Let Us Make A "Little" Money with Manufacturing, It's actually easy to balance.

[200down]

Now that you mention it Mythoes, I've yet to have any REAL money issues with the game but that's likely because I always start in the same spot with 4 countries inside my radius. Not to mention, I've put well over 400 hours into the game and at this point I already know the best way to get started while saving money. Actually if you start in that same area the latest build feels about spot on as far as monthly funding. Not too easy but not too hard ether. But starting anywhere else cuts your funding a bit too much. Especially if you're new to the game sense difficulty levels don't effect pay in any way. Which they should.

It would still be nice to have pricing adjusted a little so manufactured items are worth "something" though. Even though it doesn't really matter in the whole scope of things. It's just feels wrong lol.

[Lorebot]

I just started playing Xenonauts yesterday, but I'm a long time X-Com fan. I was extremely put off when I found that I was unable to supplement my income with production of researched goods. I hope the devs are planning on adjusting that because cash really is in short supply in the game just as it always was in the originals.

I would like to throw a suggestion out there just in case they're paying attention. Of all the X-Com games the economy from Apocalypse made the most sense to me. It ran on supply and demand, the less items there were in circulation the more money you'd get for selling them. But once the market was flooded you'd get very little in return, until eventually you'd lose money on producing items for the purpose of selling them. I'd suggest something similar, though it may require some redesigning of the Sale and Relations mechanics.

The idea is that when selling items you could choose who you're selling them to, like transferring items between bases. Each nation would keep track of what you've sold them and pay you less as their inventories increase. Selling to nations with a low inventory could even improve your relations with them, since they'd obviously be using those items to defend themselves. If you supply nations that aren't covered by a base it could even lead to them defending themselves more readily and cause them to down more alien craft on their own or take care of alien assaults without your help. Though once their stocks reach a certain point you'd stop improving relations and you'd earn less for selling to them, and if you keep selling them stuff they don't need it could even hurt relations. As the nations defend themselves their stocks would reduce naturally over time, they may have the tech but they won't have the training of the Xenonauts soldiers or engineers so they'd inevitably lose items through use and wear.

If you can strike a balance between supply and demand you could find the supplemental income you need along with providing the nations that are outside your coverage with a means to fend for themselves until you have enough funds to build bases in those areas to get them coverage. It could get you a lot of cash in the early game, but late in the game that stream of income would reduce substantially. So you'd get your relief valve for funding without providing a means to make funding trivial at the end of the game.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Lorebot

[DNK]

Adjustable sales costs based on a formula as below would be a good way to keep the profit from exploding into infinity.

BP = base price (original selling price)

BC = base cost (cost to build, plus cost of all alloys/etc required, plus labor/space costs)

US = number of units sold over past 30 days

ST = sales ticker (a modified form of the invasion ticker, so sales can increase proportionally with other costs/needs)

[current sales cost] = BC + (BP-BC) * (ST/(US+ST-1))

Then, just finding a correct multiplier for the invasion ticker and balancing the profits is all that's needed. For example, taking an item with a base profit of about 9% (precision laser in V18) and an ST of about 15, profits drop off fairly quickly after the first 20 units to about half, and then slowly bottom out under 1% after that. This may be too high actually, so reducing the ST to 5 or lower for the start may be necessary, or alternatively just reducing profit margins and keeping a higher ST may work best if you want a smoother drop off.

[Jorboc]

Maybe as far as the Xenonaut funding scale goes, it could just climb a little steeper ramp. As your organization could become more "famous," so to speak, funding nations dole out more cash. It seems close right now, but just a little nudge in the right direction, cash-wise, and bam. I get that 2nd Airbase before it starts raining aliens.

[Mytheos]

The devs have already said that yes the money is tighter than they want, and the economy is being adjusted.

Really the economy isnt as far along as everyone seems to think...note you dont even have monthly maintenance costs yet as they are disabled while they are balancing the economy.

And adding profitable manufacturing isnt going to make balancing the economy easier.

Not to mention there are many reasons this game and XCOM2012 took that system out, its hard to manage, and makes the Funding Nations seem much less important...even if done as small supplemental income, people are going to get lazy about doing missions to progress and the request for Auto Resolve ground combat is going to heat up...*sigh*

[RavenX]

Not to mention there are many reasons this game and XCOM2012 took that system out, its hard to manage,

I'd say it being "hard to manage" is more opinion than fact. I always found it incredibly easy to manage both in OG X-Com and here. I can't believe someone even made a mod to do it for them. Just seems like something extremely lazy to me. It's not like you're micromanaging the work force or something. You click numbers up, you click numbers down, not hard or complicated or even all that time consuming. All you're doing is pushing a ticker. I'm also pretty sure "all" the maintenance isn't disabled, at least for engineers and scientists, as you pay them every month and their upkeep could be considered maintenance. I don't think there's any building maintenance yet though.

XCOM2012 took the manufacture system out because they took a LOT out of the game to make it more appealing for a new generation of gamers. It was a good game sure, but it wasn't "X-Com" to me. It was a dumbed down, watered down, version of X-Com that didn't even have TU's in it. Seriously, how more "Basic" can you get than a "move and shoot" two step phase? I bought Xenonauts because I wanted a experience that was truer to the X-Com experience, which Xenonauts is. Please don't urge them to water this game down too by comparing it to XCOM2012 and the many horrid mistakes that were made with that game. To me it's just another example of "Triple A" devs treating gamers like they're all 15 year old FPS junkies who are too stupid to play strategy games and be any good at them. Jake Solomon's "That's X-Com baby!" sounds more to me like "That's watered down bullshit baby!". I would say that a lot of us who bought Xenonauts did so because we wanted a much more in depth experience than what XCOM2012 provided. If XCOM2012 gave me everything I wanted in a definitive X-Com experience then I wouldn't have needed to spend money on Xenonauts.

The way they're going about balancing costs and production and mission frequency and rewards, if they're only doing it from one place on the planet, then they're doing it extremely wrong. The economy and being able to survive to get other bases up needs to be done No Matter Where the player puts their starting base. I'm American and as such I'm Always going to put my starting base in North or South America. The only time I will place my starting base outside of the Americas would be now when I'm trying to see if I can keep going long enough to get a second base if I start somewhere other than the country of my birth.

When it comes to time with the game and practice, notice my join date. I've been here longer than most of the mods have. I've played every single build of Xenonauts multiple times. Not to mention I'm directly responsible for sending a lot of customers here to buy Xenonauts .

Like I said in the starting post of this thread, I Don't Want it to be "abusable" like it obviously was in OG X-Com. What I would like to see is that if do loose one to many mission or have a catastrophic loss you can make that up by either selling some items you have or devoting some manufacturing time to making money. I do Not want the normal economy to be supplanted by the player being able to make and sell things as that defeats the purpose of even having the funding nation economy.

[RavenX]

And honestly if they balance the economy correctly, then we wouldnt feel the need to make "A little extra Money" with manufacturing.

If they balance the economy that "good" then it sounds to me like it's running its-self and that if the player makes a mistake there's no way to fix it because you either can't make the money back to fix your mistake or you'll have plenty of money laying around so the mistake won't matter. There has to be leeway in the economy for both good and bad. If not then you have a economy that's "on rails" and at that point why have it at all? I don't take losses in combat and I manage to keep almost all my fighters alive during air combat. The only thing keeping me from being able to get a second base up and running is the fact that I put my starting base in the Americas, and that's not right at all. In a game like this where "Player Freedom" plays such a pivotal part in decision making the game needs to account for that freedom or there isn't any player freedom at all. If you don't put your starting base in a certain place you'll loose. If you research things in the wrong order you loose. If you build a second research lab or a second workshop too soon you loose. The game can't be on rails to that extent or it'll be a horrible failure in terms of gameplay because any "wrong decision" will lead to game over. The only real things that should lead to a game over should be having your troops wiped out in almost every mission or loosing too many funding nations. I shouldn't be loosing the game because I'm loosing funding nations because I built my base where I live (which is arguably the most powerful country in the world when the game starts in 1970's).

[Mytheos]

@RaxenX By hard to manage I meant more difficult to balance the economy.

The more sources of income a player has and how varied and random those sources of income are make it harder to balance the economy.

More variables = more difficult.

And as far as the mod goes...

Without = Set Manufacturing, go to geoscope fast forward, BEFORE you run out of money to continue manufacturing, pause the Geoscope. Go sell what you made, go back to Manufacturing, click up a couple of units, go back to Geoscope...rinse and repeat.

With = Set Manufacturing to unlimited, auto sell everything manufactured. Actually play the game.

Otherwise I would sit there and would have to micromanage production like 30 times constantly in between a UFO sighting, which was horrible.

Yeah once you had a few million on hand it wasnt so bad, but when you had 150k and it cost like 120k to make a laser the micromanagement got silly.

[Mytheos]

If they balance the economy that "good" then it sounds to me like it's running its-self and that if the player makes a mistake there's no way to fix it because you either can't make the money back to fix your mistake or you'll have plenty of money laying around so the mistake won't matter. There has to be leeway in the economy for both good and bad. If not then you have a economy that's "on rails" and at that point why have it at all? I don't take losses in combat and I manage to keep almost all my fighters alive during air combat. The only thing keeping me from being able to get a second base up and running is the fact that I put my starting base in the Americas, and that's not right at all. In a game like this where "Player Freedom" plays such a pivotal part in decision making the game needs to account for that freedom or there isn't any player freedom at all. If you don't put your starting base in a certain place you'll loose. If you research things in the wrong order you loose. If you build a second research lab or a second workshop too soon you loose. The game can't be on rails to that extent or it'll be a horrible failure in terms of gameplay because any "wrong decision" will lead to game over. The only real things that should lead to a game over should be having your troops wiped out in almost every mission or loosing too many funding nations. I shouldn't be loosing the game because I'm loosing funding nations because I built my base where I live (which is arguably the most powerful country in the world when the game starts in 1970's).

I understand what you are saying, and the devs have said they are considering advantages for different starting location which might ease some of what you are experiencing.

But it is a tactics game, and learning how to adapt to the situation is part of it. Granted in XCOM94 you damn near had to have the whole process planned out before you even made your first base...

The game however is far from being linear, but does have a few checkpoints along the way that it helps to be prepared for, I personally forgot that Explosives gave me missiles and was having to deal with cruisers having only Alienium missiles. But I learned from my mistake so on my next playthrough it wont be a problem...it it really just made it harder on me for a week and I shot down a few less UFOs, not any kind of a major deal.

Yes if I didnt understand why I was suddenly having SUCH a hard time and how to solve it, I would have failed...but again thats the point of the game.

But generally there is enough flexibility.

Me personally I have 3 bases with 4 full hangers each in January and am having no issues.

Yes you DO have to decide, do I want bases, do I want more engineers, scientists, better equipped soldiers and you cant have it all of course...thusly why it is a tactics game.

If you could do whatever in the Geoscope, and do whatever on ground combat it wouldnt be a tactics game any longer.

I agree XCOM2012 was so linear that you literally had to do x thing on x day or you were screw/couldnt have a perfect game. (On Impossible anyways)

But this game is far from being that critical

Edited July 10, 2013 by Mytheos

[Mytheos]

And you have to understand the devs arent going to make this game impossible to beat.

Every aspect of the game from Air Combat to Ground Combat to Base development "Can" be done perfectly but does not HAVE to be done perfectly to play and make progression, and even beat the game. But the bar is held so high and you do have to play it so well to do so. (And I think that bar is far from unreachable)

If you are struggling you are probably doing something wrong, and restarting and updating your tactics and strategy is quite simply XCOM.

I personally started and said, hey lets pretend this is XCOM, thats a logical starting point right? However I found that I was getting my ass kicked in Air Combat.

So I knew I would need to devote more resource toward more hangers/planes and so forth.

Then I noticed I was having trouble with loosing planes. So I sat there and save/loaded every Air Combat, and yeah it was slightly frustrating at times but after a few hours I learned how to do it successfully, in most cases taking minimal or NO damage at all.

So on my 2nd play through I just zipped through it no problems...and learning how to get to that point is part of the game.

At least thats my personal opinion.

[RavenX]

@RaxenX By hard to manage I meant more difficult to balance the economy.

The more sources of income a player has and how varied and random those sources of income are make it harder to balance the economy.

More variables = more difficult.

And as far as the mod goes...

Without = Set Manufacturing, go to geoscope fast forward, BEFORE you run out of money to continue manufacturing, pause the Geoscope. Go sell what you made, go back to Manufacturing, click up a couple of units, go back to Geoscope...rinse and repeat.

With = Set Manufacturing to unlimited, auto sell everything manufactured. Actually play the game.

Otherwise I would sit there and would have to micromanage production like 30 times constantly in between a UFO sighting, which was horrible.

Yeah once you had a few million on hand it wasnt so bad, but when you had 150k and it cost like 120k to make a laser the micromanagement got silly.

Ahh, I see now. Yes, it did get tedious doing that with small numbers. Doing so every "once in a while" when you needed the cash to build something else, that could be seen as a strategic economic choice. Doing it all the time or in mass numbers (like building a base that specialized in just manufacturing) started to point out where the system in the original was very easily abusable. We all know we don't want it to be abusable. There does need to be some leeway though.

I'm going to start a new game today and see if I can get a second base up and running if I cut down on what I put in my first base. Usually when I start to build a second base I have two research labs and two workshops built in my first base. This time I'll try building my second base (in Europe) without having two labs and workshops in my first base and I'll see if that gives me enough funds.

When they do get around to fully balancing out the economy though they definitely need to take into account that a large portion of the player base is going to put their first base in the Americas somewhere. While I'm sure a significant chunk of players are from outside of the US and that they will probably put their first base in Europe or Asia, the game needs to take all locations into account when it comes to UFO traffic (and hence missions that provide coverage and funding). Some players may put their base in the optimal coverage spot just for logic's sake. If I wanted to play by optimizing my starting location for the most nation coverage I'm sure I wouldn't be having problems getting a second base up and running. I don't feel I should need to "game the system" like that though to get a successful game start. If it's only balanced that way then all the players will end up putting their starting base in the same place every time they start a game and that takes a huge piece of "choice" out of the game. If I was born (or lived) in Europe I'd be putting my starting base there every game and most likely this thread wouldn't be here at all because I wouldn't be having problems with funding.

I still believe the funding issue with putting your starting base in the Americas is directly linked to UFO traffic and mission frequency and not the actual funding levels and mission rewards. If you put your starting base in the Americas then you miss all the UFO traffic going over Europe, Russia and Asia. Not only do you miss the UFOs (which counts against you with the nations they fly over) but you miss the chance to shoot them down and then get the mission rewards. If you start in the Americas your income is limited to what you can see and shoot down which in the Americas is leaving out the rest of the worlds land masses.

Instead of balancing out the economy to fix this it might be better to re-distribute the UFO traffic so there's more traffic where the player puts their first base. This way no matter where the player puts their base, they'll at least have the chance to make enough money to keep the game going. If you start in Europe or Russia or Asia there's a lot more chances to make money than there is if you start in the Americas. Those chances for funding opportunities is what needs to be balanced for other starting locations really, and not so much the economy.

I would urge everyone to try multiple games putting your starting base in different locations and see what happens. It will become really obvious at that point why you fail in some places and not in others.

[RavenX]

Me personally I have 3 bases with 4 full hangers each in January and am having no issues.

I know what you mean with it being about tactics. I'm not bad at tactics or the game. It's just that I'm pointing out you can't successful start if you put your starting base in the Americas.

Just do one thing for me and I think you'll see exactly the problem I'm having. Start a new game and put your starting base in a optimal place in the Americas. I find the place to get the most coverage over the Americas is to put your base near the top of South America.

If you can start there and still end up getting multiple bases up and running then it'll show me there's a problem with something else I'm doing. If you put your starting base and end up not having the money to get another base up and running then you'll see what I mean.

The only ways I can see to fix it so that you can start in the Americas and still get another base up and running is either boost the economy (which will mean you have too much money when you start elsewhere with more UFO traffic), allow the player to make some money if they're missing all the missions across the pond, or to re-distribute UFO traffic so the players starting location is irrelevant and that they have a fair chance no matter where they build their first base.

[Queamin]

As to where to place starting base and income from nations, once they sort out funding then hopefully it will be better, one thing I liked about xcom2012 was that rewards and second wave option to randomized funding just to shake things up and change things around and apart from graphics it was so linear it hurt.

I hope once they balanced funding we will not need to manufacturer just to sell items to make money.

I just started a play through where I build 1 hanger and then start to build 3 foxtrots only until I get my second base up, but I put my second base next door in Russia I think just to see what happens, 3rd base will be build in USA if they not left .

[Mytheos]

@RavenX

I made it to middle of Jan, and I would suggest not putting a 2nd manufacturing or Science lab in your first base at all...or at least only the manufacturing.

I did neither of those until several months later.

You honestly only need a 2nd science lab around the time you are building plasma weapons for your troops...And really only need the extra manufacturing shortly before then as well.

Personally I just build a Medlab and Personal Quarters and then a hanger or 2 off the bat, and try quickly to get 3 Foxtrots out and ready to go...as quickly as I can.

I didnt see a real reward for building a 2nd radar...

I also didnt use any armor until wolf and then just made 2 suits to toss on my heavies.

I also dont use any vehicles.

I made a 2nd base at the end of the first month (Created it and toss in just a radar)

And then as I could afford it, I added a personnel quarters and worked quickly towards 4 hangers.

Of course this is just what I do to handle the game as it is now.

The devs commented that "all you people with so many hangers need to realize maintenance fees arent enabled yet" Which made me cringe as there was no possible way not to have 4-5 hangers in every base.

And depending on what the maintenance was...I'd be screwed or I would have to accept the game was designed to only allow you to shoot down roughly 50% of the UFOs spotted in any given month.

Also I had a Laser defense in my 2nd and 3rd bases...tho only ever had my main base attacked 1 time, so not sure on that really.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Mytheos

[thothkins]

The only ways I can see to fix it so that you can start in the Americas and still get another base up and running is either boost the economy (which will mean you have too much money when you start elsewhere with more UFO traffic), allow the player to make some money if they're missing all the missions across the pond, or to re-distribute UFO traffic so the players starting location is irrelevant and that they have a fair chance no matter where they build their first base.

If there is a funding drop every time there's a mission across such a large landmass, perhaps a solution should be to (behind the scenes) split up the north american landmass, and having missions over say canada matter less to the overall funding for the bloc. Can't recall if mexico is in N America in the new map, but if so, then this too could be adjusted.

[RavenX]

I just started a play through where I build 1 hanger and then start to build 3 foxtrots only until I get my second base up, but I put my second base next door in Russia I think just to see what happens, 3rd base will be build in USA if they not left .

They'll have changed the name to USAlien by then

@RavenX

I made it to middle of Jan, and I would suggest not putting a 2nd manufacturing or Science lab in your first base at all...or at least only the manufacturing.

I did neither of those until several months later.

You honestly only need a 2nd science lab around the time you are building plasma weapons for your troops...And really only need the extra manufacturing shortly before then as well.

Personally I just build a Medlab and Personal Quarters and then a hanger or 2 off the bat, and try quickly to get 3 Foxtrots out and ready to go...as quickly as I can.

I didnt see a real reward for building a 2nd radar...

I also didnt use any armor until wolf and then just made 2 suits to toss on my heavies.

I also dont use any vehicles.

I made a 2nd base at the end of the first month (Created it and toss in just a radar)

And then as I could afford it, I added a personnel quarters and worked quickly towards 4 hangers.

Of course this is just what I do to handle the game as it is now.

I'm probably leaning too heavily into research and equipping my troops then. I haven't tried expanding on a "bare bones" set up. I don't use vehicles either. Always build a med lab and more quarters, completely stock my science lab and workshop. Sometimes I hold off on the second workshop but I always have 2 research labs. I never saw the point of adding another radar either as it didn't seem to affect the detection chance but I think that'll be fixed. I always make 8 of the first armor though to help keep my troops alive. I'll try branching out just a base with a hanger and radar. I think when you build a new base though you have to plan on having hangars and fighters there as soon as the radar is active. If not all the flights you can see but don't intercept will count against you "I think". I don't know if that's been implemented in how the game counts the score against you but I think that's how it's supposed to end up working.

If there is a funding drop every time there's a mission across such a large landmass, perhaps a solution should be to (behind the scenes) split up the north american landmass, and having missions over say canada matter less to the overall funding for the bloc. Can't recall if mexico is in N America in the new map, but if so, then this too could be adjusted.

On the latest map it looks like half of Texas isn't even part of the US lol. That's ok though I know they split the regions up the way they needed to. From what I understand though doesn't it calculate how the nations funding drops by aliens doing missions there? I thought I read somewhere here on the forums that's how that worked. No matter the exact mechanics, what's happening is the rest of the landmass just has far more traffic/missions/ however the game calculates how the funding nation's score drops or counts against you. If you start in the Americas and can't get to UFOs or missions in Russia and Asia then their funding drops so fast I can't get a base over there with fighters so I can't shoot down those UFOs.

On one of the last games I played I managed to get another base up but when I shot down a UFO it was out of the range of my dropship so I couldn't do the mission. I didn't survive long enough to get another hanger built there so I could transfer my troops and dropship over so they could do the mission so I'm still a bit fuzzy on how that'll work. When I get a second base up I'll need to get a dropship and troops over there so they can do the missions.

[Mytheos]

Just on a side note...2 of the 10 Funding Nations for me never dropped or increased, just stayed at +0 the whole time.

One was Australia but I cant remember the other. Could just be happenstance tho..

So needless to say they never ended up with a base to protect them lol, squeaky wheels my friends!

[RavenX]

Just on a side note...2 of the 10 Funding Nations for me never dropped or increased, just stayed at +0 the whole time.

One was Australia but I cant remember the other. Could just be happenstance tho..

So needless to say they never ended up with a base to protect them lol, squeaky wheels my friends!

LoL that's exactly why I couldn't get to that mission. The game I did get my second base up I never had a free hangar to land my dropship there. It was just a radar and 2 fighters. I put it in Russia and when they shot down a UFO my dropship couldn't get there (it would get really close and then turn back). Do you put a squad and dropship at every base or every-other base?

[Mytheos]

@RavenX

I never made another dropship.

I was just starting to get a sense at that point in the game that a 2nd one might be a good idea...I also was working towards getting soldiers into my "other" bases for protection against attacks and trying to arm them.

But I havent yet begun that process as of Jan.

But you really have to have your Spidey-Senses set to very sensitive in this game as by the time it seems like it might be a good idea, its two weeks away from being cripplingly obvious lol.

I have just been going by the assumption so far based on what I have seen, if I didnt need it/do it/ or take advantage of it in XCOM I have a good chance of needing it here.

I played and beat XCOM in superhuman (Patched real superhuman, not loaded a game and now its beginner) but still never defended my bases with Laser/Plasma Batteries...but I imagine they will be an eventual necessity here or at least worth the bother...same with a 2nd dropship.

And I agree with that, if you dont have to use something, why put it in the game? Well optional stuff sure...but I always felt the Batteries were mostly worthless as I'd rather just have soldiers take care of base defense.

I mean hell I had a base that was 100% devoted to Psychic Research, so I have tons of Soldiers with good Psy resistance leftover from my search for several Perfect Psychics

[RavenX]

@RavenX

I never made another dropship.

I was just starting to get a sense at that point in the game that a 2nd one might be a good idea...I also was working towards getting soldiers into my "other" bases for protection against attacks and trying to arm them.

But I havent yet begun that process as of Jan.

But you really have to have your Spidey-Senses set to very sensitive in this game as by the time it seems like it might be a good idea, its two weeks away from being cripplingly obvious lol.

I have just been going by the assumption so far based on what I have seen, if I didnt need it/do it/ or take advantage of it in XCOM I have a good chance of needing it here.

I played and beat XCOM in superhuman (Patched real superhuman, not loaded a game and now its beginner) but still never defended my bases with Laser/Plasma Batteries...but I imagine they will be an eventual necessity here or at least worth the bother...same with a 2nd dropship.

And I agree with that, if you dont have to use something, why put it in the game? Well optional stuff sure...but I always felt the Batteries were mostly worthless as I'd rather just have soldiers take care of base defense.

I mean hell I had a base that was 100% devoted to Psychic Research, so I have tons of Soldiers with good Psy resistance leftover from my search for several Perfect Psychics

Did you get to shoot things down with fighters stationed in your other bases? If so, what did you do with the missions that were out of range, just let them go?

[Mytheos]

@RavenX

Well I started in N. Africa, then I think I had one in Florida, and then in China.

I never had a mission out of range but once I think, and yes I just let it go.

But honestly I cant remember for sure...I dont get the impression I ever let a mission go except in the situation I had two in opposite directions and there was no possible way to do both.

That was after having 3 bases tho...and that was the time I started getting a sense that a 2nd drop ship would be useful...I was also training backup soldiers as well...for redundancy, and to send to protect my bases.

I really cant say if it IS worth it, but I imagine having a 2nd team couldnt hurt and would be a better way to train your soldiers and maximize your gains.

But I have to believe that shooting something down in China and another something down in the US, is going to require one or the other to have its own dropship...

But maybe upgraded Chinhooks remove that need?

(I am not sure the game has upgraded dropships tho, I guess I just assumed it would)

Edited July 10, 2013 by Mytheos

[RavenX]

(I am not sure the game has upgraded dropships tho, I guess I just assumed it would)

There's at least one upgrade for the dropship, yes, I'm just not sure what it's stats are as far as speed and range.

[Revoke]

Hi,

I recently purchased and am loving the game so far although it has a few issues this being 1 of them and yea it will be balanced soon, but my gripe is, what happened to freedom and a good old sandbox game.

What i liked about the original was the ability to make a profit from good planning!. A manufacturing base is not an exploit. The challenge should be the air/ground combat. Anyone apart from a total xcom noob should be able to build a 2nd base with relative ease and as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, in this sort of situation money wouldn't be a problem.

For me the beauty of most of the xcom games is the feeling of being in control of an organisation, not a tiny squad of soldiers. The more options and depth the better.

[Revoke]

@RavenX

Well I started in N. Africa, then I think I had one in Florida, and then in China.

I never had a mission out of range but once I think, and yes I just let it go.

But honestly I cant remember for sure...I dont get the impression I ever let a mission go except in the situation I had two in opposite directions and there was no possible way to do both.

That was after having 3 bases tho...and that was the time I started getting a sense that a 2nd drop ship would be useful...I was also training backup soldiers as well...for redundancy, and to send to protect my bases.

I really cant say if it IS worth it, but I imagine having a 2nd team couldnt hurt and would be a better way to train your soldiers and maximize your gains.

But I have to believe that shooting something down in China and another something down in the US, is going to require one or the other to have its own dropship...

But maybe upgraded Chinhooks remove that need?

(I am not sure the game has upgraded dropships tho, I guess I just assumed it would)

If your still using Chinooks by the time you have 3 bases you should have to build 3 minimum in my opinion to cover the globe even with engine enhancements if available. Of course when you research and have the first dropship you could maybe cover half the planet. Then with the final Avenger type the whole planet. That being said if it was too focused on making you build bases its removing your freedom of choice and forcing you down a certain route.

I also cant resist to comment your earlier post about removing the base defence, why not just add a small range around your base within which if the enemy enter, your defences engage(or it gives you an option, it may help giving your location away when your not ready). Depending on damage amount/size of craft you have a chance of it crash landing/missing/completely obliterating it so you can then proceed on a possible recovery mission. If your base is well laid out to defend the entrances you may prefer to let the enemy in than take on an unknown layout of a crash site.

With the original back in the 90's i had a friend who finished the game then at a later replay built around 20 bases consisting of OP's manufacturing and psi training facilities just for the hell of it.

Options and freedom are key to letting everyone enjoy the game how they want to play. Surely that's part of the beauty of the original game, not just the awesome gameplay.