A new approach to a soldier's stats

[81dB]

Hello everyone,

Xenonauts uses a very traditional stat system, where agents take damage and heal up to full health over time, as well as being able to gain stats (bravery, APs, etc.) through battle experience/promotions. I'd like to offer a suggestion on stats that very few games seem to use, which in my eyes, would offer a more realistic and flavorful approach. It would be nice to hear everyone's thoughts!

Health:

New soldiers start out with higher health, e.g. 80-100 compared to the ~60 that current soldiers start with. However, with each successive injury, the soldier's max health decreases. The uglier the injury, the more max health is deducted. These deductions are permanent.

Injuries may be adjusted to have a higher chance of causing bleeding, and consequently must be treated sooner on the battlefield. If a soldier is left to bleed, his overall max health will decrease further than if the injury was immediately treated. This places a higher emphasis on medics and keeping your soldiers safe, especially your more accurate/higher ranking soldiers. This will also encourage more tactical use of snipers, flashbangs, reactionary fire and suppression.

Slight health increases may still occur, and your max health can increase past the baseline provided your soldier never gets hurt or suffers rare, minor injuries. However for the most part, soldiers will end up with less and less max health over the course of his/her career.

This is more realistic, as "fresh meat" soldiers with little to no combat experience are as healthy as they may ever be, before they lose an arm and a leg in battle.

Action Points / Strength:

Similar to health, soldiers will start out with more action points and strength than usual, however injuries will deduct points, simulating limb injuries. You can't exactly run as fast as you used to after taking a plasma shot to the knee, nor can you lift as much weight as before.

Of course, this may not sound fun, as soldiers are inevitably going to get hurt in this game, and strength is needed to make effective use of heavier weaponry. So, I propose a new mechanic to offset this: Physical Therapy.

We can send new recruits to training, preventing us from using the soldier for 10 days, however they come back a better soldier. Similarly, we can send injured soldiers to PT, which would increase the rate at which they recover, as well as giving them a better chance of recovering more of their lost max health/strength/action points. However, we lose control of the soldier (like training) for a certain number of days, depending on the severity of the injury.

Wounded soldiers, however, are nursed back to an "injured" state, after which they can either be used in battle again, or sent to PT. A wounded soldier implies a severe injury, while an injured soldier implies a minor injury. Therefore, wounded soldiers suffer more unrecoverable stat decreases. Tactically, you wouldn't want soldiers falling below half health, as that would trigger a wounded state. Perhaps medkits can be used to nurse a soldier back up to 50%+ health, preventing a wounded state on mission end (and therefore less stat decreases).

However, I can see this sort of being a problem when fighting the last alien. A soldier fires at an alien, triggers reactionary fire and suffers a critical injury. Meanwhile, another soldier delivers the killing blow and the mission ends, whereas if there were another alien alive, the critically wounded soldier would have had a chance for medical attention from another soldier.

This can be refined. Perhaps the lowest point of health suffered in battle is used to determine the significance of stat decreases, while using medkits in the field determines how fast a soldier is nursed back to 100% health. Soldiers that are tended to immediately will spend less time in the medical bay. Soldiers that are still bleeding or have unrecovered health when the battle ends are nursed on the ride back. It would be as if they were tended to immediately. This would favor the players who spend all their APs on killing (what they think is) the last alien instead of medkitting.

Bravery:

Bravery's a strange stat. Some soldiers may grow scared over the course of many battles, as they rack up injuries and see their fellow comrades die. Their PTSD may cause them to panic the moment gunfire starts erupting. Others may become more brave, from becoming numb/unafraid of death, seeking revenge, and/or accepting the fact that sacrifice is sometimes necessary to win this war. Personally, I would like to see bravery increase with every successive battle that the soldier completes unscathed or with only minor injuries. Bravery would also have a chance of decreasing when the soldier gets critically injured or a fellow soldier dies within sight. The lower the soldier's rank, the higher the chance/decrease.

IMO, it's realistic for soldiers with little combat experience to have a lower starting bravery than soldiers with previous combat experience. Additionally, the enemies we are fighting are never-before-seen aliens with super advanced technology. Even the most battle hardened Vietnam veterans would be a little overwhelmed at the sight, at least at first. So, baseline bravery remains unchanged for the most part. However...

Some soldiers are truly braver than others, while others are only brave because their friends are still alive. This can be done through a hidden, "True Bravery" stat. A soldier with high "True Bravery" would have a lower chance of losing bravery stats. He/she may even GAIN them when seeing fellow soldiers die (as they set out for revenge). The bravery stat that we see will be the "Current Bravery" of the soldier. We do not know how truly brave the soldier is until he is battle tested. "True Bravery" can also increase as the soldier is promoted, with the thought process: "There are soldiers depending on me. I must be fearless."

To compensate however, soldiers gain bravery at a much faster rate (especially so if they complete missions unscathed), as they get used to fighting these new adversaries. Also, while a soldier can bravery points from being in unfortunate situations and/or having a low "True Bravery" stat, their bravery can be nursed back up if you keep them away from from seeing friendly deaths and out of harm's way.

In this way, bravery is sort of an extension of Morale. Keep a soldier's morale high, and his/her bravery will increase quite quickly. Put a soldier in unfortunate situations and his/her bravery takes a dive. Perhaps only a temporary dive if you are a careful/caring commander.

I haven't read up on how rank affects combat morale yet, but promotions seem to be handed out like candy in the current versions of the game. It would be nice to have promotions occur less often or be capped (such as having only 1 Commander, 2 Captains, 3 Lieutenants, etc. per base or # of soldiers), but be more meaningful. Perhaps they more significantly increase the bravery (and thus accuracy) of soldiers around them. Morale would take a significant hit if a high ranking officer is killed.

I've never been in a war myself, so I would like to hear others' thoughts on this.

Accuracy:

While having soldiers with low starting accuracy and having them increase with experience is the traditional way to go in many games, I propose a different approach. Aliens are invading Earth, thus the soldiers we employ should be the best of the best. A soldier's base accuracy would be a lot higher implying that the soldiers we are recruiting are some of the best sharpshooters that Earth has to offer.

Accuracy would signify how well a soldier can hit still targets in a controlled environment.

Accuracy gains would be minimal and small to signify weapon familiarity, instead of actual accuracy increases. Perhaps accuracy could be linked to specific weapon types, such as Sniper Rifle or Shotgun. Many real soldiers probably have a certain weapon type that they prefer. You can add a small boost in accuracy if the soldier is using his/her preferred weapon type.

Enough with the rambling: the new catch is that bravery plays a much bigger role in determining a soldier's chance to hit.

A soldier with low bravery would spray and pray more than a battle hardened soldier would, thus having a lower accuracy rating. A braver soldier would get more use out of his/her accuracy rating, as he takes more time to line up the shot as opposed to worrying about staying in cover.

With this change, you'd favor hiring soldiers with high accuracy ratings (if you didn't already), and hope that their bravery increases to the point of being an effective soldier that patiently lines up their sights. Bravery can be seen like a "confidence" stat.

Gameplay-wise, new recruits would still have lower chance to hit in the beginning. Bravery increases are not guaranteed, so some soldiers may never reach their potential, moreso if they keep getting hurt. However, keep your high-accuracy soldiers unscathed and they will do great things for you.

That does not mean low-accuracy soldiers are useless. They can be used on the front lines, equipped with heavy armor, or given machine guns to lay down suppression fire. Moreover, there could be an accuracy floor (e.g. 60), because we simply do not even consider soldiers who cannot consistently hit a still target 15-yards away. Alternatively, you can have newly recruited low-accuracy soldiers increase their accuracy quite a bit with weapon familiarity training.

Reflexes:

Reflexes seems like a stat that could increase with every injury, at least for balance's sake. Then, at least your low-max-health soldiers could have a higher chance of defending themselves from death. It's also a bit realistic that a soldier who's constantly getting hurt will grow paranoid over time, developing faster reflexes. Of course, reflexes can still be gained normally through combat experience, injury or not. Baseline reflexes remain unchanged.

Another twist that can possibly be added is to have bravery affect your reflexes as well. A low-bravery soldier may at times be a bit trigger happy and kill a civilian, as he misidentifies the target in the heat of battle.

Difficulty Curve

I read from the difficulty curve thread that Chris wants to increase the baseline stats of recruits over the course of the game. If soldiers start out with higher baseline stats than usual, consider reducing the recruiting costs of soldiers over the course of the game. Then you'd have more and more soldiers (with high baseline stats) as you suffer losses. The cheaper recruiting costs signifies the increasing alien threat, as more and more soldiers are willing to put their lives on the line for the survival of mankind.

Summary:

- Strength, health and APs start high but decrease as soldiers sustain injuries.

- Reflexes start at baseline but increase at faster rates.

- Accuracy doesn't improve too much. Instead, bravery becomes the pivotal factor in determining chance to hit. A brave soldier with low accuracy still wouldn't hit things very well, nor would a scared soldier with high accuracy.

- Bravery fluctuates much more easily, significantly increasing or decreasing during times of high/low morale. Lots of wounded and deaths will drop overall bravery, while unscathed soldiers will increase overall bravery.

- Wounded/injured soldiers can do Physical Therapy to recover some of their lost stats.

- High-ranking officers play a much bigger role, due to Bravery being a key stat.

Other suggestions:

- Would be nice to see technologies related to these changes, such as improved medical bays (early game), stem cell research and/or synthetic body parts (late game)

- It would be nice to see a "preferred weapon type" for soldiers, such as Rifle / Sniper Rifle / Shotgun / etc. which give bonus accuracy when using the preferred weapon. This is to help offset the minimal accuracy gains over the course of the soldier's career.

- For balance, you can implement stat floors, where no more deductions can occur.

I hope to hear what you guys have to say. Even if all this isn't fully implemented in vanilla, it might give modders some ideas. It's quite a wall of text, so thanks to anyone for taking the time!

Edited May 21, 2013 by 81dB

[Sathra]

Its interesting, but sounds like it would make veteran troops worse in some important ways compared to rookies. Part of the usefulness of veteran troops having higher health is that they can survive injuries that would kill a rookie pretty much instantly. They're better in every way, making them soo very valuable.

Bravery is gained currently from medals (from doing lots of missions, lots of kills, taking a major wound and surviving) and from resisting panic. There was something planned about having rookies more likely to kill civilians, but it might have been drossed. Although, having accuracy based somewhat based on Bravery would be interesting, since bravery increases in groups.

Improved medical bays and stem cell healing are already either in, or planned to be in, the game. The advanced medikits are apparently stem cell tech. Or something.

[81dB]

Veteran troops will still be valuable due to higher bravery/reflexes (and thus chance to hit). Note that veteran troops would only be "worse" if they sustained a lot of injuries during their career, which is realistic, and makes taking damage much more impactful. You'd have to adjust your tactics accordingly, and be more hesitant to send the more valuable soldiers to the front lines. Additionally, a high ranking officer whom you kept safe, such as a sniper, would have insane stats (as the starting stats are higher), and hurt that much more when he's caught by an unlucky, stray plasma shot. Veteran soldiers whose bravery stat didn't take a dive (from seeing too many friends die or sustaining too many critical injuries) would still be very reliable shots. This introduction of PTSD adds a new wrinkle to gameplay.

If you worry about having soldiers who can sustain heavier injuries and survive, that's what rookies are for. Rookies would have higher health and strength (to wear heavier armor), therefore being better meat shields, but lower bravery and reflexes still make them a liability. Perhaps armor can provide a bravery boost as well, with better armor giving a higher boost. Realistically, you wouldn't expect an older 35+ year old squad leader to have the same stamina and speed as a younger, healthier individual. And you wouldn't expect a rookie getting his feet wet to have the steel nerves of a veteran when a plasma shot flies by his head. Most people tend to use sacrificial rookies on the front lines anyway. You wouldn't send an old captain to breach a room unless it was your only option.

And while you might think to be "clever" by making the majority of soldiers a sniper, some maps have more close quarters than open field which make snipers less useful than other soldier types.

Besides, these penalties can be reduced with technologies and research, so while early game has heavier penalties, late game would have more ways to combat those deductions. End game research may even nullify the penalties (though your soldiers may still have to go through PT to regain their lost stats). PT adds another wrinkle by making you decide whether to let a certain soldier fully heal up as a healthier soldier, or keep him in battle (when injuries and deaths are rampant). It makes sense that a soldier whose arm or leg wasn't properly given the chance to heal wouldn't function as well as one who was.

I know improved medkits and bays are already in, but I was talking about having them be involved in preventing stat loss, as currently there isn't a big sense of urgency in treating wounds. Even when soldiers are bleeding, there's not a big sense of urgency because the soldier would still be able to heal up to full health. It just takes longer. There's only urgency when a bleeding soldier is close to death. There should ALWAYS be urgency in treating wounds.

And you say bravery increases in groups? That's great! Groups of soldiers would have overall higher accuracy, but be more susceptible to splash damage such as grenades. Lone soldiers would have lower accuracy rating simply due to the fear of being alone. Another consideration is to have medals provide bravery to surrounding soldiers, but not the soldier wearing them. You feel much safer around a high ranking officer with lots of medals, but the high ranking officer may not exactly be braver for getting them. Perhaps he's seen too much s***.

BTW, are reflexes involved in any calculations of enemy reactionary fire? A soldier with high reflexes should be able to peek around a corner really quick and back into cover without being shot at. It would give your front line soldiers a better chance of survival.

You must remember that a soldier's starting stats are much higher, and therefore his/her potential ceiling is higher. Grooming a soldier is also much more involved. Instead of simply staying alive, the soldier must also stay out of harm's way if he/she is to have a long and productive career. Your well-groomed higher ranking officers would mean a LOT MORE to you. This makes their injuries and deaths much more emotional. Perhaps you might even have one of your starting soldiers win the war without sustaining a single injury. Imagine the stories that he'd have for his grandkids.

Overall, these changes would make for much more realistic management, which I think Xenonauts would be better for. It would also make the game more unique and memorable by stepping away from traditional permanent stat gains. I can certainly understand that some people just want a modernized X-COM game though.

Edited May 21, 2013 by 81dB

[Max_Caine]

On the suggestions to Health

This is based upon the premise that more health will result in soliders who come back alive more often. I argue your premise is flawed. To whit: alien plasma rifles do 75 points of damage per hit, with no armour migitation and a +/- random damage of 20 points. Removing the random element from the calculation, a plasma rifle could do (in a three-round burst) 225 HP of damage, leaving a smear on the ground. If a Xenonaut were to wear Wolf (mid-tier) armour, which absorbs 40 points of energy-type damage, a plasma rifle would do instead a mere 105 points of damage if all three hit, or 70 points of damage if 2 hit, or 30 points of damage if 1 hit. Ergo, an accurate burst (2 hits) from a plasma rifle (the most common weapon in the game) will either critically wound or chop down a Xenonaut in anything other than top tier armour. If we were to consider the second most common weapon, heavy plasma guns, which do a mere 85 points of damage and (crucially) ignore 10 points of armour, we have 165, 110 and 55, of which again, an accurate burst will definately chop down a Xenonaut in anything other than top tier armour.

As GJ improves the AI and it learns to co-ordinate its forces and focus its fire, soliders are far more likely to come back from a mission either not wounded at all, very seriously wounded or (more likely) dead (Pcannons, anyone?). Unless the starting HP for a fresh recruit is ridonkulous, it won't matter, because even mid-tier alien weapons are so nasty that when they hit, you damn well know it.

The nastiness of alien weapons should already encourage all the game styles and tactics that you mention. If a squaddie goes running at an alien with a plasma rifle, FPS-style, he gets everything that's coming to him.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Max_Caine

[81dB]

These deductions don't have to be big. Imagine if a soldier has ~80 max health and suffers an injury that puts him at 20 health. After being nursed back to "injured" state and going through PT, the soldier's max health is 77 on an average difficulty. The deductions would be more significant on harder levels, and more forgiving on easier levels.

How much health is a soldier expected to have in the late game? Can we not use that number as the starting point?

I don't imagine it would be easy to implement this into vanilla though at this stage of development, though. So, I'm hoping this can be modded in, but how much power do modders have over character development?

[Sathra]

The maximum health a soldier can get is 100. At the moment I think you can only change how fast it goes up.

[Gauddlike]

You cannot add any systems that are not currently present.

That means you could not change much about the way stats are managed beyond speed of increase.

You definitely couldn't alter the way injuries affect the character.