Terror missions: Modified 'low fuel' behavior--high-stakes gamble to continue?

[Piloter]

I just had a game where the Chinook was halfway across the ocean, running at best speed, and had to turn back. Right as it was getting back to base...the city was nuked. My troops could've handled it, the Chinook could have gone bingo and resupplied from friendly ground forces, but we had to abort.

You can tell your interceptors to ignore the low fuel push, finish combat, and ditch--for the sake of one UFO--but you can't tell your dropshop to risk it all for the sake of an entire city.

Suggestion: Pop up a box--ONLY when enroute to a terror mission, you wouldn't throw away your troops on just a regular landing--when the Chinook reaches 50% of its total range.

"Commander, if we keep going--whether or not we make it to the city--we won't have enough fuel to make it back. If we push on and don't get there in TIME, I hope you have a SAR crew on standby."

"Continue" / "Return to Base".

If the player elects to continue and the nuke timer runs out:

The dropship immediately turns around and heads to the closest base (if only one base, home base) until the fuel runs out, then it crashes. If this is over the sea...that's unfortunate. If it's over land, there's a chance of generating a crashed-dropship mission type--IF Xenonauts supports it. The country takes only half the usual financing penalty, because HQ did absolutely everything they could to get there in time, ending up sacrificing a squad of soldiers and a dropship...much, much more reassuring than "The bastards didn't even try!".

If the player elects to continue and succeeds in the mission, temporarily give the dropship enough fuel to make it in a straight line back to the nearest base. It got there on fumes and favorable winds, it can get back in the same way. Apply a funding bonus. "They ran their equipment almost literally into the ground to get to us, thank $Deity they care."

If the player elects to continue and is defeated, nothing changes.

If the player elects to continue and aborts mission, treat it as a defeat. That dropship ain't moving, and the soldiers would probably be occupying the transport like the pilots in Blackhawk Down, trying to hold off the mobs until the bitter firey end.

It just really stung having to see that 'you didn't get there in time' message when there was fuel (barely) to make it and time (barely) likewise. If players want to elevate the stakes--the entire squad against the clock / a funding bonus--that could be a valuable hard-choices option.

What do you think, sirs?

[Max_Caine]

It's a nice idea, but the current range of dropships is currently undergoing reconsideration. It looks like the first dropship is going to have a considerably longer range than current, so that would probably render this idea moot.

[TrashMan]

Dunno. I personally liek the idea of limited ranges. Makes multiple bases actually important.

Also, a helicopter wouldnt' crash. When fuel gets dangerously low, they would land.

So no, you wouldn't loose troops.

They would just have to get back to base in a slower way, making them unavailable for a while.

[thothkins]

I'd perhaps be for a delay (could be a day) for your troops to be unavailable as they are shipped back to base.

But, mucking around with the Chinook range just lessens the more advanced craft to come, and I'm OK knowing that not every mission is one that you're going to get to.

It would really suck to have your troops land on the last whiff of fuel, just in time to see the missile arc above them...

[HWP]

Military craft don't run on fumes when they need extra range, they radio for a tanker.

[Piloter]

Yes, calling up the nearest funding country in advance and requesting a tanker as part of the flight plan makes sense, but I really doubt Chris wants to build that interface. =) Much less having friendly NPC CAP escorting the tanker, to be met by PC CAP during the refueling operation.

With the Chinook range being what it currently is, this is just an idea to add one option box to the game and otherwise work completely within existing parameters.

[HWP]

You don't need a whole interface, just give the Chinook longer range and drop its speed so that traveling a long distance is PAINFUL. That you barely catch a UFO crash site across the world, and sometimes not at all if you don't send the craft together with interceptors.

[TornadoADV]

You don't need a whole interface, just give the Chinook longer range and drop its speed so that traveling a long distance is PAINFUL. That you barely catch a UFO crash site across the world, and sometimes not at all if you don't send the craft together with interceptors.

It already travels at the same rate as the Skyranger, that's slow enough, considering that UFO sites are no longer bugged/designed to stay "active" whenever a transporter has it's location set as an active waypoint.

Edited October 28, 2012 by TornadoADV

[thothkins]

I'm still for changing something about the location of the actual crash sties in the early game, rather than change the range/speed of the Chinook at the moment. If that's a blanket increase around the globe in the first few days - possibly landed craft as opposed to crash sites - then that gives the player access to the research/battlescape needed, wihtout unbalancing the craft or introducing something fiddly like refuelling from friendly nations into it.

[frukc]

this problem with Chinook - low fuel / turn back - on alien terror missions is very annoying. i don't recall having such thing in original x-com. i hope it will be addressed.

[Piloter]

It already travels at the same rate as the Skyranger, that's slow enough, considering that UFO sites are no longer bugged/designed to stay "active" whenever a transporter has it's location set as an active waypoint.

You know, that behavior would make a lot of sense for extending the time limit on an terror mission if a transport is already in the air. Whoever's authorized to order nuclear weapons on home soil would be authorized to know about the existence of the Xenonauts, and I would assume that when you abstractly tell the Chinook to head that way that, at ground level, a call goes out from the base commander to said Nuclear Football equipped invidual to "hold the perimeter, we have a bird in the air and heading your way."

Of course, if they broke out of the perimeter before you could land...dependent on alien strength, funding nation happiness (if they've been overwhelmed already with assaults, their resistance may be degraded, dependent on lousy luck...then the nukes might still go off.

That said, these are populous cities (keep getting missions in Mumbai!) and there's no WAY a tac strike is going to kill that few people. I appreciate the finality of "OMG NUCLEAR OPTION" but if you had responsibility for the theater, wouldn't something like a Dresden-style saturation carpet bombing approach work better? Hell, massive FAEs (fuel-air explosives) in saturation quantities would level the playing field nicely for some ground-attack aircraft, or napalm, or a 'friendly' artillery rolling barrage or just about anything that isn't a nuke.

[Andeerz]

I am all for refueling options and so forth, as well as the suggestions the OP had. However, I could live with not having refueling, and just have the OP's suggestion provided the more advanced dropships get more range.