Jump to content
Chris

X2 Base Mechanics - Community Poll

Recommended Posts

To be honest, most of the secondary bases will probably continue to be Aircraft Hangars and Radar Outposts, while Atlas Base will become the Research/Manufacture/A-Team Hub, since unless having certain structures in the other bases will be better than having them in the main base, they simply wont be built.

Maybe to encourage more variety, there could be buildings that have an effect on the region where the base is built, like shortening the duration of Resource missions, or increase local force presence/give bonuses to local forces, or even spawning an "ambush mission" where with help from the Xenonauts, local authorities lure Aliens into a prepared site, where (almost) any mission type can occur, except with all civilians replaced with local forces.

Or being able to construct a purely defensive structure, with more defensive deployment options (more places for turrets or other such things), which would do nothing outside of base attacks.

In any case, I thought the Side-Ways view of the main base was a nice take, as well as having the Hangar/Radar Bases, and it justified only having one dropship at any time, but being able to construct more full bases makes the One dropship rule kind of arbitrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'd just be happy with an improved version of X1 - if it can be improved any more! X1 took over from UFO - Enemy Unknown as my favourate game of all time. I trust Chris with any changes because X1 was spot-on in so many ways. I think the way bases are handled in X1 is more realistic of how things would go though - if you station and rely on auto defences at a base (missile systems/robots),  there may be a chance the ailens will defeat them etc. (possibly like the 1 player mode in Rebelstar where you get to watch your automated ground defences - robots etc. make good/bad choices in fighting the ailens who get through to do a ground assault, but having no interaction unless you also have human soldiers stationed there). Auto-defences would, of course, be cheaper to maintain than stationing soldiers there.

Many didn't like the ending to X1 much though. I suppose the endgame should be about attacking a huge alien base containing traps and a mixture of all alien types.

 

Edited by ooey

Share this post


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

Signed up to the forum just to reply to this thread because this is really important to me.

One of my favorite features of Xenonauts 1 is the ability to send out multiple dropships at once to respond to multiple threats at the same time. It makes absolutely no sense to me in the XCOM reboots that you can only respond to one threat at a time when you have enough soldiers to cover everything. The global manpower pool is fine; just stick an alien-looking teleporter gate in the hangar on the base maps once you build your second base so players understand what's going on without breaking suspension of disbelief. I like having to manage everything separately but understand why people would rather it be global. But for the love of the stars, please allow sending out multiple simultaneous dropships.

I have equally just signed up to the forum to reply to this thread, because breaking a sweat trying to respond to various threats is challenging, but makes it a much more rewarding (if sometimes frustrating!) gaming experience. Having only one dropship makes absolutely no sense to me, although I understand that's how the code has now been written (although I thought it was always a better idea to have multiple, even with just the one base),

I don't mind having to kit out multiple squads - in fact, one of the things I loved about Xenonauts 1 is that you always felt like your soldiers were expendable and easily killed, so you never relied on any one soldier too much (at least I didn't, was always leveling up rookies alongside more experienced squaddies). In XCOM, when you lose a few high-level team members everything just breaks down and you feel like you have to start all over again just because of that.

Unlike Mister Maf, however, I don't like the idea of making pools of staff global, at least not from the get go - if you want to do that, make the "stargate" a researchable project at the very least, and perhaps even a building for bases. Considering the low tech you start with, it makes zero sense to have teleportation gates at will.

I've voted for multiple bases, I like having the choice and I always thought it was cool how the bases in defence missions were exactly how you built them - thanks for for letting us have a say on this! :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey,

Been quietly watching the progress this time around, but I felt I should voice my cents in this topic.

On Single-base setup

Single-base setup is simple and works beautifully. Has problems, like said base defence. Some ideas:

- Leave base defence out completely: Instead focus on aliens' terror affecting your funding etc. and choices and consequences between having to choose between simultaneously placed missions' adverse effects. Like what Xcom2 TNG did. Some brutal civilian defence missions etc.

- Add in base security as a factor: Deploy security forces in various place of your base, maybe have some security buildings etc, automated defences etc. Then handle it more like tower defence in Realtime 2D, with a more statistical approach. This could btw be very good for both Single- and Multi-base...

- Ground level Base Defence only: If players engage base defence, make the defence mission only on ground level. This way you could have a map with large outdoor sections and some inside sections. The layout need not exactly match the side-view, you can add whatever to make it more interesting. You could randomize the base defence once per game - or just stick with the one premade. could be good, for more tactical and better thought-out invasions...

Rare, but meaningful Invasions: With a single base, alien invasions should be very rare, because losing one base means losing the game, while with multi-base setup, it might not... Rare invasions would support hand-made and more carefully considered levels, as opposed to randomly generated. Sure the coolness aspect of seeing your own layout in action is lost, but that feature really only works if the other features of multi-base management work really well.

- Support Staff and random events: Now this would be something new in this genre: events that occur within your base that you have to resolve via a simple narrative choice-driven interface. I'm thinking events in games like Stellaris, which are drawn from pools of events. Different events require different solutions, e.g. a reactor is breaking down so you need to assign some engineers, and then you find an alien infestation lurking in there and need to assign some security to take care of them, maybe losing some staff in the process. Or a conflict between your chief engineer and one of your soldiers forces you to sack one of them etc. Maybe even add some new support staff to maintain the base. With proper pacing of events it could make things more interesting. Anyway, anything to make you care more for the people in your base is better. Could also work well with arbitrary RPG stats and traits on the random staff, maybe one guy is especially good at killing bugs, so you want him to be your exterminator, while another excels and boosting morale and resolving social conflicts.

 

On Multi-Base Setup

I think that If you're going to do multi-base, make sure you get a fresh spin on it, instead of just re-iterating with some - albeit welcome - simplifications.

- Make base locations unique: I love the nuclear missile silo in the side-view. Why not have access to nukes?! Why not make each base location unique in the sense that they each provide something extra for you. And make number of base locations also limited. There would be many options to consider between randomized and static base locations, but most importantly this can give you important game design leverage to give players meaningful decisions - that's what made X-COM TNG such a successful franchise IMO.

You could even have unique story sections related to each base, maybe some sort of small quest in order to get the special facility operational 100%

- Make basic base grid unity much smaller: Allow building corridors, to manufacture really unique layouts; choke points, security checkups, otherwise just beautiful layouts etc. In addition with the unique base effect concept, you can add rubble and junk that needs to be cleared, or just unbuildable areas. Special Effects could be static base tiles that can't be removed, influencing how certain places could be built. With Power as a requirement, you could even go as far as add Power Nodes that need to be placed manually, to improve distribution of power between Power Plants and facilities. 

- upgradeable facilities: Facilities could use some upgrading mechanics. Especially with base invasion, I could easily see some room for base upgrades between security and efficiency - maybe something else as well. Maybe upgrades could be unique modifiers that need to be chosen from a certain list, but you only have room for few - again adding another layer of choice.

- Multiple dropships: Yes, if multi-base then this. You could also do several spins on this as well, maybe add some massive troop carriers, and some lightning fast but smaller ones, for stuff that require rapid responses for less-threatening missions that still have adverse impacts you'd like to avoid. Also, not all missions need be combat missions. There can be mission that require investigation and some small narrative-based decision-making. Maybe you don't really know the threat unless you go there or scout around etc. Maybe even some kind of black ops missions that allow you to sabotage enemy, without engaging, with some risk of getting into combat. This would also support in having crafts with more roles.

 

---

Yes, I realize what I suggest all requires more work, some a lot, but those opinions were thrown out in the name of making the game feel better with some new interesting twists in this department.

Overall, I will vote for single-base setup because doing the multi-base proper this time around would take a ton of development time, and I'm afraid a half-done version would just reduce the overall quality of the game. Of course, if you guys have the muscles and the bucks, then do it! :) Just don't screw it up, and for frack's sake give it a new, fresh spin :cool:

Cheers!

PS. Also realized I haven't checked the demo in a while, so i should probably play a few rounds with it...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for giving us this update as it is a very important and critical choice, which is going to effect a LOT of the game. I will do this reply in point form.

- Multiple bases are my ideal as you can have different listening posts all over the globe. This would be even better if the transporter moved
troops and supplies between bases.
- As much as the side on esthetics look nice, to me it looks like it would be too complicated to know which is which. The top down or good ol
3D Isometric (for us older gamers out there) is a lot easier to say, oh that is the toilet, that is the kitchen sink etc. There should be a kitchen
so we can have some of our troops get frying pans and cleavers out to fight!
- If there is going to be dropship for the entire bases, then you should have the base teleporter option available, so that you can say story wise,
that you need specialist from here, here and there to do this particular kind of mission, whereas in another mission, you might need a totally
different team. This would also allow the option that if you have say 5 bases, and there are say 40 soldiers at each, and you needed say 4 from
each base, there is still a sizeable defence for as it always seemed to happen that you'd be out on a mission with 2/3 of your troops, and an
alien assault team of snakemen and ethereals would come and attack your base and you'd be down your base, troops and chopper... which in my
train of thought, could just then fly back to a base that has an empty hangar available.
- I do like the whole shared equipment and researchers idea. Since there were computers and the internet available, it has allowed universities as
well as governments to have research done by multiple labs at once because they are able to share results.

Looking forward to seeing what comes up next. There was something else I wanted to add, but lost it ah... right is there a potentiality for there being
more power at one base, and then having it wirelessly transmitted to a base that needs some extra? Please keep up the good work, and thanks for the
updates that you have been posting. I am looking forward to seeing myself in the game. :)

With gratitude and happiness,

Jim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Base building isn't that complex in these games. It is not like in FTL where those decisions about build determine your overall strategy. However, if multiple bases can be built, there is more room to play like that. I'm pretty confident that the 'best' tactic will still be to consolidate yourself in a main base, with other bases acting as annexes - but it doesn't matter what the optimal tactic is. The game will be more fun if you have the choice to do something suboptimal, like make a research base defended by one soldier and 30 rocket launchers (that base is in the USSR and that one soldier is certainly called Crazy Ivan). 

I vote for trusting the devs at the end of the day. But, I think the game would be richer for having multiple bases. Yet, I'll probably stick to one base in X2, unless there are some clever mechanics to make those additional bases less time- and resource-consuming to develop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I put my faith in you. I love the top design most because it's easy to keep aircrafts and buildings, but I also like the side part too.

For the multi base it's ok to be there but it is not a must for me. I voted the third option in the pool, my fate is in the team I'll not be disappointed :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Multiple bases only really matters from a gameplay perspective if one of two things is true:

Base assaults actually matter

You want to impose expansion costs that have a sudden jump

 

In X1 base assaults didn't really seem to matter.  Downing every UFO wasn't that hard compared to the costs of letting them do as they pleased, and base defenses seemed pretty strong.  I think base attacks that are actual threats would be interesting, since they are by far the least seen form of mission, but they also need to be recoverable from.  If you lose it needs to not be grounds or just reloading or resetting.

 

The other possibility is that the costs of securing a new base act as a expansion cost at a particular level. 

 

From a world perspective it is kind of silly that you have just one X-com base.  I suppose you could theme it as having teams of troops, interceptors, and weapons in many military locations but one central R&D/C&C location. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have like the top down aspect of the last games, with multiple bases, but I would have wished that their was a little more variety with the choices of buildings.

1. Storage buildings could be general, and ammunition, that are keeps separate.

2. Living facilities could be upgraded as the game progressed,

3. Research facilities could like wise be upgraded and diversify, as new technologies are discovered.

4. Manufacturing plants could also be upgraded, as in research, and new plants could be built, to make new weapons and devises.

5. Power generation, looks like it will be in the next base infrastructure, and that to could have a number of upgrades.

6. Aircraft hangers to provide for the number of different types of craft.

7. Internal defence, such as sentential posts to combat invading aliens, gas filled corridors, and airlocks, to name a few.

8. Medical facilities for advanced healing and regeneration. Possibly bionic upgrades in the later game.

9. Training Facilities, to improve skills, with weapons types, and leaderships bonuses.

10. the Command centre, and HQ

These are just to name a few, but it would need a larger base tile model to incorporate it. Just a thought!! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a game in these series of alien invasion ( UFO Aftermath ) , that had a ground level combat, and then you would enter the underground complex to destroy the alien base, could not this idea be used in the defence of the xenonauts base or bases??

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm 51 yo and and been around awhile. Played the original XCOM when it came out like many of you. Been around XCOM and this game too. 

Ive read the above. In short, as a supporter and fan, here is what Id like to see one day...

Multiple bases: Each base with their own soldiers and staff, vehicles, and supply.  Some bases might be outposts or later developed by the player into larger bases. 

I think having one soldier pool that somehow warps to remote bases under attack or one drop ship limit is not good at all IMHO.

Id like to see bases be constructed with defenses in mind that the player can build such as sealing or strong doors, turrets, AA etc. Thats just me. That is what will set this game apart from just a graphics redo. Needs to add a lot and be something more. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s been considerable discussion about the possibility of several dropships, but I don’t believe that everyone is reading from the same playbook. From a mechanic and (if I understand correctly) a narrative perspective, the current model is that the dropship is teleported close to where the crash site lands, then the pilot lands the dropship and we proceed directly to ground combat. This instantaneous transportation of troops knocks the legs out from several reasons for having more than one dropship. If the time spent travelling between a base and the crash site is trivial, then the only limit on getting to all the crash sites are wounded soldiers and any accumulated stress and fatigue on both soldiers and the dropship. You don’t need several dropships to visit all the sites when you can teleport effortlessly backu-and-forth, picking up a fresh load of troops between each site. Currently there are no mechanics to prevent this from happening (no stress/fatigue or at least none that I have experienced). The dropship doesn’t have to worry about being intercepted (teleportation) and doesn’t have to worry about being late to crash sites (teleportation). The only value a new dropship would bring is increased capacity. To make using more than one dropship viable, there would have to be a deliberate effort to sabotage the teleporter, either through the introduction of mechanics that make the teleporter less and less valuable, or by scrapping the mechanic all together. Is that really what people want?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I initially was not a fan of the side-view base, but I went "well I'll try it" and it grew on me.  But not anywhere near enough that I would "hate" changing back either.  Not at least from aesthetic concerns.

But if you go top-down, are you going to then decentralize manufacturing?  I'm not sure you should.  I mean, what's the point?  Decentralization for the sake of decentralization is basically just being inefficient for the sake of inefficiency.  Previously there was a reason to decentralize, and that reason was workshops couldn't share work between multiple bases.  Well that and that it took a day+ to transfer stuff around the world, so a four-workshop base could make stuff very quickly but would lose much of that savings in transporting raw materials to it and distributing stuff from it around the world.

Now, though, why do it?  Sure things can now port around the world instantly such that you can easily decentralize, but why do so other than merely for the sake of decentralizing?  Granted if you do decentralize manufacturing then you kinda have to decentralize storage.  And power.  And then soldiers fit right back into the decentralized model so easily that it's seamless.  It fits.  I see the appeal, especially for the folks who are missing their multiple dropships so badly.  But I don't agree.

And if you aren't decentralizing science or manufacturing nor soldier pool, what else IS there to decentralize that isn't already covered by the current model?  (i.e. planes and radar already are decentralized.)  Soldier training?  Nope.  Generators?  Storage?  Housing?  Medical?  None of those seem to fit.  What else is left?  I don't see anything.

There were a lot of things about the original X1 that I really liked.  The defense missions were definitely one of them.  But if the only point of going back to top-down is for the defense missions, then I don't think you should do it.  Those were fun.  But we can easily live without them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@GlobalHawk, what was the original idea behind the single base/dropship? Attempt to follow simplification of xcom2? I thought you guys were following initial x-com ideas before it turns into boardgame under Firaxis.
We can play ad extremum))) Lets limit to 1 soldier and one enemy alien and one button to press to pay respect))))
 

Share this post


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

How about taking the best of both worlds.  Keep with the single base and current single drop-ship mechanics, but allow that base to be customized in a top down fashion.  The "side view" would give a summary of every level (and wouldn't have to have specific side view art, though there could be some dynamic aspect to it based on what the level contains if desired, i.e. if a level is mostly hangers, then there would be a hanger summary background art that is loaded for that level), and each level could be customized in the top-down approach.  The base would start with a depth of 1 and one 6x6 building grid to customize.  The second floor (depth = 2) would have a cost to dig it out, which would then open the player up to another 6x6 building grid to customize.  Each additional floor would have a higher cost associated to it, to help balance the added floor space.

That would make an interesting mechanic with base defenses too (if possible) to have a multi-level fight.  i.e. as your base depth grows, the player could keep the important structures in the deeper floors and replace upper floors with defensive structures and the like.

Side View:

------------------------------------------------------ Ground

----------- Level 1: Floor Summary ------------ Click on the level to view the floor plan (Floor plan would the current top-down view)

----------- Level 2: Floor Summary ------------ "

- Button to start construction of next level -

Quite like the idea here, one base but with the extra floor options like this is very appealing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I guess I'm wondering if we go back to top-down view, will we still be plucking scientists and engineers up 2 by 2 by 2 from the global hotspots missions?  That'd be fine by me.  Actually, either the top down or the side view is also fine by me  I don't think you'd need to be limited to 'just one main base' because of the use of side-view, though.  You could tab through pages of the bases, with a side-view for each, much like we tabbed through the top down views of each base in X1.  As for base invasion feasibility on a side-view base, you could simply leave only the exposed top / surface section available to the aliens for invasion, having the rest of the base go into 'full and automatic lock down' with huge slabs of steel-reinforced concrete dropping down over all the other entrances and exits (animated, if you wanted to get a little crazy about it, lol ...) and then your troops are either already in the top level to defend or they come up through the primary elevator shaft on a turn by turn basis, maybe.  If you wanted to get super creative, you could expand this map to include where the alien invasion ship touches down in relation to the Xenonaut base as well.  Just to think outside the box a bit.  Oh, and on the click box that shows your hangars and radars only, you could add space HERE to include your anti-aircraft batteries, since there won't be any room left on the current topside to do that.  Those batteries could also get included (gutted and in need of repairs) in any invasion taking place on topside.

As for multiple drop ships - Chris, you're gonna hate me for adding to the clamor, but YES, we seriously could use more than one drop ship in the game.  The new XComs really had me holding suspension of disbelief with their explanation that only One ship and One group of soldiers could solve any and all of the world's growing extraterrestrial problems.  I would hope X2 doesn't go that same route.  I used to make up 3 to 4 bases at least in each X1 game I ever played, with Base 2 getting the 'hand me down' gear from Base 1, and Base 3 getting the 'hand me down gear' from Base 2, whenever Base 1 got a new upgrade again.  I'd basically end up with 2 really good, well - defended basis by the time it was all said and done, and ... well .... 2 or 3 red-headed stepchildren for the other bases ... ahem ...  but yes, please allow us to build more than one 'main base' - regardless of which view you decide to go with.

 

P.S.  I voted for the decision to be left with the designers, b/c the other 2 choices don't accurately reflect my real choice - which is for you to go with EITHER view you guys prefer, but to allow multiple bases either way (this choice was not an option on the poll, lol ...)

Edited by Wyldefyre_CP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

We're also making a couple of simplifications to the mechanics in other areas.

  • Personnel and Base Stores are global across all bases (assume the bases are linked by alien-derived translocator gates)
  • The Xenonauts only have one troop dropship at a time

Can't say I'm too fond of this. ESPECIALLY the second one.

First is better without any silly magitech explanation (just gamepaly mechanics for player convenience), but I liked the logistics aspect of it in X1. Making sure the material you need is where you need it most IS a crucial aspect of high-level warfare. Logistics is king that reigns above tactics and strategy.

 

Being limited to just one dropship when you have multiple bases...just no.

 

 

And lastly, personally I'd have two types of bases - general bases and air bases. General bases would not contain any aircraft (or at least not any that isn't VTOL)

Air bases could contain barracks, radar, defenses and similar, have long runways and hangars, but would not contain research, containment or similar.

The reasoning behind it quite simple - it makes little sense to put your hidden HQ in a place that is highly visible and easily detected - and anything that has a lot of aircraft and runways is going to be just that. However, how something like that would end up feeling during actual gameplay is questionable. I have no idea if it's a good idea or a bad one.

 

EDIT: WHY the frak can't  I edit the quotes??

Share this post


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

 To make using more than one dropship viable, there would have to be a deliberate effort to sabotage the teleporter, either through the introduction of mechanics that make the teleporter less and less valuable, or by scrapping the mechanic all together. Is that really what people want?   

Since I HATE teleportation, that would be a big YES from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think it's a great idea to have multiple bases. Although it has some drawbacks. Mostly, the side-on view felt fresher. And looked cool, so it was good for marketing reasons. Thus, I think it's important to make it look much better than in X1 and more complex. Here are some ideas on that matter and some others:

- Make the buildings bigger. To make it possible, the base could be vertically larger. In that case, the statistics could be placed below the base view.

- Make two levels. With the second one becoming possible after doing some research and then digging. This way it would retain this feature from the side-on view. And obviously, some buildings could be built only on the upper level and some on the lower.

- Sharing resources and staff could be possible only after building or finding more alien gates. Or they could be required to build other bases at all. It also makes sense from the story point of view because aliens could detect it and also there is no time for transporting equipment and personnel. After all, in reality, it takes a lot of time and you need trucks, trains,  planes, etc. to do that.

 

And one more thing for the future. I think it would be a shame if all the assets and ideas for the side-on view would be wasted. Thus, maybe you could use them to make another game only about X-COM base management? It could let you get some funds for future projects. After all, somehow Fallout Shelter became extremely popular.

 

Edited by Ravn7

Share this post


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

the current model is that the dropship is teleported

5

At first, I thought only the stuff and troops can be teleported. Not something as big as a plane. But if it also applies to the dropship, then why do you need it at all? You can transport the troops with the weapons storage made in a shipping container.

The lack of a dropship (since you don't fly with it, then you actually don't need it) definitely wouldn't add anything to the game. One squad and a few dropships - that would be fine. But one teleporting dropship? That's too simplistic, in my opinion.

Edited by Ravn7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Ravn7 said:

At first, I thought only the stuff and troops can be teleported. Not something as big as a plane. But if it also applies to the dropship, then why do you need it at all? You can transport the troops with the weapons storage made in a shipping container.

The lack of a dropship (since you don't fly with it, then you actually don't need it) definitely wouldn't add anything to the game. One squad and a few dropships - that would be fine. But one teleporting dropship? That's too simplistic, in my opinion.

Have to agree here, teleporting dropship just doesn't make sense or fit with everything else, if you have the tech to teleport a massive aircraft then why the hell are you using crappy old ballistic guns from basic concept of which is 100 or more years old? and current designs from 30 years ago? why would you have the tech to teleport things but not have anything to defend your troops from more than a gnat farting at them?

Edited by Kaiphus_Kain
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me a while to find when the skyranger started teleporting, (because it didn't always). It started teleporting in Build v3. To quote from the build:

Quote

Skyranger Translocation: Alien teleportation technology is key to the story of Xenonauts-2, and the Skyranger has been reverse-engineered from this alien technology - indeed, the fact the Xenonauts are the only people who can instantly respond to alien activity anywhere in the world is the main reason why the rest of the world needs their help. As such, the Skyranger no longer appears on the map directly; the ground combat missions just begin immediately after you choose to deploy troops to that location.

If you're not keen on teleportation you aren't going to like X2 seeing as how teleportation appears to be a core tenet of the narrative and some of the mechanics. Teleportation has been tossed around as a concept on the boards for quite a while. If I remember correctly from the previous discussions, teleportation waves away a number of narrative issues such as the capability to reach crash sites at abnormally long distances, etc. If the objection to the Skyranger teleporting is a satisfying narrative reason, rather than a gameplay reason then I'm sure narratives could be spun out of thin air. I mean, off the top of my head, teleportation on the Kardashev scale could belong to a civilisation that rates much, much higher than humans so any examples of teleportation are dimly understood at best, and treated as "it just works". The Elder race trope has a long and distinguished history, no reason why X2 could drink from its well. I mean, Stargate did.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mentioned in an earlier post that we're reverting the teleporting Skyranger change. If all goes well it'll fly around on the Geoscape like it did in X1 from the next build onwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case then, more dropships plz. If  it's going to be possible to have a global pool with unlimited access to all bases, would it be possible to use bases as a launching point for dropships? So that you give up part of your satellite base as a place for a dropship and crew to be sent through. That would add a new dynamic to placing satellite  bases, you're not only thinking of where to put them for air coverage, but where to put them for dropship coverage as well. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have been reading everything and i think these features would form the best game:

  • YES - to a single main unattackable base. This would house ALL personell, including soldiers, scientist, engineers and other possible specialists. This base will be mainly responsible for power management and other, global upgrades.

 

  • YES - to multiple (possibly infinite ) secondary bases which house radars, hangars, laboratories, workshops, possible generators, and all other, "real" tangible buildings. These are attackable bases and aliens can and will be able to attack them. Making them small, operatable bases with interesting building layouts, eg. being able to place corrdidors, and defensive structures in addition to the main buildings will make for more interesting decisions. Secondary bases are essential if you want to get any research, manufacture or other project done. It houses hangars for the aircraft which are essential to shoot down UFOs, and the planes have real range limitations ( at first - similar to X1 ). Since they are small players should be expected to place at least 2 - 3 right at the start, maybe make one science and one engineering base preloaded for the player to place at the start of the game.
  • YES - to location specific boni/mali for secondary bases. One country can give a scienc bonus, and an aircraft range mali.
  • YES - to boni for specialised bases, eg. building 2 workshops beside each other grants a +10% work efficiency and total work space - for each additional workshop.
  • When scientist/engineers/specialists are working in a secondary base they are physically transfered there. This means the omnipotent teleporter array will have to leave a port open to that specific base - which consumes energy. Energy is mainly transfered from the main base, but smaller generators can be build in that specific base to relieve some of the stress, but only in that local base. The open port can only be filled with energy from the main base. More about that in the image below.
  • If a base gets attacked, you will get asked whether or not you want to send in a team to defend your secondary base.

 

  • YES - to global personal and storage. The main point of having more than 1 dropship is to have a bigger gang roaming around. X1 had the problem with your rooster actually being distributed over physical bases, which led to a lot of micromanagement, but having a single main base housing all your soldiers, and sending one team to defend a base, while having another one doing a small crashsite is not different from having 2 dropships - just with the added bonus of easier management, global soldier selection, item management, and equipment screen.

 

  • YES - to possibly infinite dropships, or rather open teleporter arrays. Each open teleporter spot requires energy, and needs to be open as long as the ground combat is out there and fighting. So if you want to send out another team through the teleporter ( and also guarantee a way back in case of abortion ), you will need to pay the additional energy for each and every team.
  • To avoid exploitation of the system, rerouting power can take between 24 - 48 hours ( so you cant just quickly power down something else to get a triple team ). And dont give me that "But why cant we send another team to the same mission ?" crap. X1 didnt allow for 2 chinooks to land in the same mission, and there wasnt an explanation for that either.
  • Here is an original idea: I would like for ground combat missions to take up actual time. So lets say every turn is 10 minutes on the geoscape. You play for 12 turns and the mission takes up 2 hours. Once its finished you get teleported back to "when the mission started" and the geoscape will have an icon with "Team A fighting Crashsite - 3". You can resume normally, while already knowing the result of the fight. In this time you can potentially take on another mission, as long as your teleporter has enough energy. This idea would include the ground combat mission day - night state to change accordingly to the real geoscape time, eg. you can start fighting during the day, and after some time it starts to dusk.

 

Unbenannt.thumb.png.fd58959a10be0b73103a2dc77f14abae.png

 

  • Now to the side/top view issue. In this setup i wouldnt mind it running either way. If you have confidence in your engine providing a good vertical firefight than make everything a side view. If you are not, than keep the fight horizontally and make the secondary bases with a top down view. The main base can be a side view, it looks quite good that way.
Edited by Charon
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

×