ViewThePhenom

You can plan for losing specific regions. That way, you don't have to worry about covering every funding bloc. You could ditch those regions surrounded by a lot of water in favor of covering the land-masses. Air coverage is important, but you don't have to dump all of your cash into it immediately.

Seriously? What's the purpose of this attack?

Reapers will attack local forces and civilians if they are in range.

Try installing the Dynamic UFO spawn mod, that could help with some of the ship crews. If the FTD mod takes off, that could be the answer to more terror/base attack/base defense missions as well.

Suggesting that all off-topic posts are deleted by a moderator (including this).

"I think the poster's complaint has more to do with the perceived lack of that second level of challenge. He's worried that by grinding away at trying to figure out how to play a winning game of Xenonauts, the only thing left for him to do is play against "faster monsters with more hit points," which is not the same thing as breaking open a new level of mastery. All it is doing is testing how well you know the script of the game, which is not really exciting to look forward to." The complaint really seems to be that he doesn't know what to expect, so he prepares for one thing and something else ruins his play-through. Reading the original post, I don't see any concerns about gaming the system, just frustration with the Geoscape challenges. For example, I play for x amount of time, then y happens and I didn't expect it, so my game is ruined. This isn't really true, and I would think one of the draws of Xenonauts is experiencing the "unknown" and adapting accordingly, but not everybody is going to want that. There is nothing wrong with lowering the difficulty (even to easy) if you're having problems with the current level of difficulty.

@ Skitso I suggest deleting this thread, then re-creating and immediately closing it to further replies. As silly as the outcry is against this mod (seriously, if you don't like it why are you here), I can guarantee that the offenders will simply post again in the new thread. Have to get the final say in on the Internet, and all that. Great work, as always.

This is true for any game with a reasonable difficulty curve, though. If you're new, you become familiar with the mechanics of the game and play-through on normal to get comfortable. For a second play-through, you test yourself against the higher difficulty levels. If you're new and you start with hard mode, having no previous familiarity with the game (Xenonauts is not Old XCOM) then expect to get stomped as you go through. Players aren't required to like every game they play though, so it's fine.

Well, the game isn't for everybody. Nothing wrong with quitting and moving on.

LMG is really good if you protect the user and use it in a supporting role.

If things suddenly go south, you can adapt with your decision-making on the Geoscape. Probably the only thing that will screw you on the Geoscape is base positioning...and how you approach air coverage. Nothing else is really set in stone, tbh. Besides robotic enemies, the only upgrade to enemy units is health and better weaponry; even against robots, some ballistic weapons are very good at piercing armour (LMG, sniper rifle) and armour degrades as damage accumulates, so they aren't invincible. It's a shame that you're dropping it, but it's not like you're forced to go ABC or you lose. To each his own, though. Edit: Which month are you losing in and what's the difficulty?

Why does every thread devolve into "the game should have been done this way so it would be better". Just answer the man's question and move on, ffs. And yes, at this point the answer is "make a request in the mod section" for new features or if it's a bug, report it.

Just fire engineers at the first base and hire them at the second.

/Thread

Actually, there was nothing childish about his response. There will be no changes like this made to the game at this point, no matter how hard you push it. If you want something different, look towards the mods. If you don't like certain aspects of the game and can't live with them, either wait for a mod that gives you what you want or move on. Sure, the game has flaws and, in your opinion, it would have been better with certain features. But complaining about them isn't going to make it a reality; either start up a topic in mod discussions or create a mod yourself. That's the simple truth of it. @Chris You know you've made it when threads like these pop up every other few days. Congrats dude! I'll follow your lead and exit, though.

This wouldn't make sense, based on information presented in the very first research topic.

This definitely needs to become a thing. Difficult to destroy (AC) UFO that doesn't land but spawns terror missions and attacks bases would be great.

You would be surprised to know how difficult it can be to correct "minor" issues. It may seem simple at a user's pov, but it can be a nightmare to get something like a scroll bar functioning correctly given the limitations of the engine. You'll have to trust Chris when he says the team could not get around to it and correct the game-breaking bugs at the same time. It sucks but that's development, especially for an independent project. PS: Confirming that sometimes original code can be so bad that it makes what would otherwise be a simple fix take a lot longer.

I would include crouching to fire over adjacent units, a tip on how to avoid accidentally suppressing your own troops with the LMG and a tip that smoke is useless against Sebs. Otherwise, good work for information on a tutorial mission.

False. If you're going to deny yourself that part of the game, Ironman won't make a difference. You can just back-up the save file, then copy over the current save, the same as reloading only with slightly more work involved. There's nothing that can be done about players who want to play without losing a single unit, the risk/reward argument is for players who will actually take their losses instead of reload on every bad turn.

If the developers have no desire to work on the game again, DLC won't happen. Maybe in the future, after GH completes their new projects. For now though, I would focus on mods.

It would be bad design if there was no reason to do GC other than soldier experience. It could be argued that the game can be successfully completed with rookies as long as your tech is up to date. Air strikes giving as much money as GC would allow this, since why would I ever bother doing GC again? Granted, I'm sure you can just mod the game to your preference. As long as you're not one of those players who consider the game as broken/incomplete since it doesn't have what you want, there shouldn't be a problem. You can ask about it in the modding section.

By locked-down, do they mean read-only? Maybe that's the case and they have issues installing other mods that update the same files as Lore+? For the record, I haven't had an issue with any mods yet.

I'm pretty sure it's moddable, but the reason air-strikes give less money is because they are no risk alternatives to clearing a site. There's a 0% chance of you losing veterans if you air-strike, so the reward is lower. As far as grinding is concerned, the answer is to air-strike, just don't expect to get the same rewards as GC.

Yes, saying enemies in the game are too weak even on insane makes sense. What it seemed like you were saying before was that Sebilians are too strong on insane (i.e. a complaint). You can look into modding some of the xml files to up the strength of enemy units if you want.