bonerstorm

In my latest run (the last exp before the milestone release version), I built my fourth on day 61. I think that's the optimal way to play, but it's important that the game be flexible enough to accommodate different styles. Like it should be viable to try all sorts of different base builds and troop setups, instead of one optimal one. Players should also be able to recover on Ironman from a debilitating setback like a full or half party wipe. Like a player should be able to have a reasonable time with a squad of mostly riflemen... Speaking of: this is a daily reminder to the devs that the nerf on rifle burst accuracy is way too high. I don't mind that the game is too easy at this stage as long as it isn't unbalanced. Cranking up the difficulty at this point while the gameplay fundamentals are still in flux risks

Unless I'm totally off my gourd, I don't think "lab spam" is a thing. Not an OP thing at least. It is important to have a decent number of labs, 3 if not 4, by day 200... but I don't see an advantage in doing more than that or rushing it at the expense of other critical stuff. You can't build anything of substance without workshops and you can't progress without plenty of air power. Many techs are entirely skippable, so you shouldn't be hurting that bad even while skimping on labs. More money only gets you so far.

Just finished a full run. Only one new bug! Reported already.

Multiple such broken tiles. Seem to be clustered in that building, near the computers.

Soldier Anni cannot move forward due to obstruction on tile that is not visible. quick-16.jsonoutput.log

Random: There shouldn't be "empty" techs that only give flavor text. It's a waste of the player's time and encourages a weird behavior when powergaming where we intentionally do not research many techs to maximize money. Every plot tech should involve at least a modest funding increase. The Cyberdrone tech stands out in particular: make it take 5 times as long for all I care, but give us a modest Hit chance for rifle burst-fire is ridiculously low TRIGGER WARNING (Realism): I would really love love love to have a button to check in the final product which... erm... doesn't result in half of my soldiers being women (especially the one with the biggest strength score hip-firing an LMG like Jesse Ventura - EDIT: actually John Basilone). Like a 10-20% ratio I'd be fine with. Or a setting where they have a penalty to strength/HP but a bonus to reflex/accuracy (which would seem reasonable as the kind of women who would make it into an elite unit would be obsessive trainers). Just saying, it breaks immersion. Ideally both. Like the OG Mount and Blade "historical sexism" button. Turn all modules into checkboxes. Maybe balance by setting a limit on how many at once? Or a penalty for too many?

Good luck! Yeah, it occurred to me to hit shift because it happened immediately after using shot preview on the previous soldier. As far as bugs go, it's not the end of the world. Anything that can be solved by F5+F9 is survivable.

It happened again! This time I started hitting different buttons to see if a key might be causing it... hitting the "shift" key a few times seems to have fixed it.

Matter of taste. I always have one Laser LMG Heavy on my midgame squad just in case I run into an eyeball cybertank thing. If the heavy is crouched and hasn't moved, it will destroy practically any one thing in LOS - especially if not in cover. Upgraded laser means it won't run out of ammo, it'll tear through cover and initial hits will strip armor for subsequent ones.

Great! This also addresses a whinge - not exactly a gripe - that I didn't mention: the midgame is certainly lacking in ground missions independent of downed UFO's. If you want to reward multiple playstyles, then it makes sense to give alternatives for reducing panic and getting loot other than prioritizing air combat over everything else in the midgame. For instance, Quantum Arrays automatically pinpointing landed UFO's outside of radar range would be a big help to offering more combat opportunities and justifying the cost.

I've actually downed many destroyers with just two x-25's with that loadout. What you need to do is set your fighters up on opposite sides of the destroyer. Whichever one it turns its main gun towards, send it off at a 90-degree angle with afterburners on while the other hits it in the side and keeps side-rolling to stay in the blind spot. The targeted interceptor will be able to continue dodging the main-gun shots as long as you keep the angle squared. By the time it's remotely close to danger, the other interceptor will have filleted the alien SOB. It works best with 3 fighters and lasers instead of autocannons, but you'll still take it down with minimal damage.

Agreed. I was about to say this is unrealistic, but - upon googling - found out I was totally wrong. Standard fuel tanks on an F-16 are 18% of internal fuel per matching under-wing hardpoint plus 9% for the one fuselage hardpoint, which presumably impacts fuel economy to the point where 15% is frankly generous - especially considering the IRL mig-25 has half the operational range of the in-game x-25. Apparently English-language information on the mig-25's external fuel storage isn't very plentiful, but they're practically similar jets. The recon variant apparently equipped a 1,400 gallon centerline tank, which would have increased fuel capacity by 4,239kg (28.41%) - more than twice the standard combat payload (ouch!). What is unrealistic @Chris are the limits in general (and the speed is definitely nerfed from IRL). Sorry to text-wall you but - no presh - I really hope you consider this or pass this along to whoever's thinking air combat over: When in doubt about game mechanics, I say to go with reality and then tweak OPFOR for balance from there. Mig-25's have 4 under-wing hardpoints and no internal autocannon, so there should be two slots for weapons/fuel plus a third slot only for armor and MAYBE a fourth slot for a fuselage-mounted fuel tank (perhaps of various sizes). Foxbats don't have a maximum take-off weight, their top cruising speed with 4x 1,000lb R-40 missiles is 2,319.12kph, top operational speed (again: kitted-out) is 3,494kph and their top cruising speed with no payload is 2,981.5kph. It can go past Mach 3 in a pinch, but that bricks the engine. A loaded M61A1 autocannon (internal on the F-16) weighs 377kg. The Soviet equivalent which would make the most sense for an X-25 weapon mount (SPPU-6 gun pod with GSh-6-23 autocannon) weighs 525kg. The titanium armor on an A-10 warthog weighs 540kg. Sidewinders weigh 85.3kg and have a 9.4kg payload - so two would weigh 170.6kg R-40 missiles (standard for foxbats) weigh 475kg (950kg for 2x) and have a maximum 100kg warhead. R-60 Vympel missiles (lightweight alternative) weigh 43.5kg (2x 87kg) and have a 3kg warhead. Modern R-73 missiles weigh 105kg and have a 7.4kg warhead. KH-31 supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles (the closest "torpedo" equivalent for Soviet jets) weigh 610kg (1220kg for 2x) and have a 94kg armor-penetrating shaped-charge warhead. Random thought #1: I believe that - for weight balance reasons - it doesn't make sense to only have an odd number of "torpedoes" unless you're sticking one on the fuselage (maybe that should go in the "fuel tank slot" I suggested earlier). So here's my dangerous and possibly heretical take: remove all limits on weight, but have that impact speed instead. Make the readout for speed in the hangar show green for fast and red for slow (like too slow to catch a Scout). As fuel tanks are used up and missiles fired, reduce weight and increase speed/range accordingly. Start with 2,981.5kph as a baseline, then 2,319.12kph for a 1,900kg payload and work out the math from there. Have the slots go: "Inner Hardpoints" - "Outer Hardpoints" - "Armor" - "Fuselage Hardpoint" Hardpoint options: (standard speed at weight 20) Light Missile 2x - Weight 2 - standard damage Heavy Missile 2x - Weight 5 - ?10x? missile damage Dual Autocannon Pods - Weight 5 Torpedo 1x (fuselage only) Weight 8 - 10x missile damage plus armor penetration Laser Cannon (fuselage only) - Weight 7 Fuel Wing Drop-tank 2x - Weight 20 - +15% fuel Light Ventral Drop-Tank - Weight 10 - +7.5% fuel Medium Ventral Drop-Tank - Weight 18 - +12% fuel Heavy Ventral Drop-Tank - Weight 42 - +28% fuel Ablative Armor - Weight 5 (perhaps allow scaling up to a certain point?) HOW ABOUT THIS: What if the drop-tanks allowed you to boost thrust by 50% until they run out instead of giving more range? You mentioned toying with the idea of adding an option to do so. Like @Grobobobo said, that's what we really want. I'm not an aviator, but I believe this should be in line with the MIG-25's capabilities. And let's say every interceptor with something mounted on the fuselage hardpoint (like a fuel tank the player - for whatever reason - clicked red so it wouldn't drop in combat) would prevent dodge-rolls. Different style of play, I think. If your interceptors are engaged in constant combat, especially with autocannons, then their health is going to inevitably wear down faster than repairs over time because - no matter how well you dodge - you're still going to get dinged at point-blank by some UFO's.

Good to know about funding and loss condition. I guess... one base in Asia Minor and another in Mexico or Eastern-Europe? My concern with getting secondary bases up and running is getting the opportunity to harvest more UFO's for cash and loot. Since panic isn't as much as a concern in this build, farming money is. I may have racked up over 800k in deficits, but that's past day 250 with everything on my wish list bought. More ground missions absent UFO combat would definitely be appreciated, because otherwise there isn't much reason to actually do much of it in the midgame - at least for me. I just passed day 60 (still pretty early) and I've already got like 2/3 of my 23 soldiers heavily wounded after taking out the cleaner base on day 60, so I had to pass up on a downed UFO, but I could afford those two new bases. So you rush advanced interceptors and have them up by what date?

output.logWhat it says on the tin. I can try to reproduce with a video if the logs don't tell you what happened. It seems to happen when throwing a grenade at an object (or missing your target and landing on an object).

Can you get away with playing one main base and advanced interceptors? If so, that's pretty wild. What's that timeline look like? I'd love to test it.