Gauddlike Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I also thought about that but it wasn't much of a gameplay feature. Enemies are miles above us, quick stop researching and manufacturing! Not launching fighters makes a kind of sense though unless you know you can overwhelm the scanners, or are willing to risk failing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 Honestly, I don't really care about giving us reason to have larger number of bases, but give us better reason to where we put our bases besides largest radar coveration, largest amount of terror sites nearby, biggest mass of land so you can drop all ufos there and such. For example, since Iceland is important background wise, it would be nice if there were something interesting to happen if you have base there. But if there is nothing special about Iceland, then there is no point to put base there as your coverage will be mostly sea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thothkins Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 I'm sure we'll find out that one of the aliens escaped and went on to become Bjork. It makes perfect sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 there is no point to put base there as your coverage will be mostly sea. Suppose that depends how much the events like strafed fishing fleets begin to affect the funding nations. As you say, there should probably be a reason to have bases with less than optimal land coverage. It doesn't necessarily have to be region or location specific though. The seas surrounding a nation are important to it, if an enemy is damaging their fishing fleets, sea transport networks, oil production or any number of other things then you have a reason to cover it. If it is a big deal though then it needs to be clear so people don't overlook it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 Yeah, but you still would get more air missions than ground mission meaning you will get alien tech to research slower. Unless lands with large sea coverage would have bonus that would make it better even if you start there. I mean, iceland could have secret cache of alien tech or something(though I doubt that would work since aliens blew themselves up there) for example. Or bonus to research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeaxle Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 There is a simple, and less arbitrary way of encouraging the player to build substantial bases out. I think adding additional scientists to a research project gives diminishing returns - namely the first scientist gives 100%, second 95% third 90% etc (not the actual numbers as far as I know). More bases with labs means more efficient research, and you could do the same with workshops. If you combine this with collaborative research, so that if two bases are looking into the same topic they both contribute to research instead of one researching the topic and the other essentially wasting time and wages. So, make the stacking penalty significant and there is a very good reason to build lots of bases, rather than one main and radar stations everywhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean-Luc Posted May 21, 2012 Author Share Posted May 21, 2012 Honestly, I don't really care about giving us reason to have larger number of bases, but give us better reason to where we put our bases besides largest radar coverage... That's precisely what I was talking about but the discussion kinda lost sight of that I feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeaxle Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 (edited) That's precisely what I was talking about but the discussion kinda lost sight of that I feel. The discussion moved to reasons to push the player to have a larger number of generalist bases (ie. spread out workshops and labs) because someone brought up the point that as things currently stand Firaxis' XCOM model is the better one. If there is no advantage to having three lab bases then you might as well have the game centralise core activities into one base and just have radar/hanger stations to get global coverage. This is not something that would be changed by getting a 'coverage bonus'. If there is no disadvantage to centralising everything in one base then other bases will be radar/hanger stations, meaning the core consideration for siting these bases will be radar coverage. You could have bonuses for a base in Iceland, but all that will mean is that you will place a radar/hanger station there. So even with extra bonuses, the question remains, why not just use Firaxis' system? The simple fact is, due to the nature of the game radar coverage is going to be the core consideration when siting a base. Rather than giving additional bonuses for bases built in random locations, I think the better path is to encourage de-centralisation of research, manufacturing, soldiers etc. It means additional bases actually have a purpose. It also means you can really buff base invasions and make them very tough and exciting if the player should be building a decentralised system (which really makes sense in this sort of conflict). Edited May 21, 2012 by freeaxle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 The discussion moved to reasons to push the player to have a larger number of generalist bases (ie. spread out workshops and labs) because someone brought up the point that as things currently stand Firaxis' XCOM model is the better one. If there is no advantage to having three lab bases then you might as well have the game centralise core activities into one base and just have radar/hanger stations to get global coverage. This is not something that would be changed by getting a 'coverage bonus'. If there is no disadvantage to centralising everything in one base then other bases will be radar/hanger stations, meaning the core consideration for siting these bases will be radar coverage. You could have bonuses for a base in Iceland, but all that will mean is that you will place a radar/hanger station there. So even with extra bonuses, the question remains, why not just use Firaxis' system? The simple fact is, due to the nature of the game radar coverage is going to be the core consideration when siting a base. Rather than giving additional bonuses for bases built in random locations, I think the better path is to encourage de-centralisation of research, manufacturing, soldiers etc. It means additional bases actually have a purpose. It also means you can really buff base invasions and make them very tough and exciting if the player should be building a decentralised system (which really makes sense in this sort of conflict). I'm still annoyed by the fact that my secret antartica base in original XCOM was wasted money Seriously, even if game mechanics shouldn't encourage people have bases in different countries, I think there should be some kind of extra bonuses(of non game changing short). I mean, there are probably people who'd love to put base in their country, but won't because putting base in there doesn't cover good areas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Caine Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 There are two existing mechanisms for encouraging the decentralisation of manufacturing in Xenonauts - your C-17s can get shot down, and (in the current alpha) it takes a helluva effort to get large batches of goods built. Hands up anyone who has spent 7-8 days manufacturing 12 suits of Wolf Armour, your technicians working around the clock to make it happen. You click on transfer, the C-17 starts off.... half way to the receiving base, a **$t!*! flighter wing swoops down and writes off a million dollars worth of hardware in a blink. After that happened, I found that localising manufacture eliminated that issue. It also meant that if a MiG got shot down, I didn't have to wait for whatever "Big-1" was manufacturing to finish before I could make more MiGs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Might not be such a big issue if you protect your transport planes. Especially if there is a way to do it more easily as has been suggested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Targe Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 As I've stated, all you have to do is make radar tech part of the research tree. Eliminates the annoying requirement to build multiple dishes to improve accuracy, you just research it. An interesting way Firaxis has improved base design btw is to go multiple level. They call it 'ant farm', you can build multiple floors for your base. Once changing level movement is implemented in this game, there's no reason we can't do the same here. You pay extra for each deeper level you dig, but theoretically if you want to build the REAL alien base at Dulce New Mexico, you can go right ahead! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thothkins Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 I think the X-Com bases are much cooler than the ones at Dulce! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean-Luc Posted May 21, 2012 Author Share Posted May 21, 2012 An interesting way Firaxis has improved base design btw is to go multiple level. They call it 'ant farm', you can build multiple floors for your base. Once changing level movement is implemented in this game, there's no reason we can't do the same here. You pay extra for each deeper level you dig, but theoretically if you want to build the REAL alien base at Dulce New Mexico, you can go right ahead! The reason for that is because in that game you'll only ever have a single base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thothkins Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 there's no reason why the ant farm couldn't be a design for use in multiple bases though is there? Not advocating that. I prefer the X-Com way for Xenonauts. Just asking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 (edited) Double post in different threads... that's new. Anyway... You could use the same approach, a multilevel layout would work. I prefer the simplicity of the single level though unless you were going to make them much bigger. Edited May 21, 2012 by Gauddlike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean-Luc Posted May 21, 2012 Author Share Posted May 21, 2012 there's no reason why the ant farm couldn't be a design for use in multiple bases though is there? Not advocating that. I prefer the X-Com way for Xenonauts. Just asking. No, it's just that there's no need and it discourages the building and managing of new bases which is supposed to be a part of the challenge. It's merely a matter of where you're going with your game design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thothkins Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Double post in different threads... that's new. It all went a bit wonky there. I kept getting an ominous ' do you want to leave this page. your text may not be saved and may be eaten by invisible space gerbils' or something along those lines. So, I just kept pressing... was it as good second time round... was it good first time round for that matter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Made no sense either time. I generally try to avoid sense though, it gets in the way of a good post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thothkins Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Made no sense either time. It was probably supposed to be on a third thread where it would have cleaved the heavens with a dazzling ray of blinding knowledge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Like a 2 watt bulb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thothkins Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Like a 2 watt bulb. yeah, Yahweh could impress the locals pretty easily back in the days before they got their own electricity. Made no sense either time. Actually, since you posted that I've been having this nagging feeling that all this time I've been posting there's been something wrong. I think they make perfect sense (not to mention many other self satisfying and smug adjectives:) ). But they're not. They make no sense at all. It's gibberish. I think I type: Yes, the Alien Invasion of Earth in 1979 is clearly an ironic juxtaposition on the effects of the expansionist superpowers of the cold war and their impact on vastly technologically inferior countries. In fact I type: wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity. I think it comes from the comics character Harry Christmas. A man who wrote about the truth behind the government, only for them to do a bit of remote brain surgery. His scathing critiques became garbled nonsense. nonsense that found it'['s own cult following, providing him with a modest income that meant he never suspected the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity. Google says: Yes, the Alien Invasion of Earth in 1979 is clearly an ironic juxtaposition on the effects of the expansionist superpowers of the cold war and their impact on vastly technologically inferior countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorlom Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 In fact I type: wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity wibbly squibbet wobbly sqargy faffling snugity. I suddenly got the urge to go watch "the Rimmer song" from the red dwarf show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean-Luc Posted May 22, 2012 Author Share Posted May 22, 2012 Firaxis did a very similar thing to what I suggested but you only have one base in that game so it's a moot point. Link: http://www.videogamer.com/pc/xcom_enemy_unknown/news/xcom_enemy_unknown_starting_base_bonuses_detailed.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.