KateMicucci

No- but consider that ammo counts in the OG were pretty high. Pistol: 12 Rifle: 20 Cannon: 6 Autocannon: 14 Lasers: Unlimited P. Pistol: 24 P. Rifle: 28 H. Plasma: 35 The weapon that stands out is the autocannon with 14 rounds. This is not very comparable to the LMG's 20, however. XCom's autocannon is a fictional weapon, apparently high caliber and magazine-fed. Even with only 14 rounds it could fire 4 and 2/3rds bursts, two bursts a turn, for more damage than the rifle. Other abstractions you've made in Xenonauts are either normal for the genre, or convenient for the players. Abstracting one shot to represent two or three shots does neither. It is a fairly hamfisted way to try and make ammo conservation more important. If your goal is to reward players for taking single shots instead of bursts, then bursts need to be *better* than single shots. In Xcom a burst only cost slightly more TU% than a snap shot. This had the side effect of making bursts more TU efficient than aimed shots. Up until now it seems like you've been trying to balance aimed shots and burst shots so that neither is better than the other. That's fine. However, if players are likely to run out of ammo from using bursts, and bursts aren't more effective than single shots, players are just going to take single shots instead. The more you lower the AR's ammo capacity, the more true that becomes.

What's annoying is when an alien grenade crits and takes out 3 guys in wolf armor at the same time. I wish it would roll a different value for each target.

Do you see reaction fire coming from outside sight range with only Caesans or do Sebillians and Androns do it too? Aliens are more likely to reaction fire when you have low TU. Shooting at them lowers your TU. The accuracy of early aliens is so insanely low that you might be right that its too low for them to even attempt to shoot at your xenonauts except through reaction fire.

There are only low numbers of aliens on early UFO recovery missions. Once terror missions and base assaults start happening, even ballistic weapons have to be reloaded several times a mission. If ARs are reduced to 12 rounds, are shotguns going to have 5? Are ballistic rifles going to have 6? And lasers and plasma even less? I don't like the idea of needing to carry around half a dozen spare magazines to complete a mission, especially since most soldiers are so weak they can't carry armor, a rifle and some grenades before they start taking weight penalties. I disagree with the assertion that lowering ammo capacities does much of anything to balance the weapons unless its something crazy like 1 or 2 shots. Lowered ammo capacity doesn't do anything for most weapons but make them more tedious to use.

I don't like the way berzerking is implemented. Soldiers wheeling around to shoot their comrades in the face doesn't make any sense. It would be better if they only shot at aliens, and if no aliens are available to shoot at, they take shots towards black fog or somewhere where an alien MIGHT be.

I really don't care for the balance in this build. With the low shooting costs it feels really arcadey. Tactics hardly seem to matter now. It's just blam blam blam. The new pistols really don't feel right. Aliens are terrible, terrible shots. It seems like they don't receive the close range accuracy bonus that xenonauts do either. The new high power pistols and low alien accuracy means that I can abuse a strategy of running up shielded pistol troops right next to an alien, avoid most of their shots, and then kill them with 2 or 3 pistol shots.

How is the damage potential of 3 pellets any different from a burst?

My hunter gets 76 TUs every time it shoots

Not of that incident. What % of an accuracy boost is bug territory? Trying to reproduce it now the highest I've gotten is 16%.

Now that aliens can get 4 reaction shots a turn suppression is more important- but flashbangs are still broken. I've used 3 so far against groups of aliens and not managed to suppress anyone and gotten reaction fire for my trouble. Sebillians (low level ones at least) can't hit anything even when they're spraying bursts at xenonauts only a few tiles away. Close range bonus can cause a pistol to go from 11% accuracy to 40% accuracy just by walking one tile closer, yet it is still 11% for several tiles further back. Weird jumps in accuracy. Why isn't there a high starting accuracy with reduced accuracy for every tile away an enemy is instead of close range bonuses and long distance penalties and a completely flat value in between?

Because I'm not asking for a "realistic depiction of military combat" Chris. The weapons actually should fit the roles of their video game archetypes. There are several ways to balance MGs that don't involve turning them into a different weapon. Alright... so what? Forcing the soldiers to reload X times per mission doesn't seem like an important balance consideration at all. And as it stands, the lowered accuracy levels, lowered shot costs and high cover % are doing plenty to burn through ammo already without adding in arbitrary low mag sizes.

You can have a perfectly balanced weapon with a 20 round magazine... but it isn't a belt fed machine gun. I'd rather have 25 accuracy or 5 round bursts back than these tiny belts.

When the scatter laser uses 20, that's too few, but from a verisimilitude point of view it's using the same 1 kilo power cells as all the other lasers. The LMG has a 4kg belts that occupy twice as much space and only do the same damage per shot as the AR. 50 round belts were already a compromise on 100 or 200 round belts.

Is the 20 round LMG a joke?

Can we get a mark on the loadout screen weight bar that shows when the soldier will start taking overload penalities?