Jump to content
Chris

Xenonauts-2 Soldier Inventory System Discussion

Recommended Posts

The load out would depend on the role of the soldier in question! so the weapons and battle harness differ, but would augment the needs of the hole unit.

So those who would not carry a heavy load out, could help carrying ammo for other members of the squad.

Also Battle webbing could be developed through the game to enhance these roles, more slots on waist and thigh belts, bum packs, and arm pockets, not to mention carry bags.

One of the enjoyments of this type of game, was the R & D into new equipment, and this could add another dimension in X2.

As this game is supposedly about an elite unit, filled with members who have been trained by there nations very best, and that is to start with, so we are not talking of rookies, these personal,

should be able to slots into to the roles that will be needed form the get go, but you could still provide on going training in the use of new alien weapons, equipment and tactics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussion on realism is really interesting. I mean, I don't like the military on general fluffy principles but I'm always rapt to hear about the reality that is associated with the games I enjoy. It is like Starship Troopers - the book has a horrible amount of military fascism; strangely captivating read though.

6 hours ago, jamoecw said:

let us take the extra duties that are needed for each of those roles and stack them all on a single person, now that person is way overburdened...now the 9 month long training course for basic competency for your rifleman is 19 months

This ties in nice with:

21 hours ago, Max_Caine said:

the question of whether a solider would take game-breaking combos of weapons/gear becomes moot once a player starts putting points into a specific skill area

In terms of the streamlining issue: in X1 it made sense to always fill the inventory to the maximum: more gear, more xp in strength. You max everything out but to do so you have to get involved with all that little clicking to ensure that your squad are all loaded up to the last gram. Whatever the system ends up as in X2, there will be room to make custom builds etc but it would be good to avoid the situations where it is worth the player putting a tedious amount of effort into micromanagement in order to get the best from their soldiers. So, something like a backpack/combat webbing is there as an option, but the player can also just opt to bring another gun instead, thus saving the time spent literally weighing up each utility item. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, wanderer said:

Can soldiers still pick up fallen comrades to rescue them or their equipment?

Whether we have the backpack or not, the plan is that this will be allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If skill training would focus a soldier too much on one kind of weapon, I think the current secondary weapons has more to fear than if the system allow multiple primaries.

 

Another small advantage of the slot system is that the game can automatically fills the belt with primary ammo (i.e. if you leave a slot empty you get ammo). Not a big streamline, but nonetheless adds up.

 

It seems that unless the new system can be playtested, the old system will remain the tried and trused option?

Edited by Sheepy
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Chris said:

This is a useful thread with some good points, so keep the discussion coming. To be clear - the example of the shotgun / sniper soldier was just to illustrate my point that a soldier able to take both the weapons and switch freely between them without penalties would be overpowered. I am aware there are already limitations on loading up with additional weapons and TU costs for swapping between them; my point is just that whetever system we settle on must inflict some cost on the soldier when they gain the extra flexibility that comes with carrying an additional weapon (with a bigger cost for a larger weapon).

The backpack seems like it's the only major area of disagreement between what I was originally planning and what most people want. Taking the time to write out my original post and skimming through this discussion, it strikes me that I'm not really opposed to the idea of a backpack but I think we need to ensure appropriate costs are applied for taking extra gear. The Strength system seems the obvious way of doing it, but I really don't think it worked well in X1 - it made the inventory very fiddly and micromanagey. Perhaps it would be more fruitful to consider reworking that instead.

I also think the Secondary slot is going to fix a lot of the biggest problems with the inventory. Part of the reason I wanted to change the design was because the inventory was just so clunky to use in combat, but with a load of that being fixed by the new Secondary slot I may have gone overboard removing the backpack too. You'd only have to interact with the fiddly stuff in GC when you were swapping to a new Primary or Secondary you had in your backpack, and if there were a penalty for carrying stuff in your backpack (e.g. a TU penalty) then not every player would want to do that with their soldiers.

So, yeah - I'm thinking we could add in a X1 style backpack but then just impose a -TU cost on the soldier for each item you put in the backpack depending on its size. That way you don't have to tweak your loadout for every soldier depending on how much Strength they have, so equipping teams is much faster ... and the ones carrying more gear are less mobile that the ones with a lighter load.

personally I'm for huge TU penalties if you draw another primary (or well basically anything from the backpack). in my suggestion it was half TU to pull, half TU to stow..you can use a sling on a primary to avoid having to stow it..provided whatever you pull can be used in 1 hand. and the backpack would be limited to 1 large item, or 4 small ones (size 1 or 2, mags, grenades, ammo boxes and C4 charges) the large item could be every primary save the shield. (the "or" is very important here...it is the small items like bonus mags or the extra gun...not both)

my suggestion revolved around 2 pivotal change that are apparently in the current beta builds, primary weapons should not grant bonuses not related to their use (aka no speed, TU, strength, HP, armor or whatnot bonuses) and item pickup should not be cheap TU wise (otherwise drop + pull followed by a shot and a pickup next round would be superior to stowing the weapon, firing next round, and then switching back)

the belt could hold 1 utility item (6 large items in X1, basically pistol, medkit, or stun baton) and 2 tiny items (1 size, mags, grenades), basically 8 tiles worth of equipment. pulling from or stowing in the belt would cost a minor set amount of TU. if your equipped primary has a sling, you can hold the primary without having to stow or drop it, provided the item pulled from the belt can be used in 1 hand.

The belt+ sling combo would act like a quick draw stash for things you want on hand, but it can only hold non-primary size items...in order to avoid people from using the belt only to store rare-to-use items and fill the BP up with ammo and nades to use from the quickslots, ANY item drawn from the backpack, regardless of weight or size...takes half TU. this alone allows for crazy builds like having a RPG+LMG (with limited ammo available) but equipment load can be used to limit those options, if this is required...as taking these loadouts restrict ammunition and flexibility

from what I'm reading, people wouldn't really care that much if strength is removed as the stat governing equipment load, it can used to govern grenade throwing range* and heavy weapons proficiency (or even hand to hand, if needed). training this stat would then also naturally revolve around using these weapons, not loading your soldier up just to train strength. from what I understand, most people wouldn't mind "equipment load" is just a pre-set max value.

*I still feel the throwing accuracy should be governed by the accuracy stat and related training in grenade throwing.

Share this post


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

Do you have a source for that? I find it very difficult to believe that any soldiers regularly deploy into combat with an LMG and all the ammunition required to use it effectively, plus a RPG or rocket launcher of any variety and enough ammo to use it effectively. Everything I've read suggests that a single soldier generally carries only one of those weapons and even then usually needs assistance from carrying all the required ammunition for it.

First of all I`m russian, second, I served in army, third, I`m squad lead. mj.sergeant (In British army my rank will be something between Lance Corporal and Corporal). And in russian infantry squad there are 6 soldier+IFV\APC crew (but second mostly sit inside vehicle), and that 6 men armed with 5 AK rifles, RPK LMG (just big AK), RPG-7 and several RPG-26 (oneshot AT grenade launchers), and in total they carry something about 1200 bullets for AK (about 40 mags\8 per person) , 900 for RPK (20 mags) , 20 40mm grenades for Underbarrel grenade launcher, 13 hand grenades, 1-3 RPG-26 and 3 shots for RPG-7 (2 AT+1HE, sometimes more, but normal layout is 2+1). Normally there are dedicated AT-soldier with RPG-7(and AK)+assistant, but in fact, usually all work with RPG is done by one person (and he is not always someone with AK)... in my experience I can say, that RPG ammo is more big, than heavy =)

Edited by Severvus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Conductiv said:

personally I'm for huge TU penalties if you draw another primary (or well basically anything from the backpack).

Yeah, that'll happen too. Perhaps not HUGE penalties, but enough that the player has to consider whether they want to spend the TU swapping weapons. But it can't be that alone; there's plenty of instances (e.g. when you've got your soldiers stacked outside a UFO) that you can afford to take an extra turn to switch everyone's weapons out to the optimal loadout. Hence also having the -TU cost for carrying the weapon in the backpack.

Together that's a fairly decent system, I think. Maybe soldiers will be getting a backpack after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/26/2018 at 8:36 AM, Chris said:

Do you have a source for that? I find it very difficult to believe that any soldiers regularly deploy into combat with an LMG and all the ammunition required to use it effectively, plus a RPG or rocket launcher of any variety and enough ammo to use it effectively. Everything I've read suggests that a single soldier generally carries only one of those weapons and even then usually needs assistance from carrying all the required ammunition for it.

Severvus's reply reminds me of a picture that I dismissed as a joke, translated from Chinese here:

247669248_fullrocketsquad_q90.jpg.78719e903cb6f4f94b21028cad070782.jpg

The point to make is "In China, every one got a rocket". After Severvus, I googled a bit.
It turns out to be a real loadout guide in the official squad handbook cira 2003.

It seems to be a loadout for mechanized infantry - the exact scenario described by Severvus.
Photos of squads drilling in this loadout is not hard to find.  Here is a running machine gunner with a rocket (note the drum on his gun).

479481203_rocketmachinegunner_q90.jpg.b77d9c4615fae1d765d455e6d0e15a14.jpg
It may not be the norm, but the high number of photos and articles support it as a real loadout for heavy assault duty. As real as an army can be after decades without major conflicts.

Now, if you look at the "machine gun" closely, you will see that it looks really like a plain rifle.
It's the QBZ-95 rifle's Light Support Weapon variant, with more durable parts but use the same 5.8mm rifle ammo. The light rocket is PF-89, weight 4 to 5kg.
If you ask me, I'd classify it and the rocket as two primary weapons in Xenonauts, rather than two heavy weapons.

On the Russia front, I'm sorry to report that I can't find any photo even with help of google translate.
But the Chinese rocket has recently been upgraded to one that weights 7kg, same as RPG-7, and RPK tells the same story of a rifle-like gun with drum.
So the story does hold water.  Just not the same water as a proper LMG.

Edited by Sheepy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Chris said:

Hence also having the -TU cost for carrying the weapon in the backpack.

So that we should drop the shotgun in dropship and walk back to swtich, or accept the penalty outside but drop the sniper rifles before going in the UFO? I'll give the later point for being more realistic.

Why isn't carrying less support items enough balance for the backpack?

Edited by Sheepy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Certainly the disposable rocket launchers mentioned in the below thread would be light and not too encumbering to carry around with a primary.  How do these compare to those the Chinese are using in your above photos / diagrams?  I keep coming back to this idea that the Xenonauts are a team of special forces / field agents that has to travel light, and not a mainline infantry unit, so things like big heavy conventional machineguns, mortar, big reloadable rocket launchers (as opposed to smaller RPG), etc, don't fit that idea IMO.

 

Edited by RustyNayle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting topic and thread. A lot to read through. I have a couple of thoughts though.

 

Has it yet been decided what the armor mods would fully entail? The only things I could think of were extra plates / armor, maybe a jumppack, and a backpack. What if when you first start the game your basic armor already has an armor mod slot unlocked and you have access to extra plates or a backpack? If you do it that way, you could just make equipping one of those be what reduces time units. (One might argue that just adding a backpack shouldn't cost TUs, but who would add a backpack and put nothing in it?) It would cost the same TUs to put some extra ammo and grenades in there as it would be to add a second primary or a medkit. I'd still add in a greater TU cost for swapping to those items  If done this way, there isn't really a way to cheese the TU penalty since you can't just drop that extra item to get rid of it. You could also add in different packs that allow you to carry either more of less for different TU costs. 

 

Other than that, I like the simplified system. It is just a bit more streamlined which I'm not as against as I used to be. (my time is now more valuable) The backpack I'm not really against, but I do dislike that kills a bit of the streamlinedness. I could see still keeping strength, but I can see getting rid of it. The only other real use is maybe allowing it to affect your throwing range, but that could be cheesed too much. Also, yo could get some really punny throwers. 

 

Overall, I don't see much else to talk about. I'm kind of happy with everything. at least as happy as I can be without playtesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RustyNayle said:

Certainly the disposable rocket launchers mentioned in the below thread would be light and not too encumbering to carry around with a primary.  How do these compare to those the Chinese are using in your above photos / diagrams?  

 

Chineese "small" launchers on Sheepy`s photos are disposable just like Russian RPG-26 or US LAW, but it is much more powerfull- it`s AT capability as I know is close, maybe a bit above the same of RPG-7. And the big one Rocket launcher, that chineese are using is more small cannon, than grenade launcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think we can get flexibility without tetris management.

1. A second primary slot on the back. 
2. A optional and limited number of extra "belts" (bandolier, tactical vest, bigger belt etc)

BUT, the constrictive nature of these impose stacking multipliers on reaction shots and the cost of certain types of movement, possibly even including turning. So you can carry an assault rifle, a pistol, a bazooka, and tack on 20 slots of grenades but by golly you aren't going to make any reaction shots and merely standing up from a crouch is going to wipe out half of your TU.

Basically this becomes a trade-off between having weapon flexibility or spacial flexibility. You can arm yourself to the teeth, but you won't be able to out-manoeuvre and ambush the aliens. Your only feasible options while fully kitted out are taking aimed shots and moving in straight, uninterrupted lines. If you want to make reaction shots, jump over fences, or start in a standing position and then take a crouching aimed shot in the same turn- you gotta travel light. Dumping your second primary shouldn't be too much hassle, but taking off extra belts would really eat into TU to prevent the instant role switching.  

And 3. A stowage area on the dropship that has a small handful of primary weapons, or ammunition for larger weapons. Hopefully you're geared up for any situation but hey if there's a bunch of buggers holed up, you can send a guy back to the ship and grab some shotguns or extra rockets for the squad.

Edited by ScottyWired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I support getting rid of strength as a stat for many reasons which include those that you listed and it's reasonable enough to assume that anyone can carry whatever they can fit in their inventory.  If necessary a heavy weapon can occupy both primary and secondary slots so that no soldier can carry superhuman amounts.   And if you still want strength, maybe it could just be added as a trait so that "strong" soldiers can carry an extra thing.

A potential problem with removing the back pack would be in a mission where you have to retrieve some item without killing everything in sight.  Where are you going to put it?

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/24/2018 at 10:22 PM, Sheepy said:

Perhaps we can refine the equipment classes a little bit.  Make item sizes more varied, split the secondary slot, and add a small weapon-only slot

I actually rather like your idea. I'd probably tweek it a little to better represent the balance and gameplay Goldhawk seems to be going for. Size would be the main consideration for every soldier that way we don't have to worry about the rubbish strength mechanic. A sniper switching to a shotgun is what we're trying to avoid so making each of the standard weapons take 4 out of 6 slots means you'll never have to worry about shotgun-snipers.

If SMGs are just pistols with burst fire and pistols remain the same, then that leaves you with a choice between carrying one more item or possibly being able to take down a bigger creature with just one soldier. Amusingly, this can lead to a situation where you have a soldier just carry around 6 pistols so they never have to reload. If you make it so that certain armors give you extra slots, but separate from the main torso set. Similar to how you can't fit a shotgun on your belt in X1, these new positions would be much more limiting. Perhaps it could be something like power armor getting two 1 sized slots on the wrists for rapid deployment (no TU penalty.) Either a grenade can be pushed into the hand or a tiny pistol like in so many fun spy movies. It also ties nicely into the modular armor system. You could choose either extra protection or the ability to bring along a medkit on top of your SMG and shield.

Then you just have the belt which can only carry tiny things. Grenades, ammo, ect.

On 6/25/2018 at 7:34 PM, Chris said:

I'm thinking we could add in a X1 style backpack but then just impose a -TU cost on the soldier for each item you put in the backpack depending on its size.

Be careful with this. It can easily lead to a situation where you just load someone up with all the shotguns at the beginning of the mission, drop them in the Skyranger, then go back to pick them up before breaching the UFO. Players will always find the least fun way to play your game. If still want to keep the backpack system, I'd suggest limiting it to power armor. In X1, I always turned my Predators into pack mules. That way everyone changing their loadouts before heading into the ship is something limited to the late game and gives power armor an extra mechanical kick when it comes around.

That said, I do miss how in the original XCOM, my first missions where literally about mugging the first alien I took down. Grabbing their weapon and body, then booking it back to the skyranger with a new haul in toe at minimal risk to my soldiers. Perhaps simply making it so that you only have access to the backpack while in the field is the way to go here.

Edited by ApolloZani
grammar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ApolloZani said:

I actually rather like your idea. I'd probably tweek it a little to better represent the balance and gameplay Goldhawk seems to be going for. Size would be the main consideration for every soldier that way we don't have to worry about the rubbish strength mechanic. A sniper switching to a shotgun is what we're trying to avoid so making each of the standard weapons take 4 out of 6 slots means you'll never have to worry about shotgun-snipers.

If SMGs are just pistols with burst fire and pistols remain the same, then that leaves you with a choice between carrying one more item or possibly being able to take down a bigger creature with just one soldier. Amusingly, this can lead to a situation where you have a soldier just carry around 6 pistols so they never have to reload. If you make it so that certain armors give you extra slots, but separate from the main torso set. Similar to how you can't fit a shotgun on your belt in X1, these new positions would be much more limiting. Perhaps it could be something like power armor getting two 1 sized slots on the wrists for rapid deployment (no TU penalty.) Either a grenade can be pushed into the hand or a tiny pistol like in so many fun spy movies. It also ties nicely into the modular armor system. You could choose either extra protection or the ability to bring along a medkit on top of your SMG and shield.

Then you just have the belt which can only carry tiny things. Grenades, ammo, ect.

Be careful with this. It can easily lead to a situation where you just load someone up with all the shotguns at the beginning of the mission, drop them in the Skyranger, then go back to pick them up before breaching the UFO. Players will always find the least fun way to play your game. If still want to keep the backpack system, I'd suggest limiting it to power armor. In X1, I always turned my Predators into pack mules. That way everyone changing their loadouts before heading into the ship is something limited to the late game and gives power armor an extra mechanical kick when it comes around.

That said, I do miss how in the original XCOM, my first missions where literally about mugging the first alien I took down. Grabbing their weapon and body, then booking it back to the skyranger with a new haul in toe at minimal risk to my soldiers. Perhaps simply making it so that you only have access to the backpack while in the field is the way to go here.

personally I think what Chris is trying to avoid, is the instant switch & use between "shotgun and sniper" as the shotgun covers a weakness the sniper has. not so much the ability to carry 2 primaries (something that I actually really liked about X1 was the ability to do just that) so limiting slot count to make that impossible is counterproductive. and I was a tad surprised that he used the fact that you will have down turns that the soldier can sacrifice to switch weapons, as a reason to add the flat TU penalty. now if you want to make a dedicated class less effective at being a jack of all trades they can use their current fledgling skill system to promote specialization. in that case the sniper will always be less effective with weapons other then his rifle (as that is where a sniper would have, most likely..invested his skills)

-I agree the carry capacity can be moved away from strength, this prevents people from trying to game the system by loading their soldiers up to the limit with only the intend to train that stat. strength could still be used as a stat to govern thrown weapons, heavy weapons and possibly melee if this is represented adequately in this sequel.

-personally I don't like bonus slots when you gain certain armors or upgrades, at least not without a significant drawback to acquiring them, heavy mechanized armor would have the merit of improved strength, but it doesn't add extra pockets, and even if it did the armor would impede with interaction. this means those armors would be more beneficial to the use of heavier weapons, but would have a hard time manipulating grenades. for the game-play, getting the extra armor should be the primary benefit, the bonus strength is a side effect and that part should come at a cost as well

-adding an additional flat TU cost to carrying around bonus gear can have 2 outcomes, it is either so small that people ignore it..or it will be so crippling that you get people doing exactly what you say...load up and then ditch it upon landing to pick it up later. one is wasted time on an mechanic, the other is having a mechanic that doesn't seem to add much game-play merit. 

about SMG's, most SMG's to my knowledge are 2 handed, and should not be combined with a shield, adding in a machinepistol group (while allowing the MP's to act like a pistol in any other way) would render the pistol as a weapon obsolete. so I definitely hope they never do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ApolloZani said:

Be careful with this. It can easily lead to a situation where you just load someone up with all the shotguns at the beginning of the mission, drop them in the Skyranger, then go back to pick them up before breaching the UFO. Players will always find the least fun way to play your game. 

I don't have a massive issue with people doing this if they really want to (although I imagine all that running back and forth would be pretty tedious), as Conductiv mentions above the problem is more if the soldier is able to quickly switch between the weapons. Stuff that's back in the dropship isn't immediately tactically accessible and doesn't really pose too many gameplay problems as a result.

My current plan is now to include a Tetris-style backpack, but using the -TU penalty for each item that goes in it. We can always tweak the mechanics as development continues but I think it should allow the player very similar functionality to what was in X1 but with a bit less micromanagement required.

We can potentially mirror some of the other effects of Strength by making the armour you are wearing affect the number of TU it cost a soldier to move each tile. We've not experimented with this yet but I think it would be nice in the sense that soldier in heavy armour has reduced move speed but not reduced combat effectiveness.

Share this post


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

My current plan is now to include a Tetris-style backpack, but using the -TU penalty for each item that goes in it. We can always tweak the mechanics as development continues but I think it should allow the player very similar functionality to what was in X1 but with a bit less micromanagement required.

I rather like this, but I think it could be simplified further. Instead of a Tetris X-by-X size backpack, you can just use a single "size 20" backpack and give items individual sizes. Less micromanagement. And then I think you need a size-dependent TU action cost for grabbing an item from the backpack.

Share this post


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

Adding in a machinepistol group (while allowing the MP's to act like a pistol in any other way) would render the pistol as a weapon obsolete. so I definitely hope they never do that.

In the Kickstarter video, the secondary slot can be armed with pistol or machine pistol (but curiously no SMG).

My guess is, pistol is the "mid range accurate option" while machine pistol is the "short range burst fire option".  Whether calling it machine pistol or SMG will not change their role, and neither replaces pistol for game purpose.

From my point of view, SMG is more different Pistol than Machine Pistol, and the idea is not exactly new (e.g. The Division), so I like that more. But I agree machine pistol should be more consistent.

Edited by Sheepy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it overall - having some way to carry a multiple primary weapon would be nice, but I could see adapting to not being able to do so. Maybe have non heavy weapons available via a sling with a max TU penalty due it being a bit unwieldy? So you can carry two Shotgun/Assault Rifle/SMG, but not if you have a grenade launcher, LMG, or sniper rifle (those would restrict you to a pistol). 

There's a similar mindset (but a more abstracted solution) to how inventory currently works in the first backer build of Phoenix Point - each soldier can cycle between 3 different items without any TU cost (primary weapon, sidearm, heavy weapon, grenade, medikit, etc) and then there's an inventory system that it takes TUs to switch items onto the quickchange slots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sheepy said:

In the Kickstarter video, the secondary slot can be armed with pistol or machine pistol (but curiously no SMG).

My guess is, pistol is the "mid range accurate option" while machine pistol is the "short range burst fire option".  Whether calling it machine pistol or SMG will not change their role, and neither replaces pistol for game purpose.

From my point of view, SMG is more different Pistol than Machine Pistol, and the idea is not exactly new (e.g. The Division), so I like that more. But I agree machine pistol should be more consistent.

The SMG is currently a lightweight primary weapon that grants the user a TU bonus, and the secondary weapons include two pistol variants that do exactly what Sheepy suggested above. Unfortunately the SMG doesn't have much of a niche any more because we can't realistically grant TU bonuses to weapons if the player can carry multiple weapons, so I'm not sure what will become of it in the long term.

23 hours ago, Solver said:

I rather like this, but I think it could be simplified further. Instead of a Tetris X-by-X size backpack, you can just use a single "size 20" backpack and give items individual sizes. Less micromanagement. And then I think you need a size-dependent TU action cost for grabbing an item from the backpack.

That's also a possibility, but then you don't have a specific size for the backpack which is awkward in UI terms. I still think an overall "weight capacity" for the inventory may be a possibility; it just might be more abstracted than in X1 where it was explicitly expressed in KG and all the soldiers had different carrying capacities (due to their differing Strength). I guess it's kinda weird in the current system that all equipped items are equally heavy; I suspect that might come back to haunt me when I try to balance all the items later.

Share this post


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

That's also a possibility, but then you don't have a specific size for the backpack which is awkward in UI terms.

You can absolutely have a reasonable UI with that. You draw the backpack in the UI as a list (think X1 backpack but with no 'squares') and you represent the items in it with an entry (item name) scaled by the item's size. So the backpack looks like:

Medkit

Shotgun

Smoke grenade

Share this post


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

That's also a possibility, but then you don't have a specific size for the backpack which is awkward in UI terms. ... I guess it's kinda weird in the current system that all equipped items are equally heavy; I suspect that might come back to haunt me when I try to balance all the items later.

The later is part of what my proposal tries to solve.  Four item sizes = four power levels.  A big mind shield to shield a small area (beware of grenade!), or a small individual mind shield that allows another small gadget like gas mask or stim to balance it out.  Heavy weapons leave no space for big gadget, without excluding a light but non-tiny weapon like SMG or PDW.

BattleTech has a non-weight one-dimension inventory system, that works like how Solver described it, but in text only.
It'd be weird to have a grenade that is as wide as a Shotgun, but perhaps we can allow two or three grenades in a slot and space it out to make it less odd.

525260339_one-dimensionbackpack.gif.f885322b6052064c0ead1574c1012c50.gif

Edited by Sheepy
Add molle vest background and rotate shotgun to better occupy three slots

Share this post


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

The later is part of what my proposal tries to solve.  Four item size = four power levels.  A big mind shield to shield a small area (beware of grenade!), or a small individual mind shield that allows another small gadget like gas mask or stim to balance it out.  Heavy weapon leave no space for big gadget, without excluding a light but non-tiny weapon like SMG or PDW.

BattleTech has a non-weight one-dimension inventory system, that works like how Solver described it, but in text only.
It'd be weird to have a grenade that is as wide as a Shotgun, but perhaps we can allow two or three grenades in a slot and space it out to make it less odd.

1300975742_one-dimensionbackpack.gif.1b127c7f7c72d4245bb51c111a519316.gif

isn't battletechs colored text block loadout system effectively a tetris system, it just doesn't allow for any horizontally parallel slots (yes 1 dimentional, and tetris is already 2D) and BT definitely uses weight as a parameter, actually in most cases it is either BT's hardpoint system, or its weight system that limits loadouts. (talking the recent videogame, not the tabletop) the main benifit BT has in this aspect that with just colored textblocks they don't really have to worry about poorly fitted images, and for a game about giant robots that works.

personally I wouldn't try to fiddle with the tetris system too much, in my eyes it is making a whole new system to solve a very minor problem. if you just want a single BP slot, make it just big enough to fit 1 primairy, what is it 2X5. and have the belt's L shape allow for a single sidearm/utility+ a few tiny items like magazines or grenades. this gives the player 8 slots that he can quickly draw small items from, and 10 slots that he can... at great cost..drag either 1 big item from or lots of smaller ones. I find it hard to believe if someone would have problems micro-managing 10 BP slots

for hauling corpses, well that is 1 area where I prefer the newer X-coms approach over X1's...I found it hilarious you could stuff a corpse in your backpack for like 3 TU's and then move around with your weapon out.

1 hour ago, Chris said:

The SMG is currently a lightweight primary weapon that grants the user a TU bonus, and the secondary weapons include two pistol variants that do exactly what Sheepy suggested above. Unfortunately the SMG doesn't have much of a niche any more because we can't realistically grant TU bonuses to weapons if the player can carry multiple weapons, so I'm not sure what will become of it in the long term.

I dunno who suggested it, but there was a person that suggested reducing the weapons TU cost to fire, so show that it is a faster operating automatic weapon then a assault rifle is. I'd hate to see them go, as PDW's and SMG's have been making their name on the battlefield for decades, and they where used a lot during the height of the cold war.

by reducing TU costs for snap, normal and burst while maintaining a high reflex multiplier it could still somewhat compete with the pistols and the shotgun, in close quarters..where it should have greater range then the machinepistol, better accuracy and a larger mag on single shots then the standard pistol, a much cheaper and much more abundant..but less powerful snapshot/normal shot then a shotgun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I mean to say BattleTech's weight is rarely a limit in one location (where number of slot is), but I stand corrected.

We've seen why adding TU it is not a good solution in the Alpha build, and it goes worse when you can drop, pick, and transfer items.
Lowering firing TU solves many problems, but not the issue that it means more attacks and actually increase damage output.

I think Phoenix Point got a good balance in this regard by limiting each soldier to one attack each turn, but attacking has variable movement cost.
A "lighter" weapon allows the soldier to move further before attacking, while "heavier" weapon effectively reduce the mobility of the soldier.
Most weapons also fire multiple shots for a bell shaped damage profile, which allow low accuracy to work out even with a single attack action.

(Edit: In Phoenix backer build, Weapons does not change total TU. Max sprint range always stay the same and not affected by changing weapon. Only attack TU change with weapon.)

Adopting this "one attack per turn" system would not prevents X2 from keeping the TU system or different firing modes, and it's perhaps worth experimenting.
It should work equally well to slot inventory and backpack both.

Edited by Sheepy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×