Build V18 Geoscape Balance Discussion

[thothkins]

Calm down...or I'll moderate you.

You should add that to your signature. It's has a vague sense of menace, without anyone knowing what would actually happ...>TZZZZZT< Gah! Ok, OK the topic at hand.

zips and laces on >TZZZZZT< Gahh!

Well, the Chinook used to be as limited as the fighters until there was enough opinion to lengthen and lengthen it's range to global is the simple answer to that. Can you even do a fighter escort with one now?

Along the way, the logic frays and >snap< suddenly you have to build in abstracted mid air fuelling by way of an explanation for the differing mechanics.

If the game already had built in fuel points, would I mind? No.

If those fuel points were linked to being only in funding nations? better yet.

Realistically, I don't see such things being added at this point to address something that was supposed to be a solution for another issue. Suddenly, you have "why are alien controlled nations still allowing refuelling?" and so forth.

I think hand-wavery will come out on top here, but I'd have been happy enough with a limited Chinook range in the first place. Strangely, the aliens stay a little away form the place they get shot down all the time makes perfect sense to me. If it's done properly it can be a gentle nudge to get those additional bases up and running.

Additionally, as mentioned, 1 hour delays along the way would have to be balanced against you actually getting to the crash sites. Particularly terror missions.

I don't think I have to mention respect and courtesy to everyone on this forum. They've always been part of the board. But since Sathra has come back it seems to >TZZZZZT< Gahh!

[GizmoGomez]

Let me repeat a simple question:

why does a dropship have infinite range, but a fighter doesn't?

Why a different mechanic for what is basicly a same thing. There is a logical (and mechanical) disconnect there.

No, it's quite simple. The chinook has larger fuel tanks. It even says so in the xenopedia, it's modified to have extreme range. I'm sure it has external fuel tanks besides the expanded internal ones as well. I mean, the dropship has no weapons, and all it's carrying is up to eight guys, or six guys and an armored car (or equivalent), so it's not like it's even close to the weight limit. Also, we can assume that it's very efficient in using that fuel.

The reason the fighters don't have the same range is because they actually need to be light, fast, and maneuverable enough to compete with UFOs in dogfights. Plus, they are equipped with armament, so that adds weight. Also, the fuel would be used more quickly (with thrust and not fuel economy in mind) to maximize the amount of power available.

It really is quite simple when you think about it.

Since you can't have a fighter escort all the way, people would not even want to use the chinook's full range, as they could be shot down by a marauding band of UFOs.

Now, to be honest, I seriously doubt that your idea is going to be implemented. I mean, you can try to convince us all you want, but it's still Chris's decision, and I doubt that he'll add this to the game.

However, I'm not Chris, so I recommend that you send him a PM, and ask him yourself. Like I said, convincing us on the board isn't going to get it in the game, but maybe you can convince Chris otherwise.

Personally, from a gameplay perspective, I'd rather it not be added for the sake of simplifying moving from point A to B, but it's not my choice.

Oh, and thothkins, you never fail to amuse.

[TrashMan]

Chinok:

Maximum speed: 170 knots (196 mph, 315 km/h)

Cruise speed: 130 kt (149 mph, 240 km/h)

Range: 400 nmi (450 mi, 741 km)

Combat radius: 200 nmi (370.4 km)

Ferry range: 1,216 nmi (1,400 mi, 2,252 km[96])

F-16:

Maximum speed:

- At sea level: Mach 1.2 (915 mph, 1,470 km/h)[52]

- At altitude: Mach 2 (1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h[1]) clean configuration

Combat radius: 340 mi (295 nmi, 550 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with four 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs

Ferry range: 2,280 NM (2,620 mi, 4,220 km) with drop tanks

Service ceiling: 50,000+ ft[1] (15,240+ m)

I'm not seeing it. The Chinok having a global range? It can't even outrange a normal F-16.

Last time I checked, tanks and poeple in full combat gear weren't exactlx a light load.

Not to mention that while fighters use up fuel more quickly, they also travel A LOT faster. Fighters have greater range than helicopters because of that.

Of curse, this beign a game some liberties have to be taken. Using base chinok stats, you'd never get anywhere in time and you wouldn't have much range.

Also, I'm not looking for Chris to implement THIS idea (altough I'd be flattered if he did).

I'm looking for SOME idea that is better than what we currently have.

EDIT:

Hmmm.. poeple complain that cutting the Chinnoks range would prevent them for doing many missions, or even miss terror missions.

A possible solution would be to

a) increase starting money so palyers can build a second (or evne third) base

b) have nations approval drops be far less severe in the first month

c) not have terror mission in the first month.

Edited April 18, 2013 by TrashMan

[Max_Caine]

And so, a history lesson.

The global range of the Chinook came as a direct result of multiple people complaining over a protracted period of time that they could not reach mission sites, most specifically Terror sites. There were dedicated threads like this, but as often comments would be slipped into other threads. I argued against it at the time, suggesting that instead that terror sites and ufo sites should creep away from the base site, but that went down like a lead balloon.

While initial requests didn't meet with success, the issue of range kept cropping up under different names by different people. The real turning point came with Chris' thread on difficulty smoothing where Chris outright acknowledged that dropships were going to have a longer range as to do so otherwise would gimp parts of the game. This was a significant divergence from the original design (anyone remember the first Chinooks?), but ultimately, from a game perspective, giving a Chinook unlimited range solved the issue of players unable to reach ufo and terror sites very neatly, reality be damned.

The game is very clearly divorced from reality at that point, because a sizeable percentage of people felt (perhaps rightly, perhaps wrongly) that they needed/wanted an extended range. Amusingly, the developers at Firaxis clearly knew what they were doing with EU2012. They knew that one base was all that people were ever going to need or use, because that’s what people, ultimately, want.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Max_Caine

[Sathra]

Not sure if this has been brought up before, but how about Fighters providing alloys? Basic Fighters 3 alloys, Heavies 6 alloys and Interceptors either 6 as well, or 12 (I haven't gotten that far yet).

It'd either be added with the ground combat for their escort, or as a popup about an hour after shooting down the Fighter (group) saying it was recovered or some such thing.

Give a good reason to shoot the damn things down, as well as a nice reward.

[TrashMan]

And so, a history lesson.

The global range of the Chinook came as a direct result of multiple people complaining over a protracted period of time that they could not reach mission sites, most specifically Terror sites. There were dedicated threads like this, but as often comments would be slipped into other threads. I argued against it at the time, suggesting that instead that terror sites and ufo sites should creep away from the base site, but that went down like a lead balloon.

While initial requests didn't meet with success, the issue of range kept cropping up under different names by different people. The real turning point came with Chris' thread on difficulty smoothing where Chris outright acknowledged that dropships were going to have a longer range as to do so otherwise would gimp parts of the game. This was a significant divergence from the original design (anyone remember the first Chinooks?), but ultimately, from a game perspective, giving a Chinook unlimited range solved the issue of players unable to reach ufo and terror sites very neatly, reality be damned.

I know the history of hte problem. I've been here the whole time ya know.

The game is very clearly divorced from reality at that point, because a sizeable percentage of people felt (perhaps rightly, perhaps wrongly) that they needed/wanted an extended range. Amusingly, the developers at Firaxis clearly knew what they were doing with EU2012. They knew that one base was all that people were ever going to need or use, because that’s what people, ultimately, want.

Wrongly.

Firaxis ruined half the XCOM atmosphere with that one base crap.

What pisses me off is people campaigning against logical consequences to actions/situations, simply because they can't be bothered to put some effort...or simply because "they want it all and they want it now". They want their L00t.

Who even said you SHOULD reach everything early on? Why should you? It's an alien invasion, not a picnic.

I've played games with a (sado) randomizer that sometimes gave you a poor start. But you deal with it. Extra challenge. It's not like you're palying competetively agaisnt another player eitherway.

It's like complaining in a FPS that your early crappy gun is innacurate and demanding that all your bulets auto-home on targets. Because you don't want to waste bullets - after all, it might doom your playtrough if you waste too much ammo!

The irony is that if I were to use exactly the same logic against some game aspects those same people love, they would bring out the pitchforks and torches.

Edited April 19, 2013 by TrashMan

[Sathra]

Enough. Change the subject.

[TrashMan]

Isn't this part of the Geoscape balance? How it is not on-topic?

[Sathra]

What I see is you berating people that they are idiots because they don't share your viewpoint. Change the subject or actually add to the discussion without being elitist.

[TrashMan]

Idiots? No.

I berrate people for lack of proper arguments other than "I don't want to be bothered with it" (which is a universal argument that can be used for anything). I also challenge the notion that the palyer should be able to do every mission early on.

I'm no more elitist than anyone else here, altough I grant you that I can be rather.... erm... blunt...and argumentative...and abbrasive...and elitist...and underhanded...and irritating...and not funny...and I better stop now.

***

With that out of the way, discussing balance and Chinnok range/speed cannot be further discussed without clearly defining the basic requirements:

- should the players be able to reach/do every mission early on? If so, why?

Edited April 19, 2013 by TrashMan

[Sathra]

Depends. With the current income it is very difficult to start a second base early on. While there is the opinion that you should just have to deal with the fact you can't reach everything, its not for everyone.

Especially if the terror missions have more of an effect. As it is, a terror mission is worth about two flyovers. Not much funding loss.

The other side is, quite simply, why the heck can't I deal with this damn terror mission. Not everyone likes roguelikes and Nintendo hard games. Even now Terror missions can be hard as hell, and as the AI gets better they'll simply get worse. Doing them or not, should be in my opinion, simply a case of whether you can actually finish the damn things without losing the whole team, rather than simply having to write off a city because you just can't reach it.

Being told that the city gets nuked because you couldn't do anything about it is disheartening. People new to the whole Xcom style game and the inherent lethality of the combat might just give up or restart because they think they did something wrong, when the simple matter is that they got unlucky with having the site appear out of dropship range.

If the dropships get fixed up the first new one, which would have global range regardless of this discussion (its in the Xenopedia article) is roughly 4-5 months of game time (or whenever landing ships appear). That's dozens of missions, and in my playthroughs can be anywhere from 2 to 12 Terror sites. That's a long time for new players to get the feeling its just damn impossible. Sure, if they stick it out and manage to build a Shrike they'll suddenly be able to deal with those but not everyone will do that.

This is a game focused almost entirely about the ground combat. Why not let the Chinook have global range and let players just try to do a terror mission. They'll fail or succeed but it'll be entirely based on how well they can play (and the usual blind luck, but mostly tactics) not because of a design decision that means they just can't do it.

As someone said before, its about the fun. While it would make sense for the chinook to have limited range, or have to take breaks or whatever, that's just adding stuff for the sake of realism. Its not actually fun to have to do or watch. The fun is in facing off against the aliens, planning your tactics and coming out on top. Or just throwing troops around and winning in spite of it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, while its a good idea, it shouldn't be in the vanilla game. Mod or game option, sure. Its simply easier to just give the chinook global range (which would also keep it in line with the other 2 dropships that also have global range) and let players deal with the consequences of it (which in more than a few cases would be uh...enjoying​ the fun of night missions)

[TrashMan]

Depends.

I'd say it doesn't. You have to have a firm stance on that before any balancing can be properly done - in no small part because it determines in what ways you can balance and what you want to achieve.

While there is the opinion that you should just have to deal with the fact you can't reach everything, its not for everyone.

NOTHING is for everyone...

Xenonauts itself is not for everyone.

IIRC; there were people who wanted to completely remove air combat, because it wasn't "fun" to them.

Being told that the city gets nuked because you couldn't do anything about it is disheartening.

Which is exactly how it should feel. Alien invasion, loosing war? That is the proper atmosphere.

Flawless victories should frankly be 100% impossible IMHO.

People new to the whole Xcom style game and the inherent lethality of the combat might just give up or restart because they think they did something wrong, when the simple matter is that they got unlucky with having the site appear out of dropship range.

People new to XCom might give up and restart for a bajjilion other reasons.

Overkilled the UFO? No reactor, no research, you lag behind, you suffer.

Lost your star team? You lag behind, you suffer.

There always was a random element to these games. And frankly, if missing a terror mission is enough to re-start, then what isn't? Not getting EVERY terror mission isn't important enough to ruin the game.

Now, as I said before - with refueling taken into accout, the Chinok WOULD have global range. But it wouldn't have the speed.

Hence why you'd want a second base.

This is a game focused almost entirely about the ground combat. Why not let the Chinook have global range and let players just try to do a terror mission. They'll fail or succeed but it'll be entirely based on how well they can play (and the usual blind luck, but mostly tactics) not because of a design decision that means they just can't do it.

Luck IS a design decision.

So they will fail or suceed either way because of "luck".

Failing a few important roles in a row (thus doomign your mission) is just as much luck as random terror mission placement is.

[Gauddlike]

The Chinook is already the slowest craft in the game.

Being able to reach distant missions doesn't necessarily equal being able to do every mission.

For example if your base was in North America and you only had a single team you could conceivably send them off to a terror mission in Europe.

While the Chinook was slowly making its way across the Atlantic though it is unavailable to react to any other missions.

It is quite possible that by choosing to respond to that terror mission you would sacrifice your chance to react to crash sites around your own base and lose relations with your host nation in an attempt to prevent the loss of a distant one.

The choice there is which sites to prioritise.

The same applies if you have widespread interceptor bases but only a single centralised troop base.

You would be able to reach anywhere on the planet.

However you would likely not make it there in time to respond to every mission and you would certainly not manage to return to base and get out to another site if you had wounded to replace.

[crusherven]

I also advocated just forcing the first terror mission to be close by so that players could get a feel for it so they at least know what a terror mission is before being forced to skip them. I'm fine with the current solution, though... Skyranger could go everywhere in the OG and it wasn't a problem.

[TrashMan]

I think I got it..

Since all dropships are VTOL, unlike aircraft, they don't require any special facilities to land and re-fuel. Just arrange a fuel truck to meet with them along the way.

It's simple, as it doesn't require the player to build anything, OR for the dropship to divert course from town to town. It just flies in a straight line.

The only difference is that when it runs out of fuel it lands and refuels on the spot (the re-fueling arranged automaticly beforehand when the dropship leaves the base). Sicne refueling would take a bit (half an hour?) longer trips cost you extra time.

Another interesting application - have two chinnoks in base. Have a base in Europe. Send one chinnok with troop to russia. Unlike fightercraft, a dropship doesn't hover, it lands. And refuels.

So you keep it there. You got a fueled and ready dropship with troops waiting in the middle of russia, basicly extending your range. So if a terror mission appears in Japan, now you can get there faster. Without requireing a second base.

Of course, this has drawbacks.

1) Troops can't train or be reassigned as long as they are outside of the base

2) They can't be re-equipped

3) A lone dropship is easy prey for UFO's

For those that want one base, this means they CAN play like this - altough the risks are rather obvious.

[Sathra]

How about instead of overcomplicating 1/3 of the game with code for a single craft that will be replaced anyways, we just give the Chinook global range?

Oh wait, it WAS given global range.

[TrashMan]

Who said for a single craft?

And what part of "it would still have global range" are you failing to comprehend?

Should I make a presentation with flowcharts?

[Sathra]

Its bloat. You want to add a system that, by your own statements, would have little overall effect and would mostly be for the look of it.

So you want the various fighter craft to have this too? That would remove one of the major points of having multiple bases in the the first place. Intercept range. If the fighters can refuel if they fly so far out from the base, you could game the system in a really strange way, as well as void the 'whole limited fuel in air combat' if you so chose.

The tier 2 dropship is specifically mentioned to be able to stay in flight for days. I doubt the tier 3 would be any different.

[TrashMan]

What? No. Did you even read?

No to fightercraft, they can't land anywhere. Only VTOL capable craft (dropships).

And no, it's not purely visual as it has an effect and strategic implications... like I described earlier.

As far as dropship 2 goes. Change the text. Problem solved!

The entire thing is as simple as it can get, because everything is already is in the game. You can laredy send aircraft to any loaction.

The only addition would be to check if a dropship is stationary. If yes, refuel.

And of course, stop the AI from auto-flying it back when fuel is low.

[thothkins]

If you were to remove Global Chinook range:-

We now have “Local Forces have downed UFO” in the first weeks. Could these perhaps be used for an early terror mission too? In the mission text have something that states that the aliens will look to spread terror where we are least defended ( i.e. you’re not going to be able to get to all of these, but don’t worry about it too much)

Have terror missions appear later in the game, when you have the capacity to get there.

This also handles the ‘these are hard with so few soldiers early on and only coveralls to wear.’

“As it is, a terror mission is worth about two flyovers. Not much funding loss.“

I didn’t know this. The loss, in game, makes it seem that the funding nations are livid (as they should be) but this should be toned down/ reworded if it’s just a couple of craft not dealt with. It could be needlessly dispiriting for people. You aren’t losing a whole city, just that the area around the crash site has been sanitised.

Make it clear that you’re not expected to intercept all craft in the Alien Invasion text – or a funding nation introduction in game. Pops up immediately at game start or after a couple of game hours (a la autopsies)

Possibly make base start up cheaper along with key facilities to reflect funding nations putting things at Xenonaut disposal/ reactivation of old Xenonaut bases.

To include Global Chinook range:-

Including Chinook in a squadron seems odd if it’s two escorts will run out of fuel and return to base.

Is the chance of a Chinook being taken out by aliens still the same? I get the feeling it used to be higher. I’ve not had transport planes destroyed recently either.

With enough cash, as I’ve posted elsewhere I’m still finding the advantages of building secondary intercept bases, even with global range.

[Sathra]

Its reduced now. The waves are more spread out so you get long 'safe' periods to transport and there aren't so many Air Superiority missions. I think its something like 1 or 2 per wave and they seem to only go after ships that come within a certain range.

[TheTuninator]

I'm going to echo the concerns about Chinook range. The Skyranger could reach any point on the world and stay there for a few hours; if I put my base in the Southeastern US, the Chinook can't even reach Australia or parts of Russia.

I've upped the range myself in the game files (to 70,000 I think) and it makes a world of difference. Being invited to help raid UFOs that governments have downed and being unable to reach them, followed by a funding penalty, is irritating.

Realism concerns aside, this is a spiritual successor to X-COM, and is expected to be such from people who have not purchased yet but will after the game releases. These people are going to expect their dropship to be able to reach anywhere on the map, just like it could in X-COM; if people miss out on 1/3rd to 1/2 of early-game missions even though they wanted to fight just because the dropship didn't have range, you're going to have a lot of frustrated players comparing this to X-COM and asking "why?".

I'm not sure if I have the most recent version, but if the Chinook already has global range it should stay global, and if it doesn't have global range, it needs it badly.

Edited April 20, 2013 by TheTuninator

[TrashMan]

These people are going to expect their dropship to be able to reach anywhere on the map, just like it could in X-COM

They will also expect psionics... and a whole lot of other things...like buying initial guns.

This isn't a carbon copy of X-Com. Something to keep in mind.

[Gauddlike]

I don't mind either way really as I tend to use multiple squads spread around the globe in the OG, and will probably do so in Xenonauts, so the global range wouldn't be as useful to me.

[TheTuninator]

They will also expect psionics... and a whole lot of other things...like buying initial guns.

This isn't a carbon copy of X-Com. Something to keep in mind.

Yup, but I would respectfully submit that there is a difference between additional optional abilities and the ability to actually play ground missions that the game is asking you to intervene in.

Not being able to do missions is really frustrating, but fortunately the range in the v18.2 beta seems sufficient enough to reach most, if not all of the map.

Edited April 20, 2013 by TheTuninator