Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chris

Xenonauts-2 December Update

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Bayonet12 said:

Cool to hear. 3 teams of 10 soldiers, thats alot. Were you able to run every mission you wanted whenever you wanted with that amount?

Yes it was no problem. 

Wait did I say 10 ? I meant 3 teams of 12 soldiers, my bad.

Edited by Praetorian
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the ideal solution would be to just have stress as a toggle option. Balance the game around stress being on and make it the default, but allow people to turn it off. Some people will have an easier time then but hey it's their choice how they want to play. I think that would make everyone happy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it would seem 3 teams of 12 is viable which makes sense, ive seen other players hire every unit possible and clear nearly every crash site.

I like having 1 core team of 6 running as many missions as possible, but since im only using 1 team some crash sites are too far to travel. But due to stress system: it would be game over after my 4th battle due to stress. However a player that trains more men and runs every mission can bypass the stress mechanic even though the purpose of stress was to: discourage players from running every mission. And newer players can easily assume that stress means they need to hire more men to have 2+ teams instead of one (such as in darkest dungeon), then the purpose of stress to discourage players isnt working.

I like the idea of discouraging players from running every crash site if there is something else to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope to turn off that System is not an Option. And the Devs have a good reason to bring it in "Hardcoded" and as a permanent integration for many Reasons.

The first one is the Predecessor (Xenonauts 1) himself:

X1 wasn´t a game with using your Brain after a while, it was only waiting for an UFO-Swarm or many UFO´s to do the following Routine:

-shooting down,

-send soldiers,

-get the UFO´s and

-use the Material until you were overpowerd

After that you gone (maybe after 6 or 7 Month) to the final Mission and Win.

Ok, it was the first try for the Goldwhawk-Development-Team and they announced their Mistakes very fast and tried to fix it with many Patches, special Versions etc. But the Routine stays the same, which couldn´t get changed.

The second one are the directly Main-Opponents (some older, some younger and one in still directly Opponent-Development):

The other 2 Main-Opponents to Xenonauts 2, which are longer (XCOM 2 / XCOM 2 WotC) or a bit lesser (Phoenix Point with his first 2 Main and 1 small DLC´s) on the Market are the Games which Xenonauts 2 have to deal with. Not to forget the still in Development "UFO2ET", which are still secret in such Systems.

That Parts from the new XCOM-Series and Phoenix Point make the Games to what they are. Realistic in using your Troops! There are many historical examples, why some Countrys lost and get integrated.

On that Game-Parts Xenonauts 2 have to benchmark. X1 is no Benchmark for that, because it is in that Point total unrealistic.

The third one are upcomming Main-Opponents (like XCOM 3 and similar), which will rank of the others with new Features etc.:

I have played all important Games of that Gerne (all old X-Com-Titels, the newest XCOM-Titles, UFO ET, the UFO-After-Series, some Fan Projects [like UFO: AI and such] as well as begunn the new Phoenix Point Game).

Every Game have a Stress- / Timelimit-System. I will try to show you what I mean from my Memorys.

1. the older Ones are going directly to the Soldier (old X-Com-Titels, UFO ET, UFO-After-Series) in the Missions. There you couldn´t move, getting Panic, getting Paralyesd etc. The other Part is the Time Limitier (in old X-Com) it was coupled on the Founding- and Missions-Reports; (in UFO ET) it was coupled on the Energy-Reservers from the Mothership and the Storyline-Time-Limiter; (in UFO-After-Series) it was coupled on specials [in the first Part it was coupled on the Earth-Pealing, in the Second i can´t remember and in the third on the Sleep-Tank-Limiter for the next Generation]

2. the newer Ones (New XCOM, Phoenix Point and in that Point Xenonauts 2) are using the System from the first UFO-After-Game (Phoenix Point) as Time-Limiter as well as the realistic Stress-Limiter for Soldiers. The New XCOM-Series as well as Xenonauts 2 are using the Panic-System-Limiter as well as the realistic Soldier-Stress-Limiter. The Main-Limiter is naturaly the "Hardcoded" Panic- / Skin or whatever Story-Limiter.

The second announced and realy needed one for such Games are the Stress-Level for Soldiers, so that the Player have to think and plan (short using his / her Brain) with the availlible Personal.  "After a Mission is before a Mission", which is the Maxim from all Military and esp. Bussinesman.

Most Games are like the Predecessor Xenonauts 1 where the Gamers haven´t to think much. You all have everything abdunant there after a while. The best Games are where the Players have to make a longtime Plan and esp. using the less ressources correctly. There an other Maxim comes in: "You don´t have only your Head on the Torso to let get in rain in the Torso."

 

Where I give you right in the System here, that it has to be more ballanced. Ideas for that are announced in an sperate Threat. The Stress-Raising and Stress-Sinking have in the Ideas a very good Ballance. We have to see what comes in and what not, because it´s a complete new Feature during Development and many others will follow to make the Game more interessting.

X1 was a good game for a while, but XCOM EU / EW, XCOM 2, XCOM: Chimera Squad and Phoenix Point is much better, because they make you thinking where you have to use your Soldiers.An similar System the Devs get in here, because like Chris said allready the Gamers in X1 get to overpowerd against the Aliens, because we have no limiter there.
 

 

 

Edited by Alienkiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Alienkiller said:

.

If the purpose of stress is to stop people grinding crash site missions, but people are easily able to do it: then the system is flawed. All you do is hire more men and rotate them.

Stress isnt reducing the amount of crash site missions, so simply simply remove the amount of crash sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing missing from that is that you pay extra upkeep for the buildings and personnel that are required to do every mission....assuming that's the case. New patch with reduced stress is out so I don't know how that plays yet.

Share this post


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

One thing missing from that is that you pay extra upkeep for the buildings and personnel that are required to do every mission....assuming that's the case. New patch with reduced stress is out so I don't know how that plays yet.

Do you know which patch they changed the upkeep? Im watching someone running 4th Dec patch who is mid game atm that hired 46 soldiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bayonett12, that get implemented in the Beta 16.1 (the last one) with the extra upkeep for Buildings. Therefore you get atm. in the Betas 1 Million more Starting Money.

Now we have Beta 16.2 since today (or yesterday very late evening).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Bayonet12 said:

If the purpose of stress is to stop people grinding crash site missions, but people are easily able to do it: then the system is flawed. All you do is hire more men and rotate them.

Stress isnt reducing the amount of crash site missions, so simply simply remove the amount of crash sites.

Reduce the amount of crash sites ? You don't want that. And that's not gonna work because of the Terror mechanic. You start with 1 base, thus covering about 1/3 of the world with a small radar diameter. This means that if 4 UFOs spawn each wave (for example) then you're gonna see only 1 of these per wave if you get lucky, 2 if you get really lucky. And you really need money. If they reduce the number of UFOs that spawn each wave, it's less likely for anything to enter your radar range for the longest periods of time, which means that the 2/3 of the world you are not covering is getting more and more terrorized because of the UFOs doing their genocidal activities over there. You need more crash sites, to get more cash, to open more bases before you Game Over due to continental terror reaching over 100. In other words if they reduce UFO counts, you'll never accumulate enough money on time and then Game Over.

Edited by Praetorian

Share this post


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

Reduce the amount of crash sites ? You don't want that. And that's not gonna work because of the Terror mechanic. You start with 1 base, thus covering about 1/3 of the world with a small radar diameter. This means that if 4 UFOs spawn each wave (for example) then you're gonna see only 1 of these per wave if you get lucky, 2 if you get really lucky. And you really need money. If they reduce the number of UFOs that spawn each wave, it's less likely for anything to enter your radar range for the longest periods of time, which means that the 2/3 of the world you are not covering is getting more and more terrorized because of the UFOs doing their genocidal activities over there. You need more crash sites, to get more cash, to open more bases before you Game Over due to continental terror reaching over 100. In other words if they reduce UFO counts, you'll never accumulate enough money on time and then Game Over.

Its not me who wants to reduce the amount of crash site missions. I prefer to run every mission but the new stress mechanic design and purpose is to prevent players from grinding every mission /sad face.

Development wants to discourage players from running every crash site so they put stress into the game. But im against stress since it can be bypassed and hinders freedom of gameplay. Plus the stress mechanic can by easily bypassed so players can run every crash site mission anyway.

So if the purpose behind stress is to reduce players grinding crash site missions but its not working, then i would rather see development simply reduce the amount of crash sites by: implementing a chance for alien ships shot down to explode on impact. Players receive small amount of resources from the crash and all aliens died on impact. Afterall if the purpose is to prevent grinding crash missions, then simply prevent players from grinding crash missions.

-

Side note, even though stress would hinder my game style therefore im against it, I will look at ways to bypass stress by using 2 teams of 4 soldiers instead of 1 team of 6. This' why im against it because your goal is to reduce missions, but all you're doing creating something that people will seek to bypass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Bayonet12 said:

Its not me who wants to reduce the amount of crash site missions. I prefer to run every mission but the new stress mechanic design and purpose is to prevent players from grinding every mission /sad face.

Development wants to discourage players from running every crash site so they put stress into the game. But im against stress since it can be bypassed and hinders freedom of gameplay. Plus the stress mechanic can by easily bypassed so players can run every crash site mission anyway.

So if the purpose behind stress is to reduce players grinding crash site missions but its not working, then i would rather see development simply reduce the amount of crash sites by: implementing a chance for alien ships shot down to explode on impact. Players receive small amount of resources from the crash and all aliens died on impact. Afterall if the purpose is to prevent grinding crash missions, then simply prevent players from grinding crash missions.

-

Side note, even though stress would hinder my game style therefore im against it, I will look at ways to bypass stress by using 2 teams of 4 soldiers instead of 1 team of 6. This' why im against it because your goal is to reduce missions, but all you're doing creating something that people will seek to bypass.

I like how you explained things. But to be honest, when I played the game, it didn't feel like stress was there to discourage grinding. It didn't feel like that at all. It felt like "well my soldiers are getting stressed due to combat, let's give these brave human specimens a rest". They can say it's to discourage, but it doesn't feel like that in the game and it doesn't feel like you need to bypass anything, for which I'm glad. It's feels exactly like the fatigue mechanic in XCOM Long War.

Your chinook at the beginning can carry only 8 soldiers, so hire 8 more on day 1 and it's all fine (or less because you seem to prefer teams of 6 instead of 8 - why is that by the way ?). They cost 10'000 each I think - it's all good.

Just look at the stress mechanic like tiredness, not like the devs want to discourage us, and you won't mind it and it will actually make sense to have it ingame. But I get your point about removing it if it is flawed. Flawed things don't belong in Xenonauts.

Edited by Praetorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bayonet12 said:

Its not me who wants to reduce the amount of crash site missions. I prefer to run every mission but the new stress mechanic design and purpose is to prevent players from grinding every mission /sad face.

Development wants to discourage players from running every crash site so they put stress into the game. But im against stress since it can be bypassed and hinders freedom of gameplay. Plus the stress mechanic can by easily bypassed so players can run every crash site mission anyway.

So if the purpose behind stress is to reduce players grinding crash site missions but its not working, then i would rather see development simply reduce the amount of crash sites by: implementing a chance for alien ships shot down to explode on impact. Players receive small amount of resources from the crash and all aliens died on impact. Afterall if the purpose is to prevent grinding crash missions, then simply prevent players from grinding crash missions.

-

Side note, even though stress would hinder my game style therefore im against it, I will look at ways to bypass stress by using 2 teams of 4 soldiers instead of 1 team of 6. This' why im against it because your goal is to reduce missions, but all you're doing creating something that people will seek to bypass.

Except people are going to get very annoyed if they shoot down a new UFO and then it doesn't create a crash site until the third or fourth time they shoot it down, and then end up behind the research curve simply because they got unlucky with the "does the UFO make a crash site?" roll. The same goes for any new players that can't figure out how to actually generate a mission to play even though they've done everything right, they've just got unlucky that every UFO they attacked happened to blow up before crashing. There'd be a lot of angry people if we implemented that idea.

The alternative is that we just significantly reduce the number of UFOs that spawn on the Geoscape ... except obviously that makes the Geoscape much less challenging. This is actually the root of the problem; there's a lot more UFOs in Xenonauts than in classic X-Com because we wanted to make the air war more challenging and I assumed that the fact it's boring and repetitive to fight the same crash site over and over again would stop people from fighting every mission when the Airstrike option was available. Unfortunately, I was incorrect.

If it makes you happy to fight the UFO capture mission over and over again, you can still do that. The Stress system forces you to hire significantly more soldiers and that cuts into the resource gain so it doesn't unbalance the game so much. But more importantly, this also gives strategy gamers who don't want to run every mission permission not to do it because it's no longer clearly the optimal strategy, which means they're free to enjoy a more varied gameplay experience. To me, that seems like everyone wins and I'm not sure why you'd object to that (although I'm assuming here that you consider it a good thing to be fighting enemies of the appropriate difficulty).

Anyway, the discussion seems to be going round in circles at this point. Hopefully what I've explained above provides adequate justification for why the system is being implemented, but if not then there's nothing to be gained from me explaining further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear Chris. Everybody wins (you can do every Crash Site if you want, or goes the new Way) that give many differnt Options for the Middle and End-Game.

Share this post


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

Except people are going to get very annoyed if they shoot down a new UFO and then it doesn't create a crash site until the third or fourth time they shoot it down, and then end up behind the research curve simply because they got unlucky with the "does the UFO make a crash site?" roll. The same goes for any new players that can't figure out how to actually generate a mission to play even though they've done everything right, they've just got unlucky that every UFO they attacked happened to blow up before crashing. There'd be a lot of angry people if we implemented that idea.

The alternative is that we just significantly reduce the number of UFOs that spawn on the Geoscape ... except obviously that makes the Geoscape much less challenging. This is actually the root of the problem; there's a lot more UFOs in Xenonauts than in classic X-Com because we wanted to make the air war more challenging and I assumed that the fact it's boring and repetitive to fight the same crash site over and over again would stop people from fighting every mission when the Airstrike option was available. Unfortunately, I was incorrect.

If it makes you happy to fight the UFO capture mission over and over again, you can still do that. The Stress system forces you to hire significantly more soldiers and that cuts into the resource gain so it doesn't unbalance the game so much. But more importantly, this also gives strategy gamers who don't want to run every mission permission not to do it because it's no longer clearly the optimal strategy, which means they're free to enjoy a more varied gameplay experience. To me, that seems like everyone wins and I'm not sure why you'd object to that (although I'm assuming here that you consider it a good thing to be fighting enemies of the appropriate difficulty).

Anyway, the discussion seems to be going round in circles at this point. Hopefully what I've explained above provides adequate justification for why the system is being implemented, but if not then there's nothing to be gained from me explaining further.

It doesnt work. People just bypass the system without even realizing the purpose of stress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bayonet12 said:

It doesnt work. People just bypass the system without even realizing the purpose of stress.

Then I would say it's a part of the Strategy gamplay, as these gamers would take extra balancing on their input and output for extra infrastructures (the upkeep of 20+ soldiers each month would be fancy), and as you said, people can run teams of 4-6 to bypass this problem, but on the other hand, it make the ground missions more challenging as well as you have less personel each time and have to rely more on tactics. 

So how players reacts to the stress system would make the gameplay more variable, you either put less effort on ground missions and airstrikes them, or you need to build more base/infrastructure and scratch your head for balancing a huge number of upkeeps. There're no one exclusive type of players for X2 and everyone should have the right to take their own solutions for the stress issue, it's encouraged. 

Share this post


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

Then I would say it's a part of the Strategy gamplay, as these gamers would take extra balancing on their input and output for extra infrastructures (the upkeep of 20+ soldiers each month would be fancy), and as you said, people can run teams of 4-6 to bypass this problem, but on the other hand, it make the ground missions more challenging as well as you have less personel each time and have to rely more on tactics. 

So how players reacts to the stress system would make the gameplay more variable, you either put less effort on ground missions and airstrikes them, or you need to build more base/infrastructure and scratch your head for balancing a huge number of upkeeps. There're no one exclusive type of players for X2 and everyone should have the right to take their own solutions for the stress issue, it's encouraged. 

I 100% agree with you, but when I look at intention verses reality something doesn't add up.

1. Do you think players who run every mission should be rewarded for working harder?

2. Should you be punished for wanting to run every mission?

I answer: 1. Yes, players should be rewarded and 2. No, players should not be punished.

If you think you do gain reward for running every mission with 2 teams you are slightly mistaken. Firstly read the quote below. Then remember that your xp gets split between 2 teams and the extra upkeep to maintain extra men is offset by what you gain from crash sites. You might break even by running 2 teams but the reasons as to why are highlighted in the quote below.

On 1/12/2021 at 11:03 PM, Chris said:

"Grinding missions" in this context represents people sidestepping the challenges of the game. There's no tactical or strategic skill in what is essentially just playing the same mission you've already beaten over and over again to make future missions easier simply because you have more resources and overlevelled soldiers relative to what the game is balanced to, so I don't agree that you should reward people for grinding missions.

Stress punishes players who want to run every mission because it's believed that: players who do run every mission are sidestepping the challenge of the game by making it easier and shouldnt be rewarded. I want to fight against all the new diversity and challenges X2 has to offer by running every mission possible, but im treated as someone that's essentially cheating the system and should be punished.

If you think its simply ok because I can figure a way around it, sure I cant figure a way around it. But wtf is up with punishing those who want to farm the core aspect of your game and thinking they should not be rewarded?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks EurekeaSeven. Good Explained from your sight. We don´t wanna punish a Gamer or Reward him / her for doing more officially. The Gamers should have the possibility to navigate the Storyline, esp. in the Midgame and Endgame with that more or less.

Like I said with the right ballance everybody wins and there could be several Routes to win the Game with it. The thinking from that will be the following to make the Storyline for all types of Players more interessting:

1. The Hardcore-Players which will do an rotating Crashsites-Recovery of X1 without delegations. Let them do it if they want. They get more Material, but have a big Army-, Transports-, Vehicle-, and Fighter-Cost every month. Evtl. they ballance with selling Artifacts (like in X1) the monthley Costs a little bit and can with evtl. produced Equipment make use of R & D for the own Soldiers. But they have then low Money for the Buildup, Upgrading etc. from more Bases / Outposts.

2. The careful Players [like me] which not doing every Crashsite to hold my people back for Important Missions (Alien-Bases, Terror-Sites, Special Missions etc.) and get more Money with Delegate some of the Missions (belongs on the Stress-Level) from small, medium and big UFO´s. Therefore the Player can Buildup more Bases and Outposts as well as produce more Upgrades for the Soldiers, Vehicles and Bases.

3. Maybe there are Hybrid-Gamers too, which uses both Alternatives in a very good ballance.

With that 3 Types of Gamers the Game get more Playability and Options to navigate the Storyline, esp. in the Midgame and Endgame.

Edited by Alienkiller

Share this post


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

1. The Hardcore-Players which will do an rotating Crashsites-Recovery of X1 without delegations. Let them do it if they want. They get more Material, but have a big Army-, Transports-, Vehicle-, and Fighter-Cost every month. Evtl. they ballance with selling Artifacts (like in X1) the monthley Costs a little bit and can with evtl. produced Equipment make use of R & D for the own Soldiers. But they have then low Money for the Buildup, Upgrading etc. from more Bases / Outposts.

You've explained it well. All of the above reasons are the punishment put upon the gamer who wants to do as many combat missions they can. I dont think it will be efficient to do as many combat missions possible. Which is confusing since they want to discourage/reduce the amount of combat missions players do, but combat missions are huge part of the game. 

We know the reason why, it's because X2 development team doesnt believe hardcore players who grind should be rewarded. Again same topic: why should players be punished for doing as many missions possible. 

Philosophically baffles me. Ive never heard of a game punishing people for farming/grinding the core part of the game.

Again, before you say you can still run as many missions as you want: remember all the negative conditions that need to be overcome to do so, and remember Chris' opinion concerning farming missions and that, they dont believe you should be rewarded.

Edited by Bayonet12

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
Sign in to follow this  

×