Squad Shared Sight Issues

[crusherven]

I think this would change the way I play very little. Currently, I move with forward scouts to spot, who freeze when spotting an enemy. Then my snipers and heavies fire. If the alien is still alive, my scout fires or withdraws. The only thing that might change is if I need to move my scout out of the line of fire. In that case, I could just memorize the tile the alien is in and force fire on that spot (I think I can do that, at least).

I like the idea that suppression reduces LOS. It makes sense and forces the player to quickly rescue a suppressed unit. I'd say reduce LOS by half rather than making the unit blind, though.

I think these changes would have more of an effect on the aliens than the player. Currently leaving any alien alive at the end of your turn is tactical suicide, particularly once heavier weapons appear. Depending on how the AI works, this might reduce some of the plasma storm that gets sent toward exposed troops.

[erutan]

I appreciate that giving the aliens extra visual range makes the player be more aggressive (when does anyone use reaction fire unless they're boarding a UFO?), but that's also part of the issue.

On a wide open map you can an enemy squad sighting you from an unknown location(s), with no real choice but to have someone run up one tile at a tile killing themselves with reaction fire. There is also a somewhat perverse incentive to scout with your lighter armored folks while the heavier armored ones sit back safely - having a few less tiles blundering into reaction fire can be safer than being more armored and taking more hits.

re: the actual topic, I noticed scouting with my hunter on a night terror mission that I had to be more careful about where I drove off to after spotting an enemy... I liked that feeling a lot more than day missions (aside from the reapers I honestly sort of prefer night to day, which feels somewhat perverse given the xcom tradition).

[Gauddlike]

There is also a somewhat perverse incentive to scout with your lighter armored folks while the heavier armored ones sit back safely - having a few less tiles blundering into reaction fire can be safer than being more armored and taking more hits.

All of the scout armour with longer visual range or jump ability is lighter while the heavier armour is specifically geared towards using heavy weapons with reduced sight range so it appears this is the way Goldhawk wanted you to play.

[erutan]

It's odd because early game it seems structured the opposite way - light weapons equip jackal and heavy go armorless due to strength restrictions. This makes more intuitive sense, that those in harms way are more balanced towards survival while you have glass cannons in back.

I can totally understand not scouting in lumbering power armor, but the jump of Buzzard is really only useful for going on top of buildings. If you're in a wide open desert map running around in Buzzard armor trying to spot aliens so the HW folk in Wolf can take them out it seems kind of... backwards.

[Gauddlike]

I haven't used the heaviest armour much but I also feel like it might devalue some of the other weapons a little.

If it uses heavy weapons on the move and has the best armour then it is a natural breacher.

What role do the assault shield, carbine, and assault rifle have if the machine gun variants can be used in the same way by someone with higher armour?

Bit off topic though.

[Sathra]

Off the top of my head, lower shot cost and reduced collateral damage (for the MG's). Its also pretty time consuming to make.

Still, would love to be able to use an Assault Shield with Assault Armour.

[crusherven]

I haven't used the heaviest armour much but I also feel like it might devalue some of the other weapons a little.

If it uses heavy weapons on the move and has the best armour then it is a natural breacher.

What role do the assault shield, carbine, and assault rifle have if the machine gun variants can be used in the same way by someone with higher armour?

Bit off topic though.

Like Sathra said, lower AP cost is big. Besides, technically you could breach with LMGs even without advanced armour because you're close enough that reduced accuracy isn't a big deal. At least, that should be the case once accuracy bugs are tweaked.

[badgerdrool]

Well I think Chris is onto something by talking about this. My initial impressions of the LOS system where...that it's a bit odd.

Honestly the old Xcom LOS system may be a major part of that game, but it was a bit weird. Same with EU2012 and squadsight snipers. There's a suspension of disbelief going on due to LOS and fog of war being very gamey systems.

I'd almost like to see a more involved rework considered. Part of me wonders about allowing a soldier to use TU to look down a scope or binoculars to get a further narrower LOS cone. That'd help reduce the drive for scout soldiers and with a narrow enough cone would still take TU to locate a target.

I kind of ask myself "What method of moving my soldiers do I want to see work in xenonauts" and then try to think backwards to how LOS might help that. I think that I'd rather not have to the old school scout soldier into sniper trick. I'd rather have each soldier move in a way that feels tactically appropriate.

I kinda wish I could peek around corners too. Be able to select something, then a square next to the soldier to "lean" into and then another square to be the direction to glance. So instead of putting a soldier into the square, turning, and then running back....

Of course then I think about the Aliens and I'm unsure. Too much control and finesse for the player would make it difficult to make threatening aliens...

[Max_Caine]

Think about it in reverse. If a squaddie can lean, why can't an alien? If a squaddie can use a scope or binoculars, why can't an alien? I've just fought tooth and nail to get through a terror site staffed with what must have been the most evil <CENSORED> <CENSORED> <INAPPROPRIATE VERBAGE> <REFERENCE TO RUMOURED RURAL PRACTICES> sebillians ever, and could you imagine giving regenerating tanks armed with weapons that will liquify Jackal armoured troopers on the second hit the capability to lean around corners and see from far distances? "Oh, I've been shot! No worries, I'll just lean back, suck my thumb for a bit and I'll be fine!", "Good news everyone! The binoculars for all you short sighted murder lizards have just arrived! No pushing, there's plenty for all!"

Edited April 28, 2013 by Max_Caine
Changed last bit.

[badgerdrool]

Think about it in reverse. If a squaddie can lean, why can't an alien? If a squaddie can use a scope or binoculars, why can't an alien? I've just fought tooth and nail to get through a terror site staffed with what must have been the most evil <CENSORED> <CENSORED> <INAPPROPRIATE VERBAGE> <REFERENCE TO RUMOURED RURAL PRACTICES> sebillians ever, and could you imagine giving regenerating tanks armed with weapons that will liquify Jackal armoured troopers on the second hit the capability to lean around corners and see from far distances? "Oh, I've been shot! No worries, I'll just lean back, suck my thumb for a bit and I'll be fine!", "Good news everyone! The binoculars for all you short sighted murder lizards have just arrived! No pushing, there's plenty for all!"

Yeah that's pretty much the problem with it all.

Mind that, for me, lean would merely be a quick LOS glance. It wouldn't allow lean and fire. Alongside sight going away, it'd purely be a way to visually sweep an area without taking full reaction fire risk.

Binoculars? Well there can be a lot of difference depending on how it was set up. Imagine a super shallow 3 square wide cone of vision that only extends 10 squares past normal LOS. TU cost, and requires clicking a square. Doing anything else, including facing change, and it stops the scope sight. That'd be difficult to use in comparison to getting up there but useful for scouting an area you saw fire from.

Again, I agree it all goes pear shaped when you consider the AI doing it too. That does get into a very related quandary though. What should the AI be doing? How accurate and strong should they be? Would every alien type need to obey the same rules as the soldiers?

This discussion in general overlaps with questions about the AI. So much of how the AI works is tied to the players interactions.

[StellarRat]

Binoculars? Well there can be a lot of difference depending on how it was set up. Imagine a super shallow 3 square wide cone of vision that only extends 10 squares past normal LOS. TU cost, and requires clicking a square. Doing anything else, including facing change, and it stops the scope sight. That'd be difficult to use in comparison to getting up there but useful for scouting an area you saw fire from.

I'm with you, IF we had binoculars there would need to be a SUBSTANTIAL TU cost and a limited area you could observe for said cost. My personal experience with binoculars is that it takes time to focus them, more time to look, and more time to reposition. In general, using them is quite time intensive compared to just using your naked eyes.

[crusherven]

Using a scout and a sniper actually makes sense to me. Mostly I'm using LMGs or precision rifles to take down the aliens, which really are long-range weapons--the former because it's an area weapon and the latter because of the scope. So it makes sense to imagine a scout telling the sniper/machine gunner to look and fire in a certain area. Rifles don't work as well in-game because they have shorter range.

[Infinitum]

I don't much care for the squadsight or the way the game handles fog of war. Having everyone in the game be simultaneously myopic and able to telepathically broadcast their vision range strikes me as curious and curiouser for a game lauding itself a simulation.

[StellarRat]

I don't much care for the squadsight or the way the game handles fog of war. Having everyone in the game be simultaneously myopic and able to telepathically broadcast their vision range strikes me as curious and curiouser for a game lauding itself a simulation.

I don't think it has lauded itself as a simulation. As far as squad sight, yeah, it's a bit off, but I would think that the squad members all have personal radios and are informing everyone about sightings so that doesn't bother me too much. Remember this game is supposed to be quite similar to the old XComs which worked the same way. Besides, I don't think anyone has ever come up with a true solution to squad sight in any standard computer game. The fact that you HAVE TO monitor/command each of your troops pretty much gives you squad sight in your mind if nothing else. The only real way to simulate squad accurately is have multiple players control ONE soldier each in some kind of isolation pod. They could then report back by voice to a "commander" in his/her own pod. Any other solution pretty much won't be accurate. The other very un-fun solution is a command level game where you can only issue orders and the AI carries them out reporting only what each soldier reports. That leaves the commander with no control over individual troop actions. Edited May 6, 2013 by StellarRat

[Aiel_Wolf]

The first change makes a lot of sense to me. If I am not looking I cannot see it. If my squad mate cannot see it, he cannot tell me where it is. This one I like, a lot.

The second makes more sense depending on the situation. A single 3 shot burst wouldn't be enough to keep a head down over time, but several would do. How much they can see would depend on their cover and the rate of fire. No cover and they have nothing to hide behind. They could still see, unless they made like an ostrich and buried their heads in the dirt. With good cover and you might sit down and hide until shots stop coming your way, greatly reducing your LOS as there is not much that you can't be shot through but can still see through.

With how the game works I think this might be rather hard to change to this extent? All though I don't think a full reduction in LOS from suppression would make sense, maybe 1/4 reduction with no cover and 3/4 LOS reduction from cover. (If possible) If not then balance the two with a 1/2 reduction from suppression. But then I have never been shot at, so I couldn't tell you how much bullets flying my way would effect me.

Maybe bravery (or stupidity) could effect the LOS reduction? A brave (more possibly stupid) soldier would be happier to stick his head out and get a look around when under heavy fire.

Edit:

More on the Sniper/Spotter roles. This is an every day tactic but the spotter as far as I know has to give the sniper very good information on the target to make the shot. For me this would mean, for those long range shots the spotter would need specialized gear to relay the correct information allowing the sniper's to do his job.

This being where the spotter needs those prior mentioned binoculars and a range finder. The spotter has a much narrower but longer view when using them. They also take up the weapon slot when equipped, assuming he has to put his gun down to make note of the targets and use the equipment. If its possible to make it so that only the sniper rifles have an effective range over the long distances then this avoids any gun hitting the target.

But, how to stop a team with two spotters and ten snipers? I am not sure what is possible with the games engine. Pairing the two people together could be one option, as in only that one sniper could use the data from one spotter. (Would suck though if you had two teams and one spotter/sniper died from each pair, rendering both useless!) Only allowing a sniper with in two squares to use the spotter is another, but still easily exploited. Could the game re-check LOS with the removal of the binoculars bonus after a sniper rifle if fired?

The last one would work best in my opinion. (Time for some out of the air numbers as examples.) A regular rifle has an effective range of 10 squares, anything beyond this and the accuracy exponentially declines. The sniper rifle has 20 squares before any penalties. The binoculars gives a sight of 25 squares in a 4x4ish pattern, this could be a cone or a circle at the target. After the next weapon is fired this extra LOS is removed. As in the sniper takes his shot and the spotter has to confirm the kill. This could be used in shorter ranges but would be wasted with regular rifles.

Edit 2: (This is becoming a lot longer than I ever meant it too.)

The binocular equipment would also tie into my suggestions on strength/equipment load outs very well, as the power over the weight is balanced by its inventory space. A spotter has less ammo, nades, etc. They cannot spot and then fire effectively.

Also to avoid individual units who can spot then snipe. As in the sniper spots his own ranged targets. Make the binoculars cost ~30-50% TU while a long range sniper shot takes ~75-55% TU.

Edit 3: (Last one, I almost promise.)

The binocular squad sight allows for alien research advancements, in that some aliens have great vision, what makes their eyes so good? Can this new ocular understanding improve our binoculars, range finders, radars or scopes?

Edited May 10, 2013 by Aiel_Wolf
Brain storm!

[GizmoGomez]

Ba ba BUMP!

So, Chris, how's this coming along?

[TrashMan]

Personally - I'd get rid of squad sight.

I would give everyone more realistic view ranges and cones, and make sure object block LOS.

A selected soldier would only really "see" the aliens it can see, for the rest that are spotted by squad members it might have a marker displayed that shows the rough location. And shooting at someone he can't directly see = big penalty.

[Wraith_Magus]

A selected soldier would only really "see" the aliens it can see, for the rest that are spotted by squad members it might have a marker displayed that shows the rough location. And shooting at someone he can't directly see = big penalty.

Doing that would make the precision rifle even more heavily penalized at its supposed role of "long" range (read: barely out of shotgun range) even more than it already is.

As I said in the other thread where we had this same discussion, unless the visual range of the snipers goes way up, that's a recipe for crippling anything but shotguns and assault rifles.

[Chris]

We're planning to give this a test once both Aaron and I are back in the office. Likely we'll put it in one of the experimental builds so you guys can test it for yourselves.

[TrashMan]

Doing that would make the precision rifle even more heavily penalized at its supposed role of "long" range (read: barely out of shotgun range) even more than it already is.

As I said in the other thread where we had this same discussion, unless the visual range of the snipers goes way up, that's a recipe for crippling anything but shotguns and assault rifles.

You missed the "more relaisitc view ranges". Meaning everyone would see a helluva far. Snipers could shoot for that far out and hope to hit.

[Wraith_Magus]

You missed the "more relaisitc view ranges". Meaning everyone would see a helluva far. Snipers could shoot for that far out and hope to hit.

Apparently, I did miss that. My mistake.

Anyway, yes, I'd be more interested in that. I'd actually think an up-to-date LoS per character would be interesting. You wouldn't be able to see anything the selected unit couldn't see, needing to scroll between characters to see where the aliens are, and position troops to see what their buddies could see.

[GlyphGryph]

There's also an "in-between" ground - have an "effective" view range and then a "reduced effectiveness" view range - basically, the same thing you have for weapon range.

Your "reduced effectiveness" view range has a chance of NOT spotting enemies in cover or at the very limit at all. But if you have a scout unit call out the enemy position and retreat, the sniper, even if he couldn't see them before, doesn't "forget" where they are - the penalty is only in the initial chance to spot, but once they are spotted they end up spotted for everyone.

So your sniper might be hunkered down gazing across the field with no support unable to see anything... but if he's patient, and the enemy runs out into the open, he spots it and gets his reaction fire. Boom!

This would mean units like Sebellians could still have an a "reduced vision range" - it's not that they'd never be able to see you at a distance, it's just very unlikely! But once you've been spotted by a unit, the others can tell where you are.

Basically, a compromise between "full LoS" and "current view box" that follows the mechanics that already exist for weapon ranges combined with the current mechanics system.

[StellarRat]

That will totally alter the tactical game. I'm not sure if it will be in a good way or a bad one. If the AI doesn't have "memory" of enemy units it will make the game easier for the human. Consider that the human always has squad sight to a certain extent in the mind if no where else. The AI will need something similar to remain competitive without cheating. Please don't let the AI start cheat by knowing where all the enemies are! I hate that kind of AI and that type of cheat is very transparent.

Another thing that ought to be considered is that spotting someone that is hiding for the first time is much harder than seeing someone that has been pointed out/reported. That ought to be considered too. Squad sight is somewhat realistic in that regard. To have a simple "he can see it", "but he can't" because he's too far away type of logic would be wrong. Extremely wrong actually. Other considerations, movement, firing, etc... will all affect sighting distances GREATLY.

Edited October 8, 2013 by StellarRat

[Wraith_Magus]

Please don't let the AI start cheat by knowing where all the enemies are! I hate that kind of AI and that type of cheat is very transparent.

You mean like how the aliens already face directly at the closest xenonaut, even if they are on the other side of a wall, to the point where it's a known exploit to trick aliens to face a wall so your buddies can run in from the other side?

The AI is already cheating, and is not yet sophisticated enough to really get by without it.

With that said, I would rather enjoy the notion of the stealth game. In games like Silent Storm, it really changes the way that the game is played to have an ability to just keep belly-crawling near-silently while the enemy is guessing at where you are, sending in sweepers that move as a squad to the last position you were heard or sighted. (At least, once you were higher-level, with points sunk in stealth, otherwise it was a total crapshoot because the game wasn't all that balanced outside the middle-game, and you'd get spotted nearly all the time early on.)

That said, sadly, I don't think Xenonauts is going to be advanced enough to include gameplay like that, or have that kind of AI.

[StellarRat]

You mean like how the aliens already face directly at the closest xenonaut, even if they are on the other side of a wall, to the point where it's a known exploit to trick aliens to face a wall so your buddies can run in from the other side?

The AI is already cheating, and is not yet sophisticated enough to really get by without it.

For some reason you have a low opinion of AI in Xenonauts. So far every cheat you've pointed out is a known BUG. It's not designed to cheat. It just is because there are still some problems with the maps, the LOS calculations, the AI, etc...but the intention is not for it to cheat. In fact, the bug you just mentioned actually favors the human because it can be exploited. I'm fairly sure someone has filed a bug report on the facing thing.