Jump to content

Recommended Posts

After the rebalancing of the Guardian & Warden armor, Guardian armor lost its relevance. Its stats need to be adjusted.

Given the fact that Warden Armor is available at the beginning of the game, it is cheaper and gives better protection - making Guardian armor in such conditions just doesn't make sense.

Ward Cost.jpg

Guard cost.jpg

Ward Stat.jpg

Guard Stat.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Вы также можете раскрасить броню, чтобы выделить отдельных солдат и отряды.

Share this post


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

Вы также можете раскрасить броню, чтобы выделить отдельных солдат и отряды.

Каждый вид брони и так имеет разные текстуры в бою, зачем их еще красить? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different armor colors are necessary to differentiate the personnel into different tactical groups with different tactical tasks. Soldiers with the same weapons and the same armor can have different levels of skill development, and this implies their different usefulness for different tactical tasks.Different armor colors are necessary to differentiate the personnel into different tactical groups with different tactical tasks. Soldiers with the same weapons and the same armor can have different levels of skill development, and this implies their different usefulness for different tactical tasks.

 

2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many soldiers are in transport in your screenshot?
In the game we are discussing, a maximum of 16 soldiers are available during the mission. Moreover, we have a different face for each soldier, unlike the old game where all units were clones. Therefore, the division of the team by ammunition is enough. And if you have a few special soldiers, it's not so hard to remember their names or faces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter how many soldiers are in the screenshot. It is important that the player can mark them. Even if the label is displayed on the control panel( 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15 ;16 The Xenonauts have 1).

 

16 soldiers for a platoon is a tactical minimum, but this number is not convenient when the soldiers are forced to break up into separate tactical groups on the battlefield (Left Flank, Right Flank, Center, Heavy Support, Reinforcement group). Games where the number of platoons can not reach the minimum (16 people) - I do not play. For me, the optimal platoon size is 20-24 soldiers. This number is useful when the mopping up of the alien bases. 4 soldiers control the space up the corridor. 4 soldiers control the space on the left along the corridor. 4 soldiers to the right along the corridor. 4 soldiers will control the corridor space from the rear. And 4 soldiers of the mobile reserve of reinforcements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MrAlex said:

Just play, and then we'll talk.

I say this precisely because I know. Because I was playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2021 at 3:37 PM, Komandos said:

16 soldiers for a platoon is a tactical minimum, but this number is not convenient when the soldiers are forced to break up into separate tactical groups on the battlefield (Left Flank, Right Flank, Center, Heavy Support, Reinforcement group). Games where the number of platoons can not reach the minimum (16 people) - I do not play. For me, the optimal platoon size is 20-24 soldiers. This number is useful when the mopping up of the alien bases. 4 soldiers control the space up the corridor. 4 soldiers control the space on the left along the corridor. 4 soldiers to the right along the corridor. 4 soldiers will control the corridor space from the rear. And 4 soldiers of the mobile reserve of reinforcements.

Some would have to pay me to play the game with 20 soldiers, as the tedium would make it a job, rather than a game. Do you think there is a reason why the entire UFO AFTER series and the new XCOM have 6-7 people max? There is. It's tedius to control so many. It slows down the game. Hell, why not 60 or 80 soldiers in the open battle. That would be fun. It would take only 5 hours to end the first turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

WolfPrrist95, exactly. That´s why all Games limit the Soldiers in Battle in all Games of that Gerne. The Old X-Com Row about 15 Soldiers incl. Vehicles as well as UFO ET are about 15 incl. Vehicle with the biggest Transport too. If I have that correctly in Mind. The UFO-After-Series are limited too, but I can´t remember on what Numbers (6 to 8 Soldiers if I remember there correctly too). That Number of Soldiers have the new XCOM-Row and Phoenix Point too to make the Game playable and not stutterable.

You mentiend the slow down of the Game with to many People in the Battle Maps / Strategy Parts. Pery Rohdan is such a Game with to many Things in it as best example. I had a Friend which played it. He could make only 3 Turns per Day on Weekend and 1 Round per Day under the Week.

If you don´t get in Limitations then you have very big Problems. Either the Devs get in there hardcoded Limiters (like in UFO ET, old X-Com, UFO After-Series, Command & Conquer-Series and other Games :D) or they give you Modding Options where Modders have to limit the useable Numbers of Soldiers, Devisions or whatever (like in Stellaris, Hearts of Iron and other similar Games).

You see that Limiters for Soldiers, Vehicles and such are a must have to make an Game playable, esp. on lower Systems. There the Devs are fully correct with the Money, Ressources and Personal- as well as other Limiters.

Edited by Alienkiller
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, wolfpriest95 said:

Do you think there is a reason why the entire UFO AFTER series and the new XCOM have 6-7 people max?

Do you think this made UFO_AFTER and XCOM more popular than the original UFO: 1-2 ???

In UFO: 1-2, the maximum maximum of soldiers on a mission was 26 people. Everyone was happy: both fans of large armies and fans of small detachments.

By adjusting the game to your individual views (6-8 soldiers), you lose some of your customers.

Edited by Komandos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Komandos said:

Do you think this made UFO_AFTER and XCOM more popular than the original UFO: 1-2 ???

In UFO: 1-2, the maximum maximum of soldiers on a mission was 26 people. Everyone was happy: both fans of large armies and fans of small detachments.

By adjusting the game to your individual views (6-8 soldiers), you lose some of your customers.

That's not the truth, is it? If the game expects me to have 20 soldiers, I can get away with having just 16, lower the tedium somewhat, or as a more median example, 8 out of 10. If the game wants me to have 26 people, I can't put just 5 guys and win, since that is not what the game expects. Yes, I could deploy only a single trooper in the old X-COM (I'm playing it right now), but I can't realistically win. I can't even carry enough ammo on one soldier to win against anything larger than small craft, and even that is pushing it.

Edit: I think it would be cool if both playstyles have their chace to shine, but realistically, it's not probable. Point is, new XCOM is popular because of the small number of people, but large number of options each one of them has. Just something to consider.

Edited by wolfpriest95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

With 20 soldiers, it is easier to defeat 60 opponents than with 2 soldiers to defeat 6 aliens. Tactical missions with 20 soldiers will be much easier and more diverse in terms of the number of types of situations that occur than tactical missions with 6-8 soldiers. The loss of 1 out of 20 soldiers is the loss of only 5% of the accumulated experience. While the loss of 1 in 6 soldiers is the loss of 17% of the personnel and 17% of the experience gained. A squad of 20 soldiers is easier to train than a squad of 6 soldiers if the missions are so difficult that they constantly kill someone. With a group of 6 people, the game can't be so difficult that the player can lose several soldiers.

Edited by Komandos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Komandos said:

With 20 soldiers, it is easier to defeat 60 opponents than with 2 soldiers to defeat 6 aliens. Tactical missions

with 20 soldiers will be much easier and more diverse in terms of the number of types of situations that occur than tactical missions with 6-8 soldiers. The loss of 1 out of 20 soldiers is the loss of only 5% of the accumulated experience. While the loss of 1 in 6 soldiers is the loss of 17% of the personnel and 17% of the experience gained. A squad of 20 soldiers is easier to train than a squad of 6 soldiers if the missions are so difficult that they constantly kill someone. With a group of 6 people, the game can't be so difficult that the player can lose several soldiers.

None of this is wrong, per se, but it's the question of what's more fun, and what takes longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wolfpriest95 said:

None of this is wrong, per se, but it's the question of what's more fun, and what takes longer.

Naturally, it is much more fun and economical to destroy 40 aliens in one mission with the help of 20 soldiers. Less fun and more time-consuming is the destruction of 40 aliens on two missions with the help of 10 soldiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Komandos said:

Naturally, it is much more fun and economical to destroy 40 aliens in one mission with the help of 20 soldiers. Less fun and more time-consuming is the destruction of 40 aliens on two missions with the help of 10 soldiers.

I'd rather do it piecemeal, than all at once. The tension and tedium are much higher on the longer mission. If I can't finish my first turn in 90 sec, I probably have too many soldiers. By that logic, why not only have one huge battle that last couple of hours, and that's it? Hopefuly, you get new stuff built and researched, and some new enemies show up on the new map. You have short and sweet battles, with something new in each one. Otherwise, there is no point, at least not for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, wolfpriest95 said:

Otherwise, there is no point, at least not for me.

What's wrong with making sense to me? I only ask the developers to reserve for me the opportunity to take on a task of 20-24 people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Komandos said:

What's wrong with making sense to me? I only ask the developers to reserve for me the opportunity to take on a task of 20-24 people.

Nothing wrong per se, but the game will be balanced around specific number of soldiers, and if that number is over 20, many/most people wont like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wolfpriest95 said:

Nothing wrong per se, but the game will be balanced around specific number of soldiers, and if that number is over 20, many/most people wont like it.

At least 20 people. The battle at the crossroads involves a division into 5 groups: 4 to the north. 4 to the south. 4 to the west. 4 to the east. 4 mobile reserve group, to provide assistance in a difficult direction. ( Also replacement of the killed, wounded).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Komandos said:

At least 20 people. The battle at the crossroads involves a division into 5 groups: 4 to the north. 4 to the south. 4 to the west. 4 to the east. 4 mobile reserve group, to provide assistance in a difficult direction. ( Also replacement of the killed, wounded).

That's why you never put them on the crossroads, so you can be attacked from the each side. You take the hallway, and so you need 2-3 to cover rear, 3 on the front and 2-3 as a reserve. What you are suggesting is clicking on EACH soldier, and then moving EACH soldier, watching EACH movement animation, while also memorizing exact gear on EACH of them. If I could control 4 at the same time, sure, that's 10 clicks, but 40, no thanks, that's a chore or a job, definetly not fun. I also can't, for the life of me, understand why would you let yourself get encircled in the crossroad. But whatever. We disagree, so there is point to this discusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wolfpriest95 said:

I also can't, for the life of me, understand why would you let yourself get encircled in the crossroad.

When you are storming someone else's military base or defending your own, the enemy can exit through the corridors from either side.

 

I have assault teams divided into fours: 1 sniper. 1 machine gunner. 2 submachine gunners. There is also a heavy support group, which includes 4 grenade throwers. Perfect tactical balance: three assault groups. Second-line support group. Backup group (4 people) (this is the UFO penetration group). Ideally up to 20 people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Komandos said:

When you are storming someone else's military base or defending your own, the enemy can exit through the corridors from either side.

I have assault teams divided into fours: 1 sniper. 1 machine gunner. 2 submachine gunners. There is also a heavy support group, which includes 4 grenade throwers. Perfect tactical balance: three assault groups. Second-line support group. Backup group (4 people) (this is the UFO penetration group). Ideally up to 20 people.

Are you perhaps Russian or Polish or maybe Czech? That's the only way this makes sense. No one else can have fun doing something so boring. No desire to insult, I'm just confused.
Yeah, you have a squad formed with the idea to split it up. I get it. I also have that, you could have 12 soldiers and split them into 2 groups of 6 or 6 teams of 2, or 3 4-man units or vice versa, you don't need 20 people. I will forget to move someone, or I will just stop caring. I sometimes have the trouble of not exiting the game when I need to control 8. 12 is really pushing it. If I had 20 soldiers, I would not even leave the craft with half of them, and would then leave half at the exit, and bring 5 to the enemy. I know what point you are trying to make, but I don't know how to explain to you that having to personally control 20 individuals is extremely boring, to say nothing of your plan needing the player to find all of the snipers, and all of the gunners, and divide them equally, and then slowly march to the ship, or whatever the target is.

And, yes, I know what base assault is, I played 2 today. Standing in the crossroad is a stupid idea, and it's much harder to defend than just a simple corridor, from where you can overwatch 2 crossroads.

Edited by wolfpriest95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, wolfpriest95 said:

If I had 20 soldiers, I would not even leave the craft with half of them, and would then leave half at the exit, and bring 5 to the enemy.

When your squad consists of 20 soldiers, the number of enemy soldiers will be 40 units, respectively. And 5 soldiers will not be enough to control the map space and have enough firepower, against the firepower of 40 aliens. 

It's enough for me if the game supports 20 soldiers, and the transport can accommodate them. (For creating mods). The necessary parameters: the number of aliens, the capacity of transport, I will edit in the files myself.

Edited by Komandos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, wolfpriest95 said:

No one else can have fun doing something so boring.

It's boring when instead of destroying 40 aliens on a single mission with 20 soldiers, I have to fly out on three missions in a row for my 8 soldiers to destroy 40 aliens. And if I lose one soldier with a team of 20 people, I will only lose 5% of my experience. And with a team of 8 people, the loss of one fighter means the loss of 12.5% of experience. It's easier to train a large team.

 

If the developers create an "exact copy" of the first UFO:1-2, then why do they not want to copy the maximum tactical number of soldiers in battle?

Edited by Komandos

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

×