so I just flew over a field in a chinook and I have no idea where the nearest...

[wcanyon]

flying saucer is? Hmm, that don't seem quite right.

I propose that the any part of the map that would be visible from the air is revealed (but fogged) when the combat session starts. Makes a lot more sense. At the very least it seems like I'd know what direction the saucer is in.

[ChaseBears]

The blacked out maps are kind of traditional in X-Com. After a while, you know vaguely where the UFO is anyway, once you've determined the borders of the map - it's in the direction the map lets you go.

(Of course, that means there's really no downside to letting players know where the UFO is... but w/e.

[Name]

NO you see comon misconception. The chinook does not fly. It drives and boats.

In seriousness. It is a balance descion you are not th e first to complain no one else has made any progress in swaying chris but your welcome t try.

[GizmoGomez]

Actually, there is a downside to letting the player know where the UFO is.

Because one win-objective is to capture and hold the UFO for 5 turns, letting them know where the UFO is could encourage the player to simply bum-rush the UFO and try to capture it as fast as possible, instead of progressing through the map like I would expect a competent commander would do; carefully, slowly, avoiding big risks unless you have a decent chance of reward.

However, that being said, rushing the UFO and leaving all the aliens outside alone will have some nasty consequences that will bite the player in the rear. Namely, once you start attacking the UFO, the aliens outside will come at you and try to take back the UFO, forcing you to defend it. This will be especially interesting once alien grenades show up, since they're sure to be powerful and you have to have your guys bunched up in a group by virtue of the reduced space for maneuvering inside a room.

[wcanyon]

I'm picturing a Chinook touching down.

Sarge: all right men, move out!

Private: which way's the UFO?

Sarge: ....

-------------

I'm just saying it's a ridiculous bit of "gameplay over logic".

[GizmoGomez]

Well, imagine it more like, they flew in low and fast, and since the Chinook doesn't have windows, they couldn't have seen exactly where the UFO is.

The issue has been debated a LOT, actually, and it seems (and I agree) that the best way to make the game fun and tension-filled is to leave the map blacked out until you explore it. It's turned out that "Gameplay is more important than realism" is kind of the motto more often than not.

[ThunderGr]

In my opinion, the location of the UFO could be known and still have a great gameplay, since the aliens are not going to wait for you in the UFO but will be setting ambushes all over the place. I do not have any problems with either approach, although I would prefer the most realistic one, if possible.

[wcanyon]

I agree with ThunderGr. Just because you know where the downed UFO is doesn't mean anything about knowing where the aliens are. Heck by this point they've had 1-23 hrs to hide.

http://www.enemyforces.net/helicopters/ch47_chinook.jpg

Doesn't have windows? What.

[GizmoGomez]

That's the standard configuration. Can your troops look out of the sides of the chopper during ground battles? No? Didn't think so.

EDIT:

If that came across as rude I apologize.

[wcanyon]

Rude? No. Desperate? Maybe

[RawCode]

there is completely no reason to hide UFO location from player, it serve no purpuse, just delay player.

Gameplay is more important than realism

total bull shit, there are 16 (or not) maps, UFO locations are static, player can memorize every map and navigate directly to UFO, soo game just punish players who cant of dont want to memorize maps.

gameplay? stupidity!

[Max_Caine]

Your comment is correct in the context of a developer more interested in fixing bugs, balance and functionality. If Goldhawk insteaded focussed all their attention on maps and adds both Y number of Goldhawk maps prior to release and Z^C number of community maps from the mapping community, does that make it so easy to memorise them?

[RawCode]

you can't decide how player MUST play single player sandbox game.

there is excuse to force players to performe routine completely boring actions just becouse you want game played that way, this decision up to players.

[Gauddlike]

You say the game punishes players who don't want to memorise the maps but I think you have it backwards.

Players who set out to memorise the maps will be giving themselves an artificial advantage not intended by the game.

Players who do not memorise the maps (or cannot as is likely when the full amount of maps are present) are playing the game as it is intended by the devs.

In the same way some players will carry exactly enough equipment to gain strength every mission and will run twice round the Chinook to guarantee AP gains and shoot pistols at disarmed enemies to gain accuracy.

They will be giving themselves an additional bonus but that does not mean that the game is penalising anyone who does not do this.

Following the logic of the suggestion to remove the shroud so everyone has the same boring experience then removing stat gains would appear to be the ideal way to fix this situation.

Removing features to make the game blander is a poor way to counter any perceived problem.

I would suggest adding more maps with more randomisation of starting location and UFO spawn as a better option.

Possibly having the later dropships illuminate a larger area at the start of a mission to help counteract the larger maps might be an advantage.

you can't decide how player MUST play single player sandbox game.

there is excuse to force players to performe routine completely boring actions just becouse you want game played that way, this decision up to players.

Giving the player the exact location of their objective at the start of the mission removes the exploration element and the single best tactic becomes moving directly towards that spot on the map with every soldier.

That is far more routine and boring to me than needing to explore the surroundings with small fire teams in order to locate and eliminate the enemy.

Edited June 29, 2013 by Gauddlike

[Max_Caine]

That's an interesting resonse, RawCode. Doesn't answer my question, but an interesting response, nontheless.

[ThunderGr]

In the same way some players will carry exactly enough equipment to gain strength every mission and will run twice round the Chinook to guarantee AP gains and shoot pistols at disarmed enemies to gain accuracy.

They will be giving themselves an additional bonus but that does not mean that the game is penalising anyone who does not do this.

Following the logic of the suggestion to remove the shroud so everyone has the same boring experience then removing stat gains would appear to be the ideal way to fix this situation.

Placing turn limit for accomplishing missions could rectify that.

Removing features to make the game blander is a poor way to counter any perceived problem.

I would suggest adding more maps with more randomisation of starting location and UFO spawn as a better option.

Picking starting location(like the UFO series) and randomization of UFO spawn sounds good.

Possibly having the later dropships illuminate a larger area at the start of a mission to help counteract the larger maps might be an advantage.

I am in favor of FOW without shroud. This is Earth. We know every inch of it. We just don't know the location of movable objects at the specific time of the mission(like aliens, civilians and any vehicles).

Giving the player the exact location of their objective at the start of the mission removes the exploration element and the single best tactic becomes moving directly towards that spot on the map with every soldier.

That is far more routine and boring to me than needing to explore the surroundings with small fire teams in order to locate and eliminate the enemy.

It is, actually, the realistic approach. In my opinion, failing to eliminate all aliens should lead to the death of all existing civilians on the map and less points for the player. Securing the UFO is the primary objective but eliminating the aliens is also important, or else you leave enemies behind that will cause trouble. This would give incentive to the players so that they search the rest of the map but not compel them to do so. Especially useful in situations that the aliens are strong but you manage to keep the UFO for 5 turns. It would give a greater depth to the game, IMHO and it would eliminate the problem that you have pointed out.

[RawCode]

Giving the player the exact location of their objective

devs shoud remove radar and any type of UFO detection, they give player exact location of their objective!

player shoud constantly send interceptors at random direction to explore airspace around!

Making game slow and boring just to expand player expirience is joke.

Player shoud make decision about how he want to play, if player forced to play in predefined way, nothing good will happen.

Just imagine:

UFO location highlighted from the start, when you start you already know where it is.

You can navigate directly to it, capture and skip 5 turns, if you want to play this way, its YOUR decision, you will not be punished for it, you will get UFO and pass mission ASAP.

You can explore area for alliens for XP and loot, its YOUR decision, but you not forced to do it, you just trade your time to gameplay money.

You can explore area for allien artefacts - something can be dropped from UFO and lay around map, but this completely random and not worth effort, but you still can try.

Some other points of interest can be placed on map, that can be explored by player, but only if player want to explore.

Currently:

You MUST explore fo finish mission, no options, no decision, you simply MUST.

same boring experience

XP shoud be gained only from allien kills, decision to seach for alliens around shoud be up to player.

That is far more routine and boring to me than needing to explore the surroundings with small fire teams in order to locate and eliminate the enemy.

If you know exact location of UFO, you still can explore, but when you dont know location, you MUST explore.

[Name]

I am in favor of FOW without shroud. This is Earth. We know every inch of it. We just don't know the location of movable objects at the specific time of the mission(like aliens, civilians and any vehicles).

But we don't know every inch of earth. And assuming we do have maps of all the random farms and building clusters across the world would the xenonauts be able to get maps midflight.

[ThunderGr]

But we don't know every inch of earth. And assuming we do have maps of all the random farms and building clusters across the world would the xenonauts be able to get maps midflight.

Satellites.

[ThunderGr]

devs shoud remove radar and any type of UFO detection, they give player exact location of their objective!

player shoud constantly send interceptors at random direction to explore airspace around!

Nicely put. LOL.

Just imagine:

UFO location highlighted from the start, when you start you already know where it is.

You can navigate directly to it, capture and skip 5 turns, if you want to play this way, its YOUR decision, you will not be punished for it, you will get UFO and pass mission ASAP.

Having to gain less points than if you had cleared all aliens is not punishment, is a realistic consequence for the reasons I have mentioned. And enhances gameplay experience without forcing. It is the player's decision what he wants/can do under the current conditions.

You can explore area for alliens for XP and loot, its YOUR decision, but you not forced to do it, you just trade your time to gameplay money.

Hm...XP and loot? We are under time pressure here...sounds like a waste of time . There should be a reason for urgency, IMHO.

You can explore area for allien artefacts - something can be dropped from UFO and lay around map, but this completely random and not worth effort, but you still can try.

Some other points of interest can be placed on map, that can be explored by player, but only if player want to explore.

These sound interesting.

[Aufklarer]

Because one win-objective is to capture and hold the UFO for 5 turns, letting them know where the UFO is could encourage the player to simply bum-rush the UFO and try to capture it as fast as possible

Namely, once you start attacking the UFO, the aliens outside will come at you and try to take back the UFO, forcing you to defend it.

That's the HOLD part you mentioned.

[Borsek]

Why not just add a 'fog of war on/off' option - button at the setup of the game? Kinda makes all this bickering about what's right and wrong seem silly. Give the player a choice, it's obvious some people would prefer to see the terrain.

[RawCode]

its issue for many many projects, obvious issue that can be fixed in minutes but ignored for years, Fallen Enchantress have similar issues with bugs and suggestions ignored for more then year for no reason.

[Name]

Satellites.

No. One of the first satellites "capable" of this would be the Corona. And that ejected containers with photos from space to the atmosphere. By the time the photo was collected the mission would be over.

Does any one know the capabilities of spy satellites during the 80s

And I assume the aliens would have gotten rid of the space junk (including satellites) that were in the way to entering our beloved atmoshpere.

[RawCode]

photo can be taken from chinook...

but no, chinook have no windows and release metanol gas to blind everyone inside...