Does the rest of the building remain standing floating in mid-air or does it all collapse, damaging anyone who was in it? Just wondering since that might make for an interesting strategy if some stubborn or hard to kill aliens were at the top of a tall building and you could effectively demolish it to kill them.

I mean, I get there are a lot of things that could be added to the base defense. Technically a whole new game could be built around elaborate base defense mechanics and traps and objectives to defend. But, I think they have a lot of other more pressing matters to add first. I had one base attack in the current build on steam, and I saw it coming and actually let it attack my base just to see what would happen. It wasn't too bad, but they had some big eye looking tank that was hard to deal with because of its reaction fire and immense health compared to my weapon damage output. About the only thing I found annoying is that it is supposed to be a "defense", but the aliens basically just stay in one place and make me attack them. Would be more interesting without any major upgrades if they just had the aliens try to push more rather than just camp the hangers.

I don't know about some of these ideas, it would piss me off greatly if my so-called smart scientists died running around like they have an IQ of 60, and it delays my research. So I am opposed to that, unless the scientist AI is way better and they actually hide or run the hell away from danger and not run around like a chicken with its head cut off. Same with base rooms getting damaged. If the base attack is too costly / risky, I think the optimal strategy will just to be to build a lot of base defenses, and then most people who know what they are doing will never even need to fight in the base at all, negating the dev work on this except to punish newbies.