Search the Community

Hey there I had a squadron of a mig and two condors chase down a bomber with escorts. They must have just reached them before the low fuel - returning to base pop up came up. My Pre-fight summary said the two condors had 0 seconds combat fuel, so I almost hit the disengage button. Then I noticed the auto-resolve said 100%. I hit the button, and, waddaya know? Perfect result. No damage to any fighters, about the right amount of ammo consumed. If I had manual controlled the mission, the two condors would have had to retreat immediately, leaving my foxtrot to get two alenium torpedoes off, not even destroying the bomber. And only maybe escaping the fighters.

I’ve been using Autoresolve for Air Combat, because I’m fundamentally useless at anything remotely real time. Using Autoresolve, sooner or later I run into trouble - basically as soon as heavy fighters start appearing, (December this time, not sure about other games), I can’t deal with them. Obviously this may be partly down to bad choices for resources and research etc., but if anyone can comment on the following it might be helpful. I should point out I’m playing “V20 Hotfix 08/01/2014” - it’s possible that all my questions are irrelevant due to upcoming changes! Feel free to say if you think I shouldn’t worry too much about air combat strategy until I’ve played a later release. Has anyone managed to play very far using just Autoresolve for air combat, or am I trying to do something that no-one else is doing? It would be interesting to know that it’s actually possible. For anyone who has played far enough to meet and defeat heavy fighters and does not use Autoresolve, have you noticed what sort of percentages for chance of success on the Autoresolve option you see, even if you don’t use it? If people are making progress by manually winning lots of air combats where the chances of success for Autoresolve are low, that suggests to me that using Autoresolve is not really an option if I want to make progress. In that case I can stop thinking about resource allocation and research priorities and think about what game I’m going to play instead of xenonauts. Regardless of whether you use Autoresolve or not, what do I need to deal with heavy fighters? 3 Condors won’t do it - would 3 Foxtrots? I haven’t managed to build enough Foxtrots to test this out yet, but it’s something I could aim for if it’s worthwhile. Would some Corsairs, which I’m currently researching, be able to deal with the Heavy Fighters? Do I just have to bite the bullet and accept that I’m going to have a period of time where I simply can’t do anything about UFOs accompanied by heavy fighters and let the aerial terror attacks go unchallenged? I know there’s no strategy that will guarantee 100% success, but it would be nice to know that there’s something I could or should do about the aerial terror attacks if I do things right. And I could say more, but this post is probably too long already. Comments appreciated.

Could you guys tell me how that thing actually works? Ive used it on several Foxtrot vs Fighter squads... and won... without a scratch. I tried wining it manually and its hard, if not impossible. A corsair and 2 migs get a landing ship with escorts, also without a scratch. 2 migs against 3 fighters? You CANT win that, auto-resolve does - with 66% hp left on the migs... lol. Does it calculate the $ cost of the aircraft versus the enemy one to determine the outcome? The purpose of the auto-resolve is a mystery to me, so Im not critisizing, just curious how it works.

Hi. THough having a dedicated place to discuss autoresolve feature would be helpfull. My first early impressions on autoresolve are the following: -It works nice so far. Got just to the first scouts (not the small ones). -Planes seem to take a bit too much damage. Engaging light scouts with 2 condors consistently gives a victory with 19-26% health on both condors. I like autoresolve giving worse results than the ones a player can have doing it manually, to encourage playing on manual, but this is too much worse. A player can win the combat with around 80% health in 1 or 2 condors, or no damage at all if good. 26% health on autoresolve is too much punishment, having around 50% health remaining will be better as it doesnt make you lose so many intercept chances because of repairs. As I almost skipped 19.4 entirely Im finding UFOs to be tougher than usual so I need to play more on manual to be able to give better feedback about autoresolve.

Hi all! So, in a couple threads now I've seen that there's a desire to have small UFOs show up throughout the game, instead of them all disappearing and being totally replaced with the current generation of higher level UFOs. This is because: a) We need a way to train new recruits, and having weaker UFOs show up throughout the game gives us an opportunity to train new recruits without needing a base training system. b) Sometimes it's a nice break from the hard core missions to have a nice easy mission where you can dominate the enemy easily. It would show you how far you've come since the early days of the invasion, and boost your spirits a bit. Anyway, some people won't/don't like this idea because they don't want to have to do the super easy (and sometimes repetitive) ground missions for light scouts and scouts. This is why I came up with this idea: As a part of the air combat auto resolve, why don't we have a "Normal Attack" option for the regular auto resolve, and an "Aggressive Attack" option for when we want that UFO completely destroyed, with no ground mission? My idea wouldn't change the main auto resolve at all, it would simply add another option: Under the normal system: If Xenonauts > UFO(s), then UFO crashes, creating ground mission. If UFO > Xenonauts, then Xenonauts Lose. Using Aggressive Attack: If Xenonauts >>> UFO, then UFO is destroyed outright, creating no ground mission at all. If Xenonaut > UFO, then UFO crashes normally, creating ground mission. If UFO > Xenonaut, then Xenonauts Lose. Of course, this is somewhat simplified, seeing as it doesn't take into account individual aircraft taking damage, or part of a squadron being destroyed, but that's not exactly relevant to this post. My main idea is that if the UFO is insanely outmatched (like a trio of Corsairs armed with plasma missiles vs a single light scout) it can be destroyed using the Aggressive Attack button. (Obviously this would need to be balanced somewhat, the example above was just an example.) Destroyed UFOs would give half of the normal Alloys and no alenium, I'd say. This would cost the player a little amount of resources for the luxury of not having to do the ground mission. If the player wanted the money, all the alloys, and the alenium from the UFO, they'd have to do the crash site themselves. This would be to encourage doing ground battles and not simply spam the Aggressive Attack. Honestly, Aggressive Attack wouldn't even be all that useful for current UFOs, because they'd be pretty evenly matched and would therefore not be destroyed. It'd be a function for lower level UFOs. Perhaps it could also effect what damaged state the UFO crashes in, if not destroyed outright. Like, if Aggressive Attack had a higher chance for major damage than Normal Attack would. Also, maybe Aggressive Attack could have a greater chance of Xenonaut craft being damaged/destroyed if the sides are more evenly matched. Anyway, sorry for the lengthy post. Thoughts?

On the last dev update you mentioned you might be implementing an auto-resolve for air combat. I agree with the idea, since at some point engaging trivial combats is just annoying and pointless. Or if not, there might still be need for it. If not, then not. However, I also have an idea regarding the auto-resolve to take the player's skill into account, and thought I'd post it here regardless of it an auto-resolve mechanisms will ever be implemented or not. Make the success chance of the auto-resolve based on the ratio of how successful the player is in downing UFO's. Start the ratio at 50% for example and for each downed ufo increase it by 1% (up to 100%) and for each lost aircraft decrease it by 1% down to, let's say 5 or 10%. Then use this percentage to multiply a base auto-resolve chance for the final chance of a successful auto-resolve. E.g. let's say the win/lose ratio is 75% and the base resolve chance of a light scout would be 110%, then the chance of successful auto-resolve mission would be (75% * 110%) = ~83%. Now let's say the player has a bad streak and loses 10 air crafts in a row, decreasing the win/lose ratio to 65%. Now the auto-resolve chance against the same craft would be 72%. You could also assign auto-resolve chance modifiers based on aircraft type and weaponry. Max chance could be capped at, say 90-95% while there might not be need for a minimum chance. I believe this would be a nice way to make player skill have an effect on auto-resolve. To make it harsher, each lost aircraft could have more than 1%-unit impact on auto-resolve chance. The win/lose ration can be called pilot morale or something, in order for it to make more sense than some ratio.

That's pretty much the only thing I hate about xcom and xenonauts.

I played the demo for a few hours and enjoyed it a lot but one thing that bugged me was how often the air combat kept coming up. It got really, really repetitive fighting the same 3-on-1 skirmish over and over and over (and later 3-on-3), especially when all I wanted to do was play the (really enjoyable) turn based combat. I was probably fighting ~20-30 air battles in a row before I got to play out a ground combat. And most of those were identical to each other. Split my 3 jets up, drag-n-bag, rinse and repeat. Maybe some sort of auto resolve option would be good. Of course, jets are so expensive I'm not sure anyone would risk leaving the results of a dogfight to some % chance. But ya... some way around this would be nice. Either that or just change up the dogfights more somehow and add variety. Anyways that's my 2c.