Jump to content
Chris

Xenonauts-2: Ground Combat

Recommended Posts

On 4/24/2018 at 8:47 PM, Chris said:

 

  • Psyons - I'm still not sure about these guys, but there'll probably be some interplay between the small weak Psyons and the larger Officers!

 

360 degree energy shields with special resistances for different kind of damage types.. this will be great for their fragile bodies and would add a great mechanic for players as well..

Full invisible enemies, assault teleporting (defensive teleporting would make them just passive and annoying, they should be ultimate enemy commandoes)..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, drages said:

360 degree energy shields with special resistances for different kind of damage types.. this will be great for their fragile bodies and would add a great mechanic for players as well..

You actually don't need this as a special ability; all armours now have resistance values for the different damage types in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Chris said:

You actually don't need this as a special ability; all armours now have resistance values for the different damage types in the game.

This is not what i mean with the "shield". Shield will act as a absorbing wall with it's own HP and damage % holding. 

Example: A energy shield with 200 HP, which absorbs %100 of kinetic weapons and %50 of explosions.. so a hit with 20 kinetic damage won't harm the user and shield will lose 20 hp. when you throw a grenade for 30 damage, the user will take 15 damage and shield will lose 15 hp.. and emp damage could %200 damage against shields.. 

If you use this mechanic with some cool visual effects on the user, it would be very nice "high tech alien" trick.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think the campaign would be too short. I played CE for the first time, so maybe it was longer but it felt perfectly fine. There are more technologies than number of mission, so you get too many new things with every one. For me one new thing per mission on average would be well enough. I don't even need that but I guess most players are casuals, so it would be fine.

Of course, the simplest solution would be to give players more options in difficulty settings. This way everyone would be satisfied. If it's not too much work for you, it would be very good and convenient. No need to wait for long war mod before you start to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/24/2018 at 12:47 PM, Chris said:

In Xenonauts-2 we think the average campaign should have roughly 25 missions, roughly split out as follows: 1 final mission, 3 terror attacks, 2 alien base attacks, 2 base defence missions, 2 DEFCON missions and the remaining 15 missions split between UFO Crash Site and Abduction missions as the player sees fit.

So.. Mission fatigue...

I actually replayed Xenonauts 1 and X-Com this week, going through a whole game (on normal/experienced, veteran takes a far longer time to win in terms of gametime and superhuman seemed a bit foolish) it was primarily to get an idea of how these two games worked. What their differences were in terms of final gamefeel and how they achieved that. Now, primarily, what X-Com does better is atmosphere. The music, the screams in the distance, the lighting engine at night, the way you aren't entirely certain (even when you can see the layout!) of where aliens are.. All that serves to create a beautiful feeling of dread and spookiness that no other game has captured since. I remember when I first played it a couple years ago, I never got mission fatigue. The XCOM remake tends to drag in the terror missions and towards the end. XCOM2 has a tedious geoscape that makes missions more fun by comparison but even with it's special levels, they still end up not being that great by the time you finished your second ADVENT base assault. Xenonauts starts off strong but very slowly devolves into air striking entire waves because a mission every four days to do the same thing is just.. Not enough variety, as you've said. So I thought replaying it would teach me why it got right what everyone else missed.

Turns out I was wrong about the original X-Com. Sorta. Oh sure it starts out brilliantly, like most games in this genre. But that's because it seems to be balanced for a single base producing the optimal amount of combat-geoscape ratio missions for time. I did a hell of a lot better this time around. Getting near world wide coverage of UFOs, not losing a single mission, shooting nearly all the buggers down.. That last one is a mistake, at least if the aim is fun. A whole globe of UFOs produces so many missions that I even stopped intercepting them before the end. This was a fun maximizing playthrough, not a win the game playthrough, not a get the best or do the best, it was just to play however was most fun for me and that led to so many pop up boxes and white dots on the map that I just rushed the tree to final mission.

I've always loved that the original XCOM just doesn't care about you. It doesn't treat you like your a player and this is a game. It presents you with an alien invasion and gives you a series of tools to do something about it; damned be the fun if it got in the way of the story. We don't build games like that anymore and for good reasons, but I do still miss it and believe in engineering a proper alien invasion that's still fun as hell to counteract, no matter how well or poorly you're doing.

With that in mind, I've come up with a few concepts which might help guide a campaign.

  • Missions are always something you look forward to if you have a shiny new toy to try out. It doesn't matter the mission or why: the first piece of wolf armor, that shiney new laser pistol which never needs reloading, that realization that shields exist, that fancy new skyranger, all those lead to you wanting to try them out. So for every toy that players will mainline, there should be at least 1 mission.
  • Transition phases. One of the biggest thing missing from XCOM2: there was never any moment where half of your squad was fielding lasers while the other were sporting plasma. This actually contributes to mission fatigue being so much worse in that game. I'd say for every major transition (There's six in Xenonauts, three for weapons, three for armors,) there should be 2-3 missions.
  • Tactical brain space. That thing where you forget soldiers exist; not just forget that they haven't fired but have literally almost left them behind at the end of the turn. XCOM has 6 soldiers max with a hilarious amount of tactical space, I rarely forget someone. Xenonauts has 12 max, I sometime forget one or two soldiers. X-Com had 14 in the Skyranger and gods knows how many in the Avenger (26) and that was just too much. 14 was fine but more because each of them had minimal tactical ability on a turn to turn basis; there was no cover, no shooting around corners, no suppression. A brain can only hold so much tactics for so long before getting burned out. 12 soldiers might actually be too much for most missions with all the stuff you're doing on a moment-to-moment basis (I'm going to try Xenonauts again by always bringing a vehicle or otherwise running with -2 slots to see how it feels. Oddly, 12 was never a problem during base assaults, splitting the squad up to search for clues creates a lot of mini-situations and that's just peachy.) Setting a lower max or just having more missions where you don't have to worry about too much at once is something to keep in mind when designing maps.
  • Some missions are a slog. They're a great slog, but you don't ever want to do them more than a few times. You certainly seem to get this but I'm just writing this in for completion sake. Terror missions should also always be interesting. Weirdly, the XCOM remake sometimes (only twice realistically) does this best out of everyone. The first terror mission almost always hits before everyone has laser weapons so you get to test their effectiveness while seeing just how badly you need the upgrade. The first one with chryssalids can be beautiful if you get to see their potential growth pattern and only barely win. And then there's usually one where everything goes right and you feel like a god. It's the..
  • Up-down relationship on the macro scale. I'm betting most people get this: XCOM beats you hard, you find a way to fight back, it gets easy for a mission or two, then you're back to the beating. It's holding a buffet of victory out for you, letting you have just enough of a taste to know it's possible before shoving you back into the mud. That taste is what drives you get up again and climb, that's where you find the fun. I'm not certain any XCOM-em-up has had more than three of these (and that third tech tier is what keeps me loving Xenonauts so much,) but I think that might be a sweet spot. X-Com has psionics and it just breaks the game. In some ways, that's the point, but once you can start mind controlling ethereals, that's it. You've won forever. It's cool for about two missions and a base assault, then winning is boring. Xenonauts' third tier may let you turn final base assaults into near assured victory, but battleships remained a challenge forever out of reach and that was awesome. What wasn't was that three marauders could always beat a battleship in autoresolve.
  • Most mission should have a positive goal. Be it getting your first weapons fragments, capturing your first alien, or just seeing what that new UFO is. It makes you feel proactive, like you've decided this mission's goals, you've decided what you need, you've decided you need more than victory. Fending off the impending creation of another pip on XCOM2's doom-o-meter is reactive, doing terror missions is reactive, doing base defence is reactive. These kinds of missions should be limited in number. They really drive home the point that you're up against an unwinnable force, but if you're always beating them back and doing it all the time, then they're more tedious than anything and don't accomplish a lick of progress. Unless you want to fatigue the player, keep these missions a certain distance apart.

How do you accomplish all that AND have what you face ramp up throughout the game? I mean, typically you end up downing more UFOs as the game progresses, not the same.

That's where I'd put the focus. Anything that makes you face the same number of missions per time at the beginning as at the end.

As a suggestion, I'm going to inspiration from AI War: The aliens have practically already won. There are battleships in the sky, an alien has contacted every super power on earth, all that's left is time and they'll achieve world domination without so much as firing a shot. That's where you come in. You're the last hope and you can't draw too much attention to yourself. You don't take down the battleships on day one not just because you can't, but you're not supposed to. You're supposed to find the smallest ship you can, smash it, then learn everything you can from it. You'll get new goals every time you do this. Sometimes it will be a simple matter of getting alloys and elerium, others you'll be gunning for a specific alien or a ship component. Doing too many missions risks the aliens thinking of you as a major threat and just running a kitted out party to your front door.

The first time, it will just be the readymade special forces scout looking for you. If you win (because losing means losing the game here), you get a message about how they were overconfident and perhaps rightly so depending on how you did. They didn't relay back to mission control, figuring they could just squash you and be done with it. The same won't be true next time. Next time will be a force of their best and deadliest. If you manage to fend them off, they'll consider us temporary equals and enter into a steady cold war. They could just blast your base from orbit, but that would reveal them. This base was designed to be nuke-resistant and they'll want to hit us with something bigger than the Tsar bomb. That would risk the nations of the world banding together against them (throwing around nukes is often considered an act of war) which isn't a part of their plans. But now they're ready for us. They're waiting. They're winning. When they think the time is right, we won't even know what hit us. Nor will 100km of Alaskan coast once its replaced by a large hole.

Biggest risk is balance and teaching the player that sitting around will get them killed and not pushing themselves will get them killed. Just so long as you're more subtle about the two walls of, "doing too much," and, "doing too little," than having a Bradford or XCOM2 pips, I'd hope it could be fine. Giving players this kind of choice is always risky, however, since you want them to run missions before they think they're ready. Perhaps making a whole new intel screen which screams, "DO THIS! Find one of these and get them while they're hot. We only know about one of them and there's no telling when we'll find another," (or, you know, you only get learn about landed alien ships rarely and get told that one ship is hotter and flying slower than normal so might have extra elerium or something) and then yells tiny red letters on the top of your geoscape when massive alien screening is going on because you farmed one scout too many.

Worst case, you'd have to get the balance pretty bad if players got mission fatigue there. Usual case, you'll run into the problem of stressing out the player if you take this suggestion. There needs to be periods of calm to have good pacing and seeing a dozen red UFOs flying around the geoscape all the time does not lend well to calm. But this is a problem of aesthetics more than anything. Make it look boring and beautiful until it does something, like a volcano.

My mate suggests drawing a heatmap of where you think the aliens think you are so that you know which areas to avoid running missions in and tying it into the, "blame the FBI system." Then having another heatmap for alien activity so you always have an idea of what's going on and can check out changes one the geoscape. Only ever seeing individual UFOs when you're specifically tracking them but otherwise having an easy time finding most of them when you know where to look.

Interestingly, this could tie into the idea of having stealthier ships gated behind a tech. Probably a base assault of some sort. What you'd put on medium UFOs with even greater stealth tech than you've seen so far is hard to justify; unless you want to try balancing getting psionics which I don't think is a plan.

On 5/22/2018 at 4:01 PM, Chris said:

The idea I'm playing with is that if there's a mind-control capable alien on the map, they can either cast mind control on any Xenonaut that they can see themselves - or "possess" a different alien that can see a Xenonaut instead. The posessed alien acts and fights as normal, but if it survives a whole turn (i.e. if the player doesn't kill it on his turn) then the psionic alien can cast mind control using squad sight from the posessed alien.

And this is just a great idea. Coming across a glowy purple glowy head that can mind control you..

"Shoot him. Shoot him now."
"The drones are all female commander. Perhaps I should shoot you."
"Will someone who's not being mind controlled shoot it?"
"Shot wide."
"Damn rookies! Worthless!"

... I think I wrote too much.

Edited by ApolloZani
Forgot a point I wanted to make.
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, ApolloZani said:

So.. Mission fatigue...

  • Most mission should have a positive goal.

You reminded me I actually did feel bored on some occasions playing CE. When I was doing the same thing all over again without anything new and not getting anything of value for quite a while.

Although I don't think I'd feel like that in X2, since it's richer in many aspects.

And I agree there were too many soldiers. I was forgetting about some of them, too. That is until I clicked "next". And it made missions too long. I had better fun with less soldiers. I'd gladly see more of them in the last few missions. Or even the last one (maybe they could use alien teleportation device or alien ship). 

Quote

We don't build games like that anymore.

But we built Divinity Original Sin. It gives you a task, it gives you tools and it leaves you to do something about it. Without compromising the story in any way.

In recent interview, few RPG designer talked about it. They think more games will go the same way now:

Brian Fargo is particularly keen to introduce “emergent gameplay” of the type that Divinity: Original Sin 2 used so effectively. Players could mess around with different elements to create fun interactions, like killing an enemy and electrifying their pooling blood so that it zaps anyone stood close. (...)

Josh Sawyer, director of both Pillars of Eternity games, agrees that CRPGs will put more emphasis on “interactive environment-driven mechanics”. “By making more fundamentally dynamic gameplay that’s more driven by environmental interactions, you’re creating a game that’s richer for creating your own stories, your own gameplay by just fooling around.”

 

Edited by Ravn7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to Psyons.. and other alien abilities

Over the years since X2 was announced, there's been a lot of discussion abut Psyons and how they would play out. I know at one point there was a lot of talk about a strong interaction between Psyon drones and Psyon Officers. I think if Goldhawk wanted to make it easy on themselves, they could do no worse than to pick and choose from standard status effects and use them directly as psychic abilities. Status effects are common in Japanese turn-based skirmish games, but we see only a handful of effects in western ones. Firaxis realized this, which is why there are around 8 status effects in XCOM 2 (compared to I think 4 in XCOM), but the psychic related abilities of enemies are grouped very tightly and don't explore the realm of status effects. The world of status effects and standard status buffs is fertile ground for Xenonauts to explore and make their own mark. After all, if you do nothing but change the conditions on which a status effect is bestowed, you have a unique ability.

Take paralyse, for example. If you make its targeting similar to a range weapon, always on and it affects the first opponent that it touches along its chosen line-of-fire, then the stock paralyse becomes mesmerise. Combine a stock ability up buff with a bleed effect which damages AP instead of HP and you have frenzied, an ability that Reapers might activate to represent them going into a hyperactive state. I think there's lots of room in the phase space of status effects and status buffs for the aliens of Xenonauts 2 to have original abilities based on the common building blocks of existing effects. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max_Caine said:

I think there's lots of room in the phase space of status effects and status buffs for the aliens of Xenonauts 2 to have original abilities based on the common building blocks of existing effects. 

Something something Reaper poison making it so you need to research a cure or knockout/kill the 'naut before they succumb to the effects. There's something I rather like about the idea of having to stun one of your own soldiers to save their life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 mission is so low at my eyes.. If your game does not have great replayability, game will be too short with 25 missions. Another thing is, some people wants to play long and experience everything for once, rather then restarting and finishing it again and again to see all the game.. I think it's like to play Civilsation fast or epic speed.. I would like to have a long and rich one with different possibilities. 

For example, 3 terror attacks for whole game means 4 month at X-1.. "Terror" attacks should be very special and fearsome.. they should not be something you can act like a normal mission.. it should be very hard, different and mostly unwinnable. Yes.. you should not win always against an alien army with super techs and fearsome creatures. Those are aliens prepared tactical attacks.. not a supply ufo.. so you should go in, rescue as much as you can, grap some unique items special to terror missions and leave with a tactical retreat.. 

BUT, i know how CHris feels about the difficulty curve of the game. He does not want to make a Dark Soul here but expects it from modders and he will support for it.. i think it's a great win-win deal. Still at hard difficulty, you should not win every battle. Main game could handle much more missions with long term too, with a good mid-late game balance of course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

3 hours ago, drages said:

25 mission is so low at my eyes.. If your game does not have great replayability, game will be too short with 25 missions.

I agree. 25 ground missions seem like a really short game, where you don't have enough time to experiment with different weapons, technologies and gadgets or get to know alien races before new ones emerge. I don't want to have new tech and aliens in every mission. Getting to equip new weapons and armour should feel like a great accomplishment that you have to wait to get. I'd say 40-60 missions sound about right in this type of game.

Edited by Skitso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes 25 ground combat is not exactly big enough to fit so much features.

I am beginning to think, may be a Easy setting can actually hide features like development projects and weapon modules and soldier skills and ban OP alien abilities, to keep the game simple and short and easy.  Vets can go for the Long War difficulty that is much more delicate and brutal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2018 at 7:08 AM, ApolloZani said:

a shiny new toy to try out

The number of missions is pretty much this though isn't it. Plus some number of missions for when each shiny new alien appears, and another few for when they get new toys. Plus some that are resources/objective/plot based. Essentially, you don't want to be replaying missions with the same set up. That is just grinding for experience. Ew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the number of ground combat missions. IF you've got a reasonably engaging interception minigame AND a reasonably engaging strategic layer so you're not just simply waiting for the next GC mission to happen but are kept engaged and busy then 25 missions won't feel like too few. What would be nice is to have some elasticity in the intended number of missions so people can stretch things out if they want to without feeling like grinding out missions is the only viable route to victory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In XCOM:EU and EW the rush tactic is very viable - equally, the long war is too even without even using the Long War mod. More enemies spawn depending on the in-game date, so late-game missions can be taken on even with a relatively green squad.

Unless X2 implements a concrete time limit via some global ticker, it shouldn't be hard to spin a campaign along; the real issue is teasing out the early/middle stages as opposed to procrastinating before activating Operation Endgame. Maybe I'm wrong, but I assume that people who are hoping for 50 missions aren't wanting 30 of them to be with top tier weapons?

I would have thought that this stuff is the bread and butter of the inevitable community edition, sticking in a few sliders under the 'New Game' button to determine how quick the aliens progress and how much it takes for your research to progress, with the number of missions being a function of the two.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

X1 used a global ticker, but it was easy to adjust the time of appearance and appearance rate of UFOs, and it was the UFOs that governed the rate at which new technology was discovered. I would imagine the bulk of new tech is going to come from UfOs in X2 as well, so it would be possible that a global ticker will be used in X2.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/24/2018 at 10:47 AM, Chris said:

In Xenonauts-2 we think the average campaign should have roughly 25 missions, roughly split out as follows: 1 final mission, 3 terror attacks, 2 alien base attacks, 2 base defence missions, 2 DEFCON missions and the remaining 15 missions split between UFO Crash Site and Abduction missions as the player sees fit.

As long as there is no artificial way to force us to endgame.  In X-COM style games, I never finish them until I'm ready to start fresh...this can, and has, lead to running over 100+ missions in one game.  Even in X1.  I liked in XCOM EU/EW the Cathedral Ship would just fly around until you were ready to tackle it.  In XCOM 2, I disabled the Doom counter, but in WotC they made it so simple to reduce the counter that it isn't even a bother.  It's nice to have the option to just get to a good point and play as long as you'd like, rather than being forced into completing the game.  I would much prefer one really long playthrough with maxed out soldiers and the best weapons over 2-3 that just force me to finish the game with whatever I have at the time.

As long as everything is self paced, that satisfies both groups.  Those who want to get the missions completed and push to the end quickly, and those that want to take their time.

Edited by endersblade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a possibility to postpone the endgame isn't enough to satisfy my need of a longer campaign. The pacing needs to be compelling for the entire length of the game so that new tech and aliens are evenly spaced out from start to finish and not so that everything is rushed in within the first 25 missions and from there I just grind mission after mission with nothing new to see or do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skitso said:

Having a possibility to postpone the endgame isn't enough to satisfy my need of a longer campaign. The pacing needs to be compelling for the entire length of the game so that new tech and aliens are evenly spaced out from start to finish and not so that everything is rushed in within the first 25 missions and from there I just grind mission after mission with nothing new to see or do.

That's something I've complained about in several X-COM clone games, including XCOM.  In XCOM the way research was done, you could completely skip tier 2 weapons and just research plasma.  I went through several playthroughs where I did that, never made laser weapons.  I think the pacing in XCOM 2 is much better as far as that goes, I end up using Mag (tier 2) weapons a lot more than lasers in the last game. 

I think I ran into this problem in X1 as well.  Between the researching and the time and materials needed to craft everything from guns to planes, it was just more efficient to skip certain tiers/types.  If you had something like 10+ soldiers, you would more than likely research the next tier of weapons before you ever had the materials required to make the previous tier.  In which case what's the point?  Just farm a bit more and make even better weapons.

I did however love the pacing of X1, the way that you can't just bum rush to the end, you have to wait for specific events to take place, like having your first officer, etc, show up.  Also enjoyed the introduction of new aliens...like, as soon as you get used to killing X1's version of sectoids (sorry haven't played in months, forgot their name), suddenly you're fighting androns and your weapons are nowhere near as effective.  Suddenly you're using several shots from several soldiers just to kill ONE, and suddenly two of his buddies pop out of the shadows. 

That's something I want to see is MORE alien races.  I have mods for XCOM2/WotC that add a combined something like 30+ new aliens to fight - granted a lot of them are just modified ADVENT grunts, but some of them actually add unique new aliens, making combat more enjoyable than just mowing down the same 5 or 6 alien types.  X1 had a good selection, but I really felt like there should've been more...granted, X1 didn't have the assault units that X-COM had, like Cyberdiscs and the other 4-spaced units and such, but something like that would be amazing.  I still remember the first time I ran into a Sectopod in XCOM, they felt so ridiculously lethal and scary, and they looked SO COOL!!  I never really felt that way about them in X-COM, I mean, they were hard to take down, sure, but they really didn't feel as threatening as they did in XCOM.

Other than the Androns, nothing really felt like that in X1.  Nothing really gave me that "oh shit!" moment.

Sorry I went off-topic so much.  But it ties into what I quoted originally:  If the game isn't long enough and paced well enough, you can get away with 5-6 alien types and call it done, but that's going to be one of those 'one and done' games that people get bored of playing really fast.  Make the campaign take time.  Introduce us to scarier and scarier aliens over time.  Ramp up that impending doom feeling.  Make me terrified of the next mission I take!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In firaxis XCOMs you can eek out the progression of tech through the campaign by simply not building any labs. If the game is to stretch to the length that you desire, user dictated research speed is one option but that fails to address the point of R&D, which is that you are meant to feel pushed to advance quickly. So, a stretchy X2 campaign needs to react to something else, with more advanced alien tech/species only appearing when you trigger the right events, e.g. you only see Androns when you capture a live alien (because Androns can't be captured so they represent a counter for the aliens).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to Abduction missions

How are these going to work? The term "abduction" suggests that either the aliens are stealing humans, or we are stealing aliens. How would Alenium be involved in this? Are we trying to stop aliens from harvesting the precusor to soylent green, or have humans already been captured, and we're getting there in the nick of time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Max_Caine said:

With regard to Abduction missions

How are these going to work? The term "abduction" suggests that either the aliens are stealing humans, or we are stealing aliens. How would Alenium be involved in this? Are we trying to stop aliens from harvesting the precusor to soylent green, or have humans already been captured, and we're getting there in the nick of time?

I read that as Xeno abducting Saul of Tarsus to convert him to Paul the Apostle so that he'll funnel us the Alenium that his army "lost on field".

Because that's more interesting a story.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been intrigued by the possibility of non-lethal options in human vs human missions. Here is my take on a sub mechanic that could drive the non-lethal aspect. 

Lore wise, in a Xenonauts vs Nation mission, you don't want the Nation to know they were hit by a military group. If they do, global tensions will rise (is there still a DEFCON tracker? If so, that could go down.). Each time a Nation solder spots your Xenonaut soldier, a "Spot Tracker" increases; once it crosses a threshold, then the Nation knows they were hit by an organized band, and global tensions rise (to avoid being spotted, Nation soldiers will follow regular patrol routes or something). The Xenonauts have two options then: kill the soldier, lowering the Spot Tracker, or destroy the place at the end of the mission. Killing the soldier reduces the Nation's relations, and destroying the facility will act as if aliens infiltrated.

Mechanically, this isn't very well fleshed out, now that I've typed it all out. But I think structuring the mission as a non-lethal mission, with lethal as an emergency out, could be interesting. It would be very much like the game Invisible Inc. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks! Nice to see xeno2 being developed, certainly like the new graphics.

A few points I'd like to see improved in ground combat:

- Make a button that would signal the end of turn for the selected soldier. Its only function would be that when you switch soldiers with TAB, it would skip that soldier. This way you could quickly see if you are ready to end your turn. This was very much missing from earlier game (and from the new demo as well). Especially when you leave some soldiers on overwatch, it's hard to see how you are standing.

- The helicopter rotors rotating above your head (and giving off a rotating shadow) is nice, but a bit annoying (even if I'm not epileptic) to watch (also seems to slow the graphics down a bit, though it really shouldn't).

- A neat feature in Terror from the deep was to reserve TUs for crouching (which was very much missing from original UFO game as well as Xenonauts). Please make it!

- When you shoot with a soldier, the aim level stays where it was, even if they have no more TUs for that kind of shot. Maybe it would be nice if the aim level would jump back to the next best for which you still have TUs (if there's any such level, otherwise stay).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, hoemaco said:

- helicopter rotors rotating above your head (and giving off a rotating shadow) is nice, but a bit annoying (even if I'm not epileptic) to watch (also seems to slow the graphics...

What if the rotors are spinning as the mission begins and visibly slows to a stop after the first round?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RustyNayle said:

What if the rotors are spinning as the mission begins and visibly slows to a stop after the first round?

Yeah, that would actually be nice. Of course in real life you may want to keep the heli going for emergency evac, but also in real life I think the shadows look different, you don't really notice them, as it's spinning too fast (from what I remember flying long ago - on the other side, please don't make realistic helicopter noises :D )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×