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.

I stand corrected! Thanks!

"Optimal" strategy so far seems to be close to the previous build: (my opinion, please feel free to disagree - I'd love to be shown wrong and do better) First Month: Northeast Africa seems to be the best place to start, but it's really up to taste. Build 1 radar, 1 lab, 1 living quarters, 1 med center, 2 training centers, 1 hangar. Fill lab as soon as it's finished. Finish Xenobiology and cleaner interrogation for for $$$. Second Month: Immediately build 1 interceptor, 1 lab, 1 workshop. Research both Plot branches - the first one ??? and (if you're lucky and get a live mentarch) Alien Origins in the same month. Get as much cash as possible from Cleaner missions and hold off on Cleaner HQ until day 60, to collect the bonus before the end of the month. Third Month: Immediately build fourth lab, fourth living quarters and third workshop. If you've got half a mil to spare, build a third interceptor. If you've got a mil, build a new base and radar. After that: If you follow my build layout, you have room for exactly 23 soldiers in your main base and enough training space for all of them. Work towards building three bases covering as much of all regions as possible with 2 basic interceptors each. After that, build three advanced interceptors at your main base and transfer 1 basic interceptor each to your secondary bases. I find that a wing of 3 interceptors with 1 laser cannon and 2x (non-upgraded!) sidewinders can handle anything in the game so far (advanced interceptors with 2x gauss and 1x reinforced are practically invincible). The secondary bases either need 2-3 upgraded defense batteries or 10x soldiers each plus 6 sentry turrets (the former is cheaper but the latter is safer - I'm testing the former now, but eventually in the final release I anticipate needing soldiers in every base EXCEPT for ones that don't have hangars). The reason why those 2 extra squadrons are vital is that more UFO's downed means more money and, if you're not downing them in regions you didn't start in, then it becomes harder to afford those bases later. Most upgrades are juice not worth the squeeze, especially early/mid armor and base upgrades (except for Surgical). Alenium Generators is better, but still not optimal. For half a dozen runs now, I've completely ignored warden/guardian armor and only got exosuits for my assault guys and stalkers for my snipers around day 200, sticking with heavy kevlar the entire rest of the game. The fact is that keeping your guys alive isn't worth the opportunity cost of doing almost anything else. I've tested a number of different squad layouts and I find the best is 3x shotty, 3x rifle (with heavy armor), 3x sniper. After getting the advanced dropship, add 2x MARS and 1x heavy (because there are some enemies that only a full machinegun barrage can handle. By day 200, my shottys shift straight from accelerated to gauss and my heavy/snipers are on laser (because the cost of reloading/holding-ammo aren't worth the extra damage - also Chris said something before about lasers having half recoil in the new update). I made grenadiers work for me in earlier versions, but I concede now that they're suboptimal. Shields... I really can't think of a use for these guys at all unless you're playing on Rookie. But here's the difference between now and what I said in Milestone 1: you don't actually have to play "optimized" to keep up with the game and have fun. The problems with massive panic accumulation with non-covered regions is no longer so crippling that it's impossible to advance into the lategame without addressing them immediately.

As before, problem is solved on reload.

Just recurred on 2.12b! -1% hit chance even with +150 range modifier for dropping on own square. It also doesn't show blast radius unless you go up a level. output.log quick-2.json

Random: is there an extra bonus for capturing a cleaner leader alive? Honestly, for the incredible hassle of that mission, we deserve more than the $20k we get for selling him (the same for any captured enemy). And I don't think any extra cleaner HQ countdown is worth that squeeze. He should be at least worth $50k, if not $100k. Hot tip to any relative newbies who happen on the thread: Cleaner missions where reinforcements come in get a LOT easier when you liberally use grenades. I just turned 5 of them into chunky salsa with just one pineapple.

Just completed a run on 2.11. Less buggy this time. Actually played Veteran too. Air combat is still fairly balanced. Money was less of a concern as I learned to discard my X1 instincts and sell alloys/alenium to supplement the budget. Quick suggestions: Remove game-over condition for budget over-runs (c'mon... what government agency hasn't gone over budget 2 months in a row? ) - but seriously later-game play gets incredibly expensive and deficits will almost certainly exceed $1/2M per month Speed up construction of radars - they're a crazy expensive investment and the delay in building them really hampers mid-game recovery from high panic in non-covered regions Halve the cost of Quantum Array or make it do something else that's worthwhile - as it stands, knowing ships/missions simply isn't worth $1M Have the game prioritize Terrorize missions for high-panic areas, as this gives the player more non-ship combat opportunities and a way to reduce panic in places where there isn't radar coverage

Pardon the x-post - I didn't realize this thread was here: I'm the guy who made some very pointed and bitchy commentary in the OG feedback thread for Milestone 1. The one with the "best base layout" which I used again and... I stand by it being optimal in this build, subject to taste. Just wanted to drop by and say that all of my gripes have been addressed (tweak to Alenium Generators much appreciated! I still won't buy it myself tho...). Milestone 2 is worlds better in terms of balance than Milestone 1. The one whinge I have is that money is a little light, I'm guessing partly because of the effective removal of corpses as a source of income, since you need them for autopsies. I found myself swimming in alenium and alloys, but no money for project to use them on... I ended up selling a bunch, but it didn't quite close the gap. Earlier versions, while being much more difficult, had me swimming in cash if I fought often enough. Suggestion: Please just convert any item that cannot be used for research/engineering directly into cash. Making the player go into a menu to manually sell everything - not knowing which may be important - is super annoying. Some might say that this build's too easy - with respect, I cordially invite them to eat my entire anus. It's easy if you're running a mega-optimized strategy, but that's how Soldier difficulty should be --> hard for nomies, easy for experienced players. I'm playing on Solder, BTW, because I couldn't possibly be arsed to play a more difficult setting while bug-hunting. Way too much effort.

I'm not convinced that the money is that big a factor in the difficulty. Perhaps you've played on different settings more than me, but I found more difficulty in the added enemies and need to carefully manage TU for overwatch shots. Nerfing the money seems like it'd be more annoying than challenging and it threatens the playability of the game rather than a given mission. YMMV, but I believe X should be balanced around Ironman play, not quickloading. An experienced player on a more difficult setting should be able to recover from a party-wipe or (more likely) multiple half-wipes, which could be made impossible with a harsh enough change to the budget. Ideally, players should respond to a serious setback with "I'm going to play harder to fix this" rather than "I'm going to restart the game."

Thanks! I played well past the 200-mark to see what kinds of things were possible... a (by my standards) fully-kitted-out Xenonauts organization pulls a little less than $1M budget deficit per month. That's one base with 3x X-55's, two bases with 3x X-25's, enough radar coverage to encompass the globe, 4x labs, 3x workshops, 23 soldiers on main base and 10x each on the two other bases. It's very easy to go negative. Honestly not sure it's worth it from a balance perspective for negative balance to be a game over since the player is in a rough enough spot without money anyway. Another quick balance suggestion: speed up the construction time of radars. The game progresses so fast that waiting almost a month for those things to get operational is a severe handicap on the ability to halt panic deterioration in places you didn't start, This wouldn't be as big of a deal if it were more feasible to use interceptors to patrol without radars. OK just one more: At this point, Quantum Arrays aren't remotely worth the price tag. $1M could get you a brand new base plus radar coverage... or a minimally kitted-out X-55.... upgraded armor and weapons for two whole squads... the player just doesn't gain that much from knowing the type of ship and mission they're on. Maybe Quantum Array could pinpoint landed ships anywhere on the globe? Or you could just cut the price down to $500k.

I just had - I believe - my second month total end with negative bank balance... and it was a game over. It'd be really nice to have a big warning attached to this eventuality in the future. Perhaps it should be two consecutive months... or not a game over condition at all. The reason why is - especially on higher difficulty - having negative monthly budgets happens within normal play. Having enough bases and aircraft and tech to handle the game will almost certainly put you over budget. This will certainly ambush a lot of players who play very close to the wire on budget.