Jump to content

herpertDerpert

Members
  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

herpertDerpert last won the day on August 28 2017

herpertDerpert had the most liked content!

Reputation

11 Good
  1. @LOS Psionics Comment: I think so. Yes, the scenario you described is possible, but I think this can be addressed by basically setting up a reaction fire trap against any aliens that try to get LOS on you to permit psionics. True, they could get through, but that's risk that I think there is a precedent for when fighting aliens you can't go toe-to-toe with (e.g. androns when you have ballistics, camping with shotguns next to doors/teleporters). @psionic reaction fire: That would still result in teamkills and lead to the same frustrating problem of not being able to get near aliens without suffering unavoidable casualties based on an external dice roll. Besides, it wouldn't be as easy as running in an shooting the psionic in the face, because then you'd have to deal with all the other aliens in the room. Running into a room and killing a single alien tends to leave a Xenonaut with no TUs that is flanked by other aliens. The player would have to either already have a good stack and the manpower to kill everything in one go, or pursue a more conservative strategy (e.g. charge in the room and stack up closer in a blind spot; kill units with dangerous weapons first and take the risk that mind control might fail). @coding implementation of psionics rebalance: We could debate this forever without a definitive conclusion. You're right, this could take a very long time if psionics were implemented in a convoluted way, which is a very real possibility when coding under pressure and deadlines. However, in my simple mind, the coding for psionics could be easy to alter if it was implemented in a modular fashion. @adding armors: I agree that adding an armor, or even editing an existing one, that changes the way units respond to panic/psionics is a solution. It could be a fast solution if items can alter the wearer's bravery stat. Currently no items I know of in the game alter bravery, so I'm not sure if it's possible given how the coders implemented items and stat changes. Maybe it's a one-line addition since Predator armor gives you 100 strength. Perhaps Sentinel can give you 100 Bravery so players have to decide if having a walking tank possibly freak out is worth having on the team? Everything ultimately will be dependent on some code editing to balance psionics and only a coder would know what is easiest given how variables and data structures are laid out.
  2. I can see why we would want a way to be immune to psionics since the player currently cannot use them. However, doing this would send Xenonaut's psionics down the same path as XCOM:EW's Thin Man poison spit: an ability that is absolutely terrifying for only a portion of the game until you have hard counters to it. Then it becomes a joke. I'm not sure if we would really want to discard something that I feel contributes to the underdog vibe Xenonauts has between aliens and the player. I'm afraid only a developer can definitively answer the question about how much work it would take to have aliens not know the exact location of Xenonauts at all times. But if my memory serves, a prior thread claimed aliens knew where Xenonauts were and a programmer replied that when Xenonauts have been spotted or are breaching the ship, aliens become more aggressive and charge where they think Xenonauts are. Therefore, the AI does not actually use Xenonaut's exact locations in its decision making algorithm; it makes guesses and goes from there. I have not seen the code, but if I were the programmer who had to implement an ability that did not reply on LOS and could affect any one on a certain team, it would look like this in pseudocode: if (psionicCooldownDone) { #check if psionic ability is available target= randomlySelect(rosterOfXenonautUnits) #returns the name of one Xenonaut unit and store it in variable target psionicAbility(target) #apply psionic ability to target } It would be rather straightforward to edit this by possibly invoking LOS code involved in firing the sniper rifle (basically treating mind control like a firearm that could use squad sight, while treating berserk-inducing-ability as described above). But again, this is just speculation on my part. Only a programmer familiar with the source code would know how much work it would take to implement a strategic level redesign of psionics. As far as rebalancing items, I suspect this would involve a lot of ongoing qualitative editing of continuous variables (e.g. should psionic armor have X or Y armor points; should anti-psionic key fob provide complete immunity or increase resistance by X%). This could ostensibly take a long time to balance as values are tweaked over successive patches. I personally do not agree with this as it still leaves the fundamental issue (i.e. robs player of actively resisting psionics because there is still going to be a remote chance your units will suddenly freak out and kill each other without the player being able to counter it in an decisive manner). A strategic solution as I described in my original post would add a dynamic, and essentially binary in effectiveness, decision to how players engage a psionic enemy that hopefully doesn't defang psionics while balancing them. I hope this doesn't come off as a personal attack to anyone or their suggestions. I am just trying to have a rigorous discussion and of course push my opinion of what the fix should be. Hopefully, if we have a through discussion, the devs might be glad we did most of the think-tank work for them and they can just code it up if it isn't too difficult--whatever the ultimate solution may be. This is really the best we can hope for as far as having the psionics issue addressed. EDIT: Also, adding items to the official game would require an artist to make new decals and such. I am not sure if the team keeps artists on salary. If not, then they would have to pay a commission to add this new item (i.e. adding items to the game would explicitly cost additional money). However, I am certain the team keeps programmers on salary.
  3. I'm glad we all agree that the primary issue with psionics is that it robs the player of choice and therefore makes the game not fun in the late game. However, I think that solving the issue by adding items that tweak the mindcontrol/berserk formula as it is is not the most elegant solution available. This would add more items and affect the current equipment ecosystem (e.g. psionic armor made wolf obsolete because it has psionic protection and is far-better/far-worse/the-same; psionics are negligible now because I made everyone an anti-psionics key fob). Instead, I believe the rebalancing psionics should involve a change in the strategic level as I described in my original post. Psionics changes the strategic playing field, therefore the most parsimonious solution should be a strategic one. This would preserve the dread associated with fighting a superior alien force while addressing the issue of player choice.
  4. I understand that psionics have been extensively discussed previously during beta testing, but I would like to start a new discussion purely from the point of gameplay. These are my original thoughts as far as I know. If they are coincidental with previous suggestions, I apologize and do not mean to take credit for another person's earlier statements. I would like to exclude metaphysics and fluff from this discussion (e.g. psionics is like a sixth sense that does not require LOS to use). In short, I believe that psionics need to rebalanced to give the player an active, immediate say to keep the game fun. In it's current implementation, psionics punish the player without the option for them to resist in any meaningful way. I have beaten Xenonauts already and I am honestly put-off from replaying it because of how patently unfun the game becomes in the endgame specifically because of psionics. The way it is now, whether or not my soldiers decide to start teamkilling is entirely out of my control. I do not know the formulas, but I feel that even with 70+ bravery, it is still quite possible for a Colonel to be mind-controlled or start berserking (i.e. teamkill). This is not even talking about any Xenonauts with low morale on a given strike team. Given how soldiers are usually flanking each other, are in close proximity, and have weapons that can reliably defeat their corresponding body armor with ease (i.e. Lasers vs. Jackal, Plasma vs. Wolf, MAG vs. anything), this implies late-game psionics allow the aliens to have a non-negligible chance of killing your soldiers without any risk to them every single turn. The crux of the issue is not that teamkilling occurs at all. Even if the formula was adjusted so that it occurred rarely but the same gameplay mechanics remained, the idea that makes psionics so frustrating would remain--psionics induce teamkilling without giving the player a meaningful option to prevent it. I cannot overstate how absolutely frustrating this is. This gameplay design effectively means a Xenonaut may drop dead at any point in time when assaulting either a Battleship or a Cesean Carrier in the late game. True, this gives the game an omnipresent sense of dread and desperation. The player is never really on par with the aliens because humans never develop psionics or true psionic resistance. Therefore, the aliens always seems mysterious and above the player's level. I agree with this design choice for the game's atmosphere, but I believe it has been taken too far. In the late game, I avoid taking on Carrier and Battleship missions because being punished by psionics is so fickle. Even if I execute sound tactical play, I can still be penalized for something over which I have no real control. Effectively, ground missions stop happening in the late game unless the player enjoys what amounts to being randomly punished. As psionics are currently implemented, my strategic instincts say late-game ground missions should only occur to capture a Praetor and then do the last mission because otherwise the player runs a risk of having their veterans wantonly teamkilled. This cuts out the biggest and, what used to be in the early and midgame, the most enjoyable gameplay component in the late game. To remedy these issues, I have suggestions for both mind control and berserking. I propose that mind control be restricted to direct LOS of the psionic or squad sight. That way, there is a way for a player to avoid the risk of mind control--aggressively kill every alien immediately upon contact or retreat. This puts the power in the player's hands: do I continue pushing and risk friendly fire on the immediate next alien turn, or do I take a few pot shots and run? With respect to berserking, I believe that units should not berserk immediately upon being affected by Fear (I am trying to refer to the ability that drops a unit's morale and puts them at risk of berserking). Instead, a unit should be put at a high risk of berserking on the next turn. After being notified that a soldier is at high risk of berserking, the player then has to make a decision: do I need this unit to continue doing whatever it is doing right now (e.g. covering the left flank) and risk a probable team kill on the next alien turn, or should I play it safe (e.g. retreat and drop weapon, therefore expose left flank and lose ground/momentum)? With this change, I think it would also be appropriate for the berserk-inducing-ability to not require LOS, as it would then be in the player's power to accept risk or not. Aside from psionics, I believe Xenonauts is for the most part balanced. I enjoyed playing the game, but found psionics to be excessively and arbitrarily punitive. These proposals address the key problem with psionics in my opinion: the fact that in their current implementation psionics punish the player without any real way for the player to resist. It's like playing chess and having one player risk losing a piece based on a statistically-independent dice roll that goes on in some remote backroom. That one player could be strategically and tactically outpacing the other player, but he/she is still being penalized by an inherently unfair system. Thanks for reading.
  5. Sorry, I don't. However, I have had the same bug occur when I manipulate a unit with flying armor (e.g. Buzzard) while they are flying. Specifically, I tried to change their flight path by double clicking somewhere else--I did not have them stop first and then redirect them. My Buzzard unit then proceeded to fly off the screen as I previously described for the Harridan. As in that case, the game did not crash to desktop until the unit "moonwalked" off screen. On an unrelated note, I have noticed that having units crouch while they are at an elevation sometimes results in a scrolling effect--like watching a 35mm film that is playing slow enough for you to perceive each slide--as they crouch. This is only an aesthetic bug as far as I can tell. The game plays normally. I can cause this to occur occasionally by trying to crouch a unit and tell it to turn at the same time.
  6. Does using sentinel armor prevent a soldier from leveling up their strength? The blurb for it mentions that it is powered and I know that Predator armor does prevent a soldier from leveling up their strength.
  7. A Harridan flew up onto a cliff while being within my vision on a desert map for a crashed large cruiser. It then shot at one of my troops at a lower elevation and scored a hit. It then tried to move but it was playing a running-on-the-ground-to-the-west animation while it was translating to the south. It "flew" off my screen and then I crashed to desktop. I am playing on Windows 7 Professional with the version of Xenonauts released on June 15th (V1.05 - HF).
  8. I received a terror mission request from a country that I had already lost. I ignored it because lost countries are lost permanently, so there is no point to risking my troops. Was this a correct assessment?
×
×
  • Create New...