Chris Posted January 16 Posted January 16 This update is also only accessible by switching to our Experimental branches (instructions on how to do so here) - although please be aware they have slower load times and worse performance than normal builds due to the extra logging they contain! Bugfixes: One additional bugfix for 6.30.0 before the weekend - fixed a crash that could occur if you shot down a UFO over international waters (i.e. in the distant parts of the oceans). Quote
gG-Unknown Posted January 18 Posted January 18 (edited) On 1/17/2026 at 12:01 AM, Chris said: This update Hello Chris, usually I drop an idea, and hope you read it and could use it. This time it is emergency, so I ping you on this post. ====== Regarding the New Feature Directional shield, my first evaluation was : controversial. But I was wrong, it is far worst. After seeing about 20 hours of vids and playing my 20 hours I have to say, this feature have to go. Yeas, it is feature removal request. ====== From the steam review Skitso copied, I am using a quote: Quote The aliens have 100% knowledge of how and where to find the angles that avoid your cover, to take the guaranteed shots every turn to kill your guys, even when starting their turn out of sight not only cover, but AI also recognise shield angles ! (dont get me wrong, I dont complain on : " AI look into cards I am holding in my hand", that is usual shortcut to program AI, I dont blame you. Programming AI which can handle unknown and foresee possibilities is outside of scope any current game) The problem is, AI is too effective AND rule-set works again player. Which means, the new_maimed_shield_feature which do not cover from sides is abused by AI to kill player. That is soooo toxic combination. I dont know what was the purpose of maim shield, but it backfired. Result is : player feels like intentionally screwed from behind. You know, like, game designer could not come up with some fun gameplay, but has a quota to kill some soldiers. So he come up with a flip-a-coin situation, >>> toss a coin so you die. On top of this, another complain : light armour was useable on shield-carrier, but now never. That is one of the "achievements" of this feature : maimed shields. >>> Light armours are officially noob trap. FIX : 1. revert limited angle shield cover - remove the feature 2. Because of reduced team size, player can no longer afford 2 shields per squad. 2 of 8 would be 1/4 of team carrying shield >> 25% of the team. It reduces firepower too much. ShieldCarrier archetype was build as mostly passive member of the team, which is good only in close fight scenario. But in smaller team, reduced firepower of shield in open fight is too much sacrifice. Therefore, rise firepower of a shield carrier is needed. In smaller team, the Shield Carrier have to be more active. Because each member of a smaller team has higher value. I am asking you reduce shield weight, so he can carry more throw-ables. Current shield weight is 50 units. Keep 50 for the top tier shield. Every lower tier shield cut weight by another 6 units lighter. I think there are 4 tiers, which means 4 x 6=24 is max weight reduction. First shield should weight only 50-24=26 units. Idea is >> strength is rising as soldiers progress, so in every stage of game Shield carrier should afford to carry about the same amount of throw-ables Thanks for your dedication George Edited January 18 by gG-Unknown 1 Quote
Skitso Posted January 18 Posted January 18 (edited) 1 hour ago, gG-Unknown said: Hello Chris, usually I drop an idea, and hope you read it and could use it. This time it is emergency, so I ping you on this post. ====== Regarding the New Feature Directional shield, my first evaluation was : controversial. But I was wrong, it is far worst. After seeing about 20 hours of vids and playing my 20 hours I have to say, this feature have to go. Yeas, it is feature removal request. ====== From the steam review Skitso copied, I am using a quote: not only cover, but AI also recognise shield angles ! (dont get me wrong, I dont complain on : " AI look into cards I am holding in my hand", that is usual shortcut to program AI, I dont blame you. Programming AI which can handle unknown and foresee possibilities is outside of scope any current game) The problem is, AI is too effective AND rule-set works again player. Which means, the new_maimed_shield_feature which do not cover from sides is abused by AI to kill player. That is soooo toxic combination. I dont know what was the purpose of maim shield, but it backfired. Result is : player feels like intentionally screwed from behind. You know, like, game designer could not come up with some fun gameplay, but has a quota to kill some soldiers. So he come up with a flip-a-coin situation, >>> toss a coin so you die. On top of this, another complain : light armour was useable on shield-carrier, but now never. That is one of the "achievements" of this feature : maimed shields. >>> Light armours are officially noob trap. FIX : 1. revert limited angle shield cover - remove the feature 2. Because of reduced team size, player can no longer afford 2 shields per squad. 2 of 8 would be 1/4 of team carrying shield >> 25% of the team. It reduces firepower too much. ShieldCarrier archetype was build as mostly passive member of the team, which is good only in close fight scenario. But in smaller team, reduced firepower of shield in open fight is too much sacrifice. Therefore, rise firepower of a shield carrier is needed. In smaller team, the Shield Carrier have to be more active. Because each member of a smaller team has higher value. I am asking you reduce shield weight, so he can carry more throw-ables. Current shield weight is 50 units. Keep 50 for the top tier shield. Every lower tier shield cut weight by another 6 units lighter. I think there are 4 tiers, which means 4 x 6=24 is max weight reduction. First shield should weight only 50-24=26 units. Idea is >> strength is rising as soldiers progress, so in every stage of game Shield carrier should afford to carry about the same amount of throw-ables Thanks for your dedication George AI fixes are coming. Shilelds were too good so they needed a nerf. Light armour needs some buff to be a viable choice. (accuracy, TU, throw range...) This is a wrong thread for a balance debate. Edited January 18 by Skitso Quote
fusion-waffle Posted January 18 Posted January 18 (edited) maybe the balance feedback about shields could be clearer if discussed in its own general discussion thread, there doesn't seem to be any changes in v6.30.1 or other recent experimental branch releases related to shield rules / shield balance. The most recent balance change i can see relating to shields is this item described in 6.23.2 stable release from november last year: Quote Xenonaut Shields now only offer 100% protection in the frontal 90-degree arc. Their protection linearly drops off from 100% down to a minimum of 20% as the angle approaches the edges of the frontal 180-degree arc. For what it is worth, during the campaigns i have enjoyed and completed across a variety of difficulty levels (soldier -- commander) in v6.26+, which all used the shield behaviour introduced in 6.23.2, to me the existing behaviour of how shields work seems fair. They are helpful in some situations but not overpowered and have distinct drawbacks. Shields are very helpful when the 90 degree vision cone of shield solder is facing toward incoming fire, but incoming fire outside of that 90 degree cone bypasses shield and hits the soldier -- this seems realistic and fair. You can reduce risk of shield soldier dying by using terrain, hard cover etc to control which direction incoming fire is coming from. Similarly to how you can cheese the aliens by running just outside their 90 degree vision cones to bypass their overwatch and shotgunning them from point blank range, the aliens can cheese you back by sniping your shield carrier from just outside the 90 degree arc of cover it provides. Edited January 18 by fusion-waffle Quote
Skitso Posted January 18 Posted January 18 22 minutes ago, fusion-waffle said: maybe the balance feedback about shields could be clearer if discussed in its own general discussion thread, there doesn't seem to be any changes in v6.30.1 or other recent experimental branch releases related to shield rules / shield balance. The most recent balance change i can see relating to shields is this item described in 6.23.2 stable release from november last year: For what it is worth, during the campaigns i have enjoyed and completed across a variety of difficulty levels (soldier -- commander) in v6.26+, which all used the shield behaviour introduced in 6.23.2, to me the existing behaviour of how shields work seems fair. They are helpful in some situations but not overpowered and have distinct drawbacks. Shields are very helpful when the 90 degree vision cone of shield solder is facing toward incoming fire, but incoming fire outside of that 90 degree cone bypasses shield and hits the soldier -- this seems realistic and fair. You can reduce risk of shield soldier dying by using terrain, hard cover etc to control which direction incoming fire is coming from. Similarly to how you can cheese the aliens by running just outside their 90 degree vision cones to bypass their overwatch and shotgunning them from point blank range, the aliens can cheese you back by sniping your shield carrier from just outside the 90 degree arc of cover it provides. Yeah, I really can't see the issue there. Quote
gG-Unknown Posted January 18 Posted January 18 (edited) 12 hours ago, Skitso said: AI fixes are coming. Shilelds were too good so they needed a nerf. / your statement is based on pudding. It is nice that you didnt deny that problem AI abusing shield narrow angle exists. My concern in balancing is fair play : when I see people abusing overloading soldiers = not fair play, becouse AI is not allowed restock grenades when I see people abusing teleport to make whack-a-mole gem, I ask for solution when I see AI gets aim bonus so high that it can shoot thru smoke, I ask for solution. (commander diff has no longer 130% bonus) when I see AI abusing narrow shield so it murders players deliberately, I ask for solution All Those unfair situations prevent player to dive deep into game world. It is all about emotions. Unfair situations do not help, doesnt matter who benefits. Now, I apreciate your trust in GoldHawk team, but AI improvement whiich could come can not reduce AI abuse by a soft way. Here is why : Developing AI which think similar to human, even on simple game rule-set is nearly impossible. Look at Total War games, they had AI team of at least 20 people, and they worked for 20 years, but their result is tragic. Are they stupid, or uneducated ? No. It is just so hard. Therefore programmers use shortcuts like usage off data which could not know. AI sees all the human soldiers, their equip and curent TU, based on this, an algorithm is able to count a move which is not completely stupid. If you exepct, that GoldHawk develop an AI which will use only the data he actually could see as human, that is not happen. Not in this decade. Therfore, precise flanking and angle abusing should stay as part of x2 AI because it is just small advantage, problem is the ruleset which creates a situation, where human feels fraud and unfair advantage and see death of soldier all at the same time. So ? AI flanking and inhuman precision in finding opportunity stays. There is only 4 months left, to polish game, so guess (hope) that Goldhawk rather than hopeless effort in developing human-like AI will focus at adding features which make game rich and fun and have to be supported by AI. Specially : rise cover bonus when character hug a prop which gives the cover make Servitor act as defensive / healer make Ripers act as pack hunters looking primary for civs implement variable spot range based on target AND weapon soldier holds (this will level up game a lot in many categories, for example Simbiont which are visible from 11 tiles do tiny size offers new situations AND there can be much more Simbionts on map, becouse you dont need to animate them when they are not visible. Variable spot range bring whole new possibilities for Wright camo, and so on... ) implement Psyonic team view and Psionic puppet control rules so Psionics will send civs in kamikaze style against player. Then player receives SERIOUS DILEMA how to handle them. implement Dread aura - (zombies, rippers, terror bomb on terror missions) superb idea which bring a lot gameplay, but AI have to know how to use it Compare impact when a AI programmer put his effort into doable project above OR chasing a holy grail of human like AI. Therfore, I wanted to highlight an issue and give an advice to how to handle it quickly. I hope that Chriss sort things out towards maximum impact, and cut corners where it is possible. Narrow shields are abused by AI, and there is no easy solution. So, it better to remove narrow shield and focus elsewhere. Oh, get notice, the only AI programmer is the same guy who is also Technical director so he have to help others and solve their small issues when they stuck, and also he wants to sleep. As you can see his time can not be wasted willy nilly. Edited January 18 by gG-Unknown Quote
Chris Posted January 19 Author Posted January 19 14 hours ago, gG-Unknown said: It is nice that you didnt deny that problem AI abusing shield narrow angle exists. My concern in balancing is fair play : when I see people abusing overloading soldiers = not fair play, becouse AI is not allowed restock grenades when I see people abusing teleport to make whack-a-mole gem, I ask for solution when I see AI gets aim bonus so high that it can shoot thru smoke, I ask for solution. (commander diff has no longer 130% bonus) when I see AI abusing narrow shield so it murders players deliberately, I ask for solution All Those unfair situations prevent player to dive deep into game world. It is all about emotions. Unfair situations do not help, doesnt matter who benefits. Now, I apreciate your trust in GoldHawk team, but AI improvement whiich could come can not reduce AI abuse by a soft way. Here is why : Developing AI which think similar to human, even on simple game rule-set is nearly impossible. Look at Total War games, they had AI team of at least 20 people, and they worked for 20 years, but their result is tragic. Are they stupid, or uneducated ? No. It is just so hard. Therefore programmers use shortcuts like usage off data which could not know. AI sees all the human soldiers, their equip and curent TU, based on this, an algorithm is able to count a move which is not completely stupid. If you exepct, that GoldHawk develop an AI which will use only the data he actually could see as human, that is not happen. Not in this decade. Therfore, precise flanking and angle abusing should stay as part of x2 AI because it is just small advantage, problem is the ruleset which creates a situation, where human feels fraud and unfair advantage and see death of soldier all at the same time. So ? AI flanking and inhuman precision in finding opportunity stays. There is only 4 months left, to polish game, so guess (hope) that Goldhawk rather than hopeless effort in developing human-like AI will focus at adding features which make game rich and fun and have to be supported by AI. Specially : rise cover bonus when character hug a prop which gives the cover make Servitor act as defensive / healer make Ripers act as pack hunters looking primary for civs implement variable spot range based on target AND weapon soldier holds (this will level up game a lot in many categories, for example Simbiont which are visible from 11 tiles do tiny size offers new situations AND there can be much more Simbionts on map, becouse you dont need to animate them when they are not visible. Variable spot range bring whole new possibilities for Wright camo, and so on... ) implement Psyonic team view and Psionic puppet control rules so Psionics will send civs in kamikaze style against player. Then player receives SERIOUS DILEMA how to handle them. implement Dread aura - (zombies, rippers, terror bomb on terror missions) superb idea which bring a lot gameplay, but AI have to know how to use it Compare impact when a AI programmer put his effort into doable project above OR chasing a holy grail of human like AI. Therfore, I wanted to highlight an issue and give an advice to how to handle it quickly. I hope that Chriss sort things out towards maximum impact, and cut corners where it is possible. Narrow shields are abused by AI, and there is no easy solution. So, it better to remove narrow shield and focus elsewhere. Oh, get notice, the only AI programmer is the same guy who is also Technical director so he have to help others and solve their small issues when they stuck, and also he wants to sleep. As you can see his time can not be wasted willy nilly. The best place for these posts is the balance threads, as others have said. But I think the critical issue here is that you're assuming the AI factors shield angles into its attack calculation, whereas I'm almost positive that it does not. Just like it doesn't avoid shooting at soldiers with heavy armour because it can cause more damage to soldiers with light armour. It can and does calculate where it needs to move to in order to shoot around the terrain cover objects you're hiding behind, but that's a different matter and one I don't think is actually an issue. The bigger problem in your quoted review is the fact the AI doesn't currently differentiate between Xenonauts it has seen and those it should have no knowledge of. If you want to discuss this further, please post about it in the balance thread. Quote
gG-Unknown Posted January 23 Posted January 23 (edited) On 1/19/2026 at 11:49 AM, Chris said: But I think the critical issue here is that you're assuming the AI factors shield angles into its attack calculation, whereas I'm almost positive that it does not. If you want to discuss this further, please post about it in the balance thread. Apparently, AI behave differently than you assume : https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2677714055?t=00h28m34s I will make an post in the balance thread. Shield is (was) signature play style of Xenonauts series which makes it different to other similar games. It would be shame if it fades out. Edited January 23 by gG-Unknown Quote
Chris Posted January 23 Author Posted January 23 35 minutes ago, gG-Unknown said: Apparently, AI behave differently than you assume : https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2677714055?t=00h28m34s I will make an post in the balance thread. Shield is (was) signature play style of Xenonauts series which makes it different to other similar games. It would be shame if it fades out. As I've said, best to discuss this in the balance thread. Feel free to @ me so I see the continuation of the conversation. I'll ask the coders to look into it, but to me what the AI is doing there is breaking line of sight from all the Xenonauts that are looking at it before attacking, because that means it won't take loads of reaction fire after it attacks. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.