DatonKallandor

I think you'll run into the fun-as-a-game-balance issue again. As long as manually playing every air-combat is optimal (better than autoresolve), people will do it, even if it isn't fun. The same problem you've illustrated (and solved) with the ground combat airstrike mechanic.

Yeah a double-light-missile for a heavy mount. Hell even the classic Air-to-Air rockets could be an interesting thing to put in there. You could build sort of a flanking fighter if light mounts could mount A2A rockets. It wouldn't have the safety long-range punch of a missile, but having what's essentially bigger and nastier autocannon style weapons (unguided, small arc - but a lot more ammo than the single-shot missiles) in the wing-mounts - bad news for the UFO if you can get that fighter behind it. Plus those really fit the time-frame. Cold War is exactly when people thought unguided rockets would be useful tools for intercepting bombers. Course it didn't work (at all!) in reality, but hey apply some Xenonauts funding and ingenuity to it...

Do you want the Air-Combat to the have the same "play some encounters, auto-resolve the rest" progression you want for the ground combat? If so: Have every Air-Encounter-Situation start off with a mediocre, fairly random auto-resolve (that's more or less the current one right?) - but if the player manually plays it, and plays it perfectly (or very well - no damage taken, no planes lost) that specific encounter accrues points (possibly varying amounts based on performance). Once the player has manually completed that specific encounter perfectly a few times (hit a certain points threshold) the autoresolve button gets replaced with a "perfect autoresolve" button, which then simulates the perfect outcome the player has proven is repeatedly possible with manual control. For example, the classic 2-Condor vs 1-Light-Scout encounter. Standard autoresolve will probably lose 1 condor but win. After 3 manual combat perfect wins (easily done when played manually), any further autoresolving of that specific (2-Condor vs 1 light-scout) encounter will assume perfect outcome. That way you preserve the incentive for manually fighting at least every new situation a few times, but prevent the endless streams of manual air-combats because the autoresolve simply isn't going to be as good as a player. Essentially it means air-combat would progress in the same fashion ground combat does: Fight every new situation a few times manually (to get items, tech - and autoresolve progress) then switch to automating it before it becomes tedious. As a bonus, it fits the fluff too - as encounters are solved perfectly you essentially simulate the Xenonauts air-wing developing better tactics for routine situations. As an aside, the High Speed Interceptor is incredibly bad for the price (it really needs at least 2 light-missile hardpoints in addition to the 2 heavy mounts - or the ability to mount 2xLights on the Heavy Mounts). And basic Condors being slower than UFOs on the Strategic screen is incredibly bad design, because there's no gameplay to it - it's random chance on the UFO blundering into your Condors, which is not fun. Plus it breaks the "Tail until over Land" button, because the UFO will just fly away out of range the moment you press it. But those are distinct issues from the manual-combat-vs-autoresolve thing.