Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Was terribly let down by the base building of Phoenix Point and while I did enjoy some of the innovations that were introduced for XCOM the concept was far too limited

Xenonauts 1 kept the original approach which I liked but highlighted some of its shortcommings so now that X2 decied to improve on the base concept here is my therapeutic list of improvements I have expected from PP and now hope will be found in X2:

1. The art needs to be popping, fitting with the era and game UI style AND each type of buildings needs to have its dominant color scheme to instantly set them apart visually. e.g: Hangar blue, Living Quarter Green, Factory brown, Reactor yellow, Defense Buildings red etc... They shouldnt of course contain only these colors but subtly warry on them viaa markings, some of the equiment paint etc.. so that it works naturally and gives a bit of variety to each base, provides instant recognition and collect-em-all feeling besides allowing the player to just look at their base without being instantly bored and/or discussed by the models/bland color choices This is a screen where the player will spend the most time after tactical battles and maybe the Geoscape and is the basis of game progression: it needs to reflect that

2. Players should be able to build a practically unlimited number of bases BUT each base should have a high enough maintenance fee to ensure additional bases are only built if they are really worth it and the player is doing well. In some cases it should be a valid choice to decomission an existing base containing a bunch of hangars for example as the countries around it have all fallen to ruin and are not actually paying into the budget anymore - this would work excellently at throttling base expansions and serve as a dynamic difficulty (one a base is destroyed by aliens you have more money left over at the end of the month to rebuild). What the heck: place a devastated base icon on the map or abandoned base marker to make the world more reactive to the campaign events and refect game progress :)

3. Limitations on buildings: Hangars should only be allowed to be built at the side of the base for planes to be able to leave the base and yes they should be 2x2 and yes: each hangar should only be housing a single plane which should be visible when in the hangar for visual flair and overview of what is where and how many. Other limitations can be energy (produced by reactors), storage room and living quarter. Now here I would introduce manpower or staff

Staff:

  • Each building needs staff to operate including labs and factories but also hangars, radars, reactors etc. There should not be any difference between lab and production staff  to do away with the one-time not really a decision micro of hiring these
  • Each living quarter provides capacity for +20 Staff
  • Staff are hired in three ways: Base staff manning all the buildings, soldiers and pilots
  • Each staff type should have different upkeep (salary): Base staff the lowest amont and pilots the highest amount
  • The goal is to both simplify the MGMT of staff, while also introducing interesting decisions and lend a much imposing scale to the organisation. The player could now hire hunderds of staff per base and would need to decide not just if they have money for a new hangar but also if they can staff it and have enough energy (which also needs staff)
  • Staff can be tied into many aspects of the game: when bombed a base could loose staff, purchase cost can be dependant on region and relationship, Base staff could accumualte exp as a unit etc, etc...
  • Now the 3 types of staff are signifficantly less in a given base moving from base to soldiers and to pilots so it could be considered to have 3 types of Living Quarters to really spice up the minigame: Base staff LQ: 20, Soldiers LQ: 10, Pilots LQ: 2

4. Base layouts should be different with each region/continent providing various amounts of usable space, bonuses and even shapes to build in. E.g: Bases in Asia, could recieve a +10 staff bonus to each living quarter, Or Africa could provide lower consturction costs for buildings, EU lower maintenance for labs etc..

5. There need to be various sizes of rooms BUT this should be simple not needing rotation (like in X1): 1x1 and 2x2 layout rooms are perfect just like in the original. The 1x2 hangar sie in X1 was less optimal then the origina 2x2 as it does not provide sufficient space for the art of the planes (the need to be bigger over time) AND hangars need to take up a lot of sapce to fucntion as a limiting factor when designing a base

6. Adjecancy bonuses - obviously. But since I thought everythign ellse is trivial here are some details:

  • Core building can be a lift but also needs to provide a small reactor and some minimal staff so its not jsut a lift but a core base element that should be 1:1 so there are a lot of directiosn to expand into (it needs to provide base energy and staff as otherwise new buildings cannot be constructed OR the player wil lalways needs to start with these trivial selections. The provided base amount can be fairly minimal though jsut enough for 1-2 buildings to get things started
  • Reactor provides discount to energy usage
  • Rooms of the same type (labs, factories, storage, defense buildings, reactors, hospitals, living quarters) should provide bonus to rooms of the same type: we got this with XCOM and forgot about this in PP... Exception is hangar for planes as only one plane can be dispaled properly per hangar
  • Robotics room (automation) decreases staff requirement and upkeep cost of adjecent rooms as well as increase their output if lab, factory OR reactor. Tech should provide increased bonus effect to this room later which means the player should want to design their bases with these rooms being as much in the center as possible if they wish to decrease the upkeep of their bases long term
  • Hospital ward increased healing rate with each adjecent Living Quarter

7. Each base should have their region represented around it (eg.: bases are in a mountain and beyond their walls you cna see the desert, forest, river, arctic snow whatever is specific to the region) - this would put all bases in a frame help to make them even more unique and identifiable as you would SEE that this base in in the Desert or in hte Arctic or in a Jungle

8. Base Defense buildings: Rocket Launchers, Radars, Shield generators protecting from bombing AND right from the start: base garrisons: These should come in small 1X1 and large 2X2 sizes that provide a small or large number of soldiers in case the base is attacked wielding base equipment. Such a garrison room would resolve the issue of having to keep weapons and soldiers in bases only for defense and would provide a great boost to important bases as well in case the planes are out or the soldeirs happen to be tired, injured, dead... very thematic, usefull building that take up loads of space and staff

9. Display planes in each hangar (Xeonauts did this but PP hasnt) AND vehicles in tank hangar: e.g: each vehicle hangar can hold 4 tanks, and each are visible on the base overview when not used to see how many, what type and what loadout is on them

I thought that these improvements would be trivial on the original but having seen countless remakes and even successful iterations only using one of them (adjecancy) I needed to get it off my chest :)

 

Do you agree, or do you think I missed something?

Are at least some of these in the new X2 game or are planned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have read some Parts. I suggest, if you are in the Open-Beta-Team then you play Xenonauts 2 and see the big suprisses it have. Only so much, Ideas which aren´t thought to an End from the Competitors get an Refit here. :D

Edited by Alienkiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Alienkiller said:

I have read some Parts. I suggest, if you are in the Open-Beta-Team then you play Xenonauts 2 and see the big suprisses it have. Only so much, Ideas which aren´t thought to an End from the Competitors get an Refit here. :D

Thanks, that makes me a bit optimistic that we can finally get a real v2 system from the original :)

Dont have access to the beta so have to wait and see - can you tell me if they use any sort of staff system

I was thinking where I have seen the best base building so far and it was in They are Billions no questions: they actually had most of the above points from the list but was RTS of course no tactical battles really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok there is a video on the beta (though might be outdated at this point:

From this it seems there is adjecancy bonus and hangars work the same way as in X1 + planes are visible as they are being built

Please please reconsider making hangars 2x2.... 1x2 is way too easy to fit into any base in any reasonable number. It negates the need to place buildings smartly for adjacency bonus as the hangars will fit in anyhow hover you build your base if they are soo sleek + there is much less space to display larger planes towards the end. Even X1 had 1x2 living quarters and labs so you might have run out of space at least in the main base but these are now 1x1 tiles - please make hangars big again :)

As for staffing I can understand its a big leap from the original and especially from the remakes. Just note that buying additional lab and production personnel and then never having to think about them again is not an interesting decision. I like the idea of having a large base with tons of people working there but this system does not support that - it was usefull in the original as this was the main way to scale up research but there are other methods for this in modern systems (leads, hints, autopsies increasing research) and building up is more easy then it was before (unless we caount the heavy laser produciton exploit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an older Version, but you see the Difference to the Predecessor and what will come in / get in so far. It´s a WIP and we get many Refit- / Upgrade-Suprisses in the next Versions until the Open-Beta will come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I a very happy to see the changes to the tactical UI and the new soldier and weapon models looks much better then before

Base MGMT contains some of what I was hoping for: X1 had a more polished (not so sterile look to the rooms) but maybe this is still work in progress (like some old assets from the tactical game)

I really hope 2x2 hangars will be reconsidered but if the game got till this point with 1x2 it might be inteded to stay indefinitively - unless its just a placeholder asset from X1 and will also get a facelift rethink :)

A design for staffing ala They Are Billoin and environmental representation was too much to hope for for sure - its more something for tripple A budget maybe. I remember some earl version of the single base concept which did have the environment drawn arround it (that was  different concept of course)

Share this post


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

e.g: each vehicle hangar can hold 4 tanks,

We do not use large tanks that require hangars, only small reconnaissance vehicles (MARS) that do not require much space and can be placed in stores.

Share this post


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

I really hope 2x2 hangars will be reconsidered

2x2 hangars make sense if they can accommodate 2 or 3 aircraft. But that's just an extra restriction for the player, and I don't like the restrictions.

So I don't like the idea of 2x2 buildings. I don't understand why we need it. Especially considering that we have to build radars that take up 2x2 space (which I also don't like).

 

Edited by MrAlex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MrAlex the Restricitons aren´t discutable. Every Game have them and most Games have them so hidden, that you only know what happend after GAME OVER show up. The old X-Com-Series is such an good Example.

In Xenonauts, Phoenix Point, UFO ET (from 2007) and the new XCOM-Series you see it. And that´s fully OK. You won´t have enough Material, Money etc. to make everything like a Partymaker with unlimited Ressources.

So Restrictions are a must have. We will see what the Devs make with the Hangars. They will do something, but in what shape we all don´t know. Evtl. the Secret will liftet in V.19 or V.20.

And the Buildings with 2x2 Squares are fully normal with new Elements like the Special-Radar. That too you have in every Game of that Gernes. We are not the Aliens which have an 1 Million Year Advanced Tech on their Home Planet over us Humans.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Alienkiller said:

And the Buildings with 2x2 Squares are fully normal with new Elements like the Special-Radar.

2x2 size is acceptable for the final radar. But to make an intermediate version of 2x2 size is not reasonable. The player is simply unable to build two large radars on the main base. If the hangars will take up 2x2 space, then even one large radar will be difficult to place.

Share this post


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

2x2 size is acceptable for the final radar. But to make an intermediate version of 2x2 size is not reasonable. The player is simply unable to build two large radars on the main base. If the hangars will take up 2x2 space, then even one large radar will be difficult to place.

I dont know the current state of the beta but if there is already a 2X2 bulding that is a good sign :) If it is late game tech, it doesnt matter as we can build additional basis or even demolish existing buildings by then

It is beneficial to have (relevant) limitations for everything in a game as otherwise there is no challenge, decisions that are not hampered are trivial and/or irrelevant

XCOM remakes went a bit overboard for my taste but they were of course very succesful with their model - I dont wish to have the game be much more restrictive then the origianl UFO game was just minimum as restrictive if that makes sense

From all the times I have layed Xenonauts I have never ever run out of space to build to and that ws with 1x2 labs and living quarters. I would get rid of 1x2 format altogether as it is not nearly restrictive enough to matter and throw in 2x2 for some buildings: hangars are primary targets as they were already 2x2 in the original (where I did run out of space sometimes) and they make sense taking up a huuge amount of space

Share this post


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

We do not use large tanks that require hangars, only small reconnaissance vehicles (MARS) that do not require much space and can be placed in stores.

Ok that makes sense. I wish there were still vehicle hangars to have more stuff to build (and again having to decide what should be built where) but doesnt make sense to force them in jsut for that

Share this post


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

I dont know the current state of the beta but if there is already a 2X2 bulding that is a good sign :) If it is late game tech, it doesnt matter as we can build additional basis or even demolish existing buildings by then

Here is one of my screenshots. As you can see, there is simply nowhere else to place another 2x2 radar. I had to remove the current radar and do without the radar for a whole month. For people who have been playing for a long time and know what technologies they will be able to research and where they will build - this is not a problem, you can just not build an intermediate version of the radar on the main base and save money. But for beginners this is a big problem. If you imagine that the hangars will also be 2x2, then except for the hangars and radar on the base, nothing else will fit. At least three hangars must be located on the main base.

Al Reactor.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don´t need to build a new Radar, you can upgrade the exsiting Inference-Radars to the Whatever-Radar later.

The Hangars can be 2x2. Either you have 3 Planes in an big Hangar (like in an Aircraft-Carrier or in an normal Hangar in an Airforce-Base) or maximum 2 Planes with Repair- and whatever-Possibilitys.

Your Picture can be there for an good example. 

Atm-State: Now you need 5 Hangars to have 2 Transports and 3 Fighters. Thats Space-Consuming and get a Trouble with time like you show.

Refit-State (Dev-Idea): You build up Hangars in 2x2-Square-Form. Thats not new (Aircraft-Carriers use that as well as the normal Army) but to the previous Games in that Gerne you get several Advantates.

1. You can use the Hangar for 2 or 3 Planes with more then enough Refit-, Rework- and Repair-Capacity.

2. You get more Space in your Base. Means you have minimum 2 Slots more then at current State.

3. The other big Radar can be build up or an other 2x2 Square-Buildung.

I see the Advantages of that System.

Share this post


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

Here is one of my screenshots. As you can see, there is simply nowhere else to place another 2x2 radar. I had to remove the current radar and do without the radar for a whole month. For people who have been playing for a long time and know what technologies they will be able to research and where they will build - this is not a problem, you can just not build an intermediate version of the radar on the main base and save money. But for beginners this is a big problem. If you imagine that the hangars will also be 2x2, then except for the hangars and radar on the base, nothing else will fit. At least three hangars must be located on the main base.

Thanks for the picture this helps a lot :)

So you want to upgrade the base radar to a new version but there was not enough space...

My immidiate instinct is that there should be an option to upgrade buildings of the same function into their more advanced version withouth loosing the fucntion of the original and withouth the need to having to build a new one and then destroy the old one

But if this is not the case: there would still be space left in your base they are just spread out

From the amount of bases and their size I would guess this is close to  late game stance - you would still have place to build such a room if adjecancy bounses were given up and rooms would have been built closer to each other - this is exactly the kind of risk-reward I would suggest for the game to have

We could also rearrange the bottom two 1x1 rooms two raws above and 3 hangars would have had space and without evne loss of adjecancy :)

I am not saying that everyone should be able to build up their base ideally all the time, but its possible if the player considers these from the beginning as you have mentioned its easier of course with hindsight but still its a challenge even if a small one

 

So I like the idea of having 2x2 radar and I would like to see 2x2 hangars - would even consider building a second base near the first one could be fun but wouldnt make sense at all if we woudl have no trouble bulding everything withouth consideration :)

The gameplay loop would be this: player knows there are a bunch of rooms that take up a huge 2x2 space right from the start (and maybe even know that more are coming later) so they are motivated to leave open 2x2 spaces but adjacency bonuses and immidiate need for more labs, storage and whatnot tempts them to encourch ever more onto precious space left - we have a minigame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big Radar is an Combi-Radar. If you play it later then you will know why. There an 1x1 Square-Radar is not Qualified for.

And if you Guys would read, there are Buildings which are Upgradeable later, esp. that Combi-Radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Alienkiller said:

Atm-State: Now you need 5 Hangars to have 2 Transports and 3 Fighters. Thats Space-Consuming and get a Trouble with time like you show.

That is exacty what I would propse yes: to get into trouble with the obviosu optimal scneario

We woud need to decide on one of the les optimal scnearios (financially, time or combat wise)

A. Build 5 hangars to have 3 interceptors AND 2 tarnsports in main base  - Huge combat advantage AND least money to maintain BUT much less space for everything else

B: Build only 3-4 Hangars AND have space for all other essential buildings - Strong early game main base AND still cheap BUT need to sacrifice 1 Interceptor slot or a secodnary transport

C: Build a second base nearby or offload research, production to a far-away base - Huge combat advantage AND plenty of sapce for everything BUT much more money to maintain AND secondary bases are less protected

Its a balancing question

We could also take C and build a bunch of hangars in secondary base right from the start but oh no - we are getting into the same decision cycle again :)

This is the idea and I would even welcome for furhter mid to late-game buildings to also take up 2x2 space for the same reason (besides radar and Hangar)

In X1 I just expanded into 5 Hangars in the main base right from the start - no consideration needed as they will be very usefull and there was no shortage of space - this made early game not the interesting base building wise and lead to all my base buildings being the same across the games

Share this post


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

That is exacty what I would propse yes: to get into trouble with the obviosu optimal scneario

We woud need to decide on one of the les optimal scnearios (financially, time or combat wise)

A. Build 5 hangars to have 3 interceptors AND 2 tarnsports in main base  - Huge combat advantage AND least money to maintain BUT much less space for everything else

B: Build only 3-4 Hangars AND have space for all other essential buildings - Strong early game main base AND still cheap BUT need to sacrifice 1 Interceptor slot or a secodnary transport

C: Build a second base nearby or offload research, production to a far-away base - Huge combat advantage AND plenty of sapce for everything BUT much more money to maintain AND secondary bases are less protected

Its a balancing question

We could also take C and build a bunch of hangars in secondary base right from the start but oh no - we are getting into the same decision cycle again :)

This is the idea and I would even welcome for furhter mid to late-game buildings to also take up 2x2 space for the same reason (besides radar and Hangar)

In X1 I just expanded into 5 Hangars in the main base right from the start - no consideration needed as they will be very usefull and there was no shortage of space - this made early game not the interesting base building wise and lead to all my base buildings being the same across the games

I don't think adding more 2x2 buildings to the game is a good idea (unless you add some other system that supports more 2x2 buildings). If you look at MrAlex's screenshot you should see that the base is almost full, and that he hasn't placed some of other buildings like labs, storerooms, missile batteries, etc. You probably wouldn't have any room if you added more 2x2 buildings to the game.

MrAlex and Alienkiller have been proposing outposts for awhile now which would help alleviate the issue if it worked kind of like a mini-base. It would be very restricted in what you can build (you couldn't build extra labs, workshops, or improved radar) and it would be pretty small (4x4 compared to the 6x6 of the main bases); however, you could use it to build extra hangars and storage spaces so it could make 2x2 hangars work (otherwise there wouldn't be enough space in the base to build other things if you have 4 or more 2x2 hangars). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Kamehamehayes said:

If you look at MrAlex's screenshot you should see that the base is almost full, and that he hasn't placed some of other buildings like labs, storerooms, missile batteries, etc. You probably wouldn't have any room if you added more 2x2 buildings to the game.

MrAlex and Alienkiller have been proposing outposts for awhile now which would help alleviate the issue if it worked kind of like a mini-base. It would be very restricted in what you can build (you couldn't build extra labs, workshops, or improved radar) and it would be pretty small (4x4 compared to the 6x6 of the main bases); however, you could use it to build extra hangars and storage spaces so it could make 2x2 hangars work (otherwise there wouldn't be enough space in the base to build other things if you have 4 or more 2x2 hangars). 

My argemt is that in the above there are still 7 slot open for buildings and it seems to be already endgame - if we swap a few buildings around there is space for radar and hangar even (not 5 but 4 would fit) - if we dont hit the limit even at late game and even if constructing many 2x2 buildings there is no limitation to speak of

Even if something wouldnt fit at all due to outright lack of space (which is not the case above just positioning), it is fine as long as the limitation only kicks in at around mid-game

We should have a bunch of buildings and some of them large and we shouldnt be able to build up each base to contain everything.

Lets imagine an optimal scenario (like the above mentioned 5 hangars in the starting base) and the idea is to only be able to achieve this by sacrificing other important things - this is how decision then matter right from the start not because it limits the player in the early game but because the player will run out of usefull space (cannnot palce 2x2 anymore) at around mid-game if they are not carefull

 

I would welcome outposts as another means of expanding the decision tree for building bases but they would probably necessitate a lot of new rules and mechanics - lie what happens if these get invaded - though again here a garrison building might be an elegant solution as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To put it simply: if the player needs 5 hangars, 2 Radars, 4 labs, 4 living quarters, 2 reactors, 2 storage room + lift to crush the early to mid -game that should not be possible due to overall avaialble space and/or size and shape of rooms

The above would require overall 41 units of space but the layout only allows for 6x6=36 - so even if built optimally something needs to be sacrificied (1 hangar and 1 Living Quarter, or 1 Radar and 1 Hangar if missions are more important etc...)

In this case it would be a design cohice that prevents the player from choosing the obvious path and thus encoruage consideration and prioratization beyond what we can afford

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a typcial starting base I created in the beginning of X1:

1281410384_MainBase.thumb.jpg.9d886b78ff784c1a123ac2fc1a940e42.jpg

Note we had a single starting tile 2x2 and hangars were 1x2: I could build up the entire base in one month and ic could handle almost anything up till the end of the game:

1. It has 4 Fighters for engaging multiple light ufos or heacvy and then rotating

2. Transports to engage multiple missions

3. Vehicle hangar so tanks can also be sesd for both offense AND defense

4. extended Radar RAnge (I usually built a third radar as well once more advanced interceptrors are available)

5. All the resaearch AND production space needed for till mid-game

6. Missile batteries though not realy needed due to the amount of defense and medbax for good measure (that one was usefull)

This was such an effective setup that secondary and tertiary bases were only needed to shoot down UFOs + more labs later

If Hangars and even radars would have taken up 2x2 - it would have been a whole deifferent question though. Additional baes would have suddenly been imperitive to have and the distance from each other also very impotant as none of them can be a jack of all trades

 

I think that these aspects all need to work together to make this part interesting:

1. Cost of new bases very high

2. Upkeep cost of each building notable

3. Overall space limited due to the amount of building options and a frequently used portion of them being 2x2 - this is why I would be happy to have hangar also for vehicles to increase the things needed to push out that benefit and especially in large numbers

4. Energy consumption: more buildings = more generators that also take up space :) - researching more advanced reactors are suddenly an important priority

5. Adjecancy bonus rewards putting the same building into the same base BUT due to all of the above it is risky as that base will be too one-sided to do other thigns effectively

I would have loved staffing as well in this list but its fine - I am happy that reactors and adjecancy is in and hope for 2x2 hangar :)

 

Note: base defenses were not realyl needed in X1 - hope they rank up the attack frequency and strenght here agaisnt all bases not just main base so that these buildings also become important and need to considered everywhre as a usefull improvement (but taking up both energy and precious space)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW: Can we get some reflector ligths on the side of hangars like in the original?

Was very neat and could even be randomised per hangar to give each base a unique look

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A valid argument could be that the amount of space was and is not meant to function as a limitation - its just a technical necessity to have borders to the build canvas

In such a case the idea would be that money and energy (also money indirectly if there is no space shortage) is the only limiting factor and adjecancy is there to spice things up

Adjecancy is the carrot and money is the whip

If this is the concept then it truly doesnt make sense to have 2x2 tiles  - their purpose would only be to break up adjecancy bonus for which this format is not ideal

This is due to the ideal format for this adjecancy bonus also being the square formation (+4 bonus for 4 buildings of a type with no losses) and squares fit in with other squares perfectly :)

 

So if that is the concept (space should not be a limiting faction at all) I have two alternate suggestions:

1. Make Hangars L shaped. This would make them break up adjecancy bonuses much better. They would also take up +50% more space but is not a factor really as seen in the above examples it would still enable 5 hangars and all the key buildings (bearly but is possible). The additional segment could serve as a storage location for the weapons for the plane visually

2. Bring back Command Centers from X1 instead of elevator and have alien invasions attack this as it was there. The idea woudl be for Command Centers to provide adjecany bonus to all types of buildings next to them (excluding hangar) BUT if they need to be defended by garrison buildings to ensure they are protected during invasion. Thus the first building would be something that needs protection all aroudn it but also provides bonus to everything around it - decision :) It would alos make sense for the command cneter to provide a bit of starting energy for other buildings to be built as it would have its own generator lore wise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why we are limited to the same area as in the original game, it would have been nice to have more flexibly in the layout of the base, and or bases, so as to be able to include more of the advance buildings that become available later in the game.

That a thought!!!

Share this post


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

I don't think adding more 2x2 buildings to the game is a good idea (unless you add some other system that supports more 2x2 buildings). If you look at MrAlex's screenshot you should see that the base is almost full, and that he hasn't placed some of other buildings like labs, storerooms, missile batteries, etc. You probably wouldn't have any room if you added more 2x2 buildings to the game.

MrAlex and Alienkiller have been proposing outposts for awhile now which would help alleviate the issue if it worked kind of like a mini-base. It would be very restricted in what you can build (you couldn't build extra labs, workshops, or improved radar) and it would be pretty small (4x4 compared to the 6x6 of the main bases); however, you could use it to build extra hangars and storage spaces so it could make 2x2 hangars work (otherwise there wouldn't be enough space in the base to build other things if you have 4 or more 2x2 hangars). 

I think outposts are a good idea as well. We need more new mechanics around base building than just adjacency bonuses. And visually speaking they need a complete overhaul. I mean c'mon, it already looked outdated when X1 released

Edited by andy079

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

×