Supporter mechanic needs more back and forth play (DLC)

[Skitso]

Supporter system needs more back and forth play. Currently, as soon as we've recruited a supporter, it's there for the rest of the game and it makes the system too linear and boring. There's one common complaint: mission variety drops after phase 1. Here's my proposal (for DLC):

Every now and then, aliens commence an operation to kill our supporters. The operation consists of a group of 2-3 simultaneous missions that are available for only 12 hours. Each failed mission means a lost supporter. Used mission types could be repurposed escort VIP missions or new wave based defence missions. The idea is that you'd really struggle to complete all the 2 or 3 simultaneous missions and need to think which supporters are most expendable.

[Skitso]

Speaking of supporters and making the system more organic:

• Supporter status (wether they are isolated or guarded) should be more dynamic (instead of random). System could be tied to the region panic level (higher panic, more guarded supporters). Current fixed cycle feels too rigid and the randomness of the status artificial.
• The amount of infiltrators spawned could be tied (at least partially) to region panic instead of solely on random UFO activity. So UFOs and alien bases raise region panic -> higher region panic increases additional infiltrator spawn chance.
• Supporter elimination missions mentioned in the first post could also spawn more in high panic regions (panic level 50+) or in regions with active alien bases

 

• Current region panic level could also provide a negative multiplier for supporter bonuses. So for example a region that is on a brink of total collapse, supporters shouldn't act with 100% efficiency. 

Like this:

Panic 0-49: no negative effect
Panic 50-59: -10% supporter efficiency
Panic 60-79: -25% supporter efficiency
Panic 80-89: -50% supporter efficiency
Panic 90-100: Region supporters flee and provide no bonuses (recruiting is also disabled)

Edited March 27 by Skitso

[fusion-waffle]

7 hours ago, Skitso said:

Every now and then, aliens commence an operation to kill our supporters. The operation consists of a group of 2-3 simultaneous missions that are available for only 12 hours. Each failed mission means a lost supporter. Used mission types could be repurposed escort VIP missions or new wave based defence missions. The idea is that you'd really struggle to complete all the 2 or 3 simultaneous missions and need to think which supporters are most expendable.

I like this idea.

A few misc thoughts:

• if these "eliminate xenonaut supporters" events happened during phase 1, there'd be a significant chance it'd result in an immediate campaign loss (OP economy is tight & doomsday pressure is sometimes very high during phase 1). but, there's already enough going on during phase 1. maybe these missions start showing up from phase 2 or from phase 3 onward
• i like the multiple simultaneous missions idea as a way to force players to prioritise/really stretch fighting back to back tactical battles
• some players say that compared to the variety offered in phase 1, the missions become repetitive during the midgame - crash site, crash site, terror site, crash site.  this is one way to increase variety
• the benefit offered by some supporters is quite low & takes a long time to accumulate. E.g. those operation supporters that give you +1 OP per day, if bought at a discounted cost of 105 OP, take 105 days (about 1/3 of a campaign) for the investment to break even & start to generate a return. If there's a fair chance you can lose supporters, it may make less sense to recruit them in the first place & instead spend the OPs on something else ($500k+ for 100 OP is often fairly attractive!)
• escort VIP mission could be repurposed, but would need to be repopulated with appropriate enemy types (cleaners on day 250? nah. how about, protect VIP from a dozen cyberdrones)

 

Edited March 27 by fusion-waffle

[Skitso]

1 hour ago, fusion-waffle said:

I like this idea.

A few misc thoughts:

• if these "eliminate xenonaut supporters" events happened during phase 1, there'd be a significant chance it'd result in an immediate campaign loss (OP economy is tight & doomsday pressure is sometimes very high during phase 1). but, there's already enough going on during phase 1. maybe these missions start showing up from phase 2 or from phase 3 onward
• i like the multiple simultaneous missions idea as a way to force players to prioritise/really stretch fighting back to back tactical battles
• some players say that compared to the variety offered in phase 1, the missions become repetitive during the midgame - crash site, crash site, terror site, crash site.  this is one way to increase variety
• the benefit offered by some supporters is quite low & takes a long time to accumulate. E.g. those operation supporters that give you +1 OP per day, if bought at a discounted cost of 105 OP, take 105 days (about 1/3 of a campaign) for the investment to break even & start to generate a return. If there's a fair chance you can lose supporters, it may make less sense to recruit them in the first place & instead spend the OPs on something else ($500k+ for 100 OP is often fairly attractive!)
• escort VIP mission could be repurposed, but would need to be repopulated with appropriate enemy types (cleaners on day 250? nah. how about, protect VIP from a dozen cyberdrones)

 

Yeah, of course these missions would start only in phase 2 forward (and maybe only as panic levels are suitably high in said region).

Escort missions should naturally be repurposed in mechanics only. Maps should probably be urban (western/soviet) with appropriate enemies.

[fusion-waffle]

19 minutes ago, Skitso said:

Yeah, of course these missions would start only in phase 2 forward (and maybe only as panic levels are suitably high in said region).

Maybe they could even wait until phase 3.  Phase 2 is distinct enough from phase 1 that the mission structure may not feel repetitive yet, & players won't have recruited that many supporters, so it'll still feel somewhat "dynamic" if they are naturally adding them & not losing any (like in the current game).  Also less punishing to lose a supporter toward the later stages of a campaign.

Edited March 27 by fusion-waffle