Geoscape Balance Discussion v19 Experimental Build 3

[Aaron]

Though there haven't been many major changes to the Geoscape and Air Combat balance since the last experimental build, I think the introduction of the interceptor recovery is probably a big enough change to warrant a new thread to discuss it and its consequences. There have also been some tweaks aside from that - percentage based repair/refuelling for interceptors, and extra fuel for aircraft missiles.

So let's get down to business.

[lightgemini]

Sorry, not a balance reort just a question. After looking at files I see were to modify the recovery time for aircraft lost, but no way to disable it. Will be it possible in a future?

[smoitessier]

Off the top of my head, if retrieving and aircraft takes 72 hours, I wonder if there will be an option not to retrieve ACs which are fast to build in the mid-late game like the mig. I should be optional if you can build one probably under 48 hours with a few workshops.

[ThunderGr]

I, also, think that the retrieval should be optional. The player should be asked whether they want to attempt and retrieve the damaged craft or not. It would be more interesting if the crafts would have a chance of being recoverable, to begin with, instead of being always recoverable.

[lightgemini]

Off the top of my head, if retrieving and aircraft takes 72 hours, I wonder if there will be an option not to retrieve ACs which are fast to build in the mid-late game like the mig. I should be optional if you can build one probably under 48 hours with a few workshops.

Thats easy. Decomision the plane being retrieved and build a new one in the now available slot.

Wich is equal to:

-Tech: Commander, work for retrieval of the last downed fighter is underway.

-Commander: The old pea shooter? forget about it we will buid a new one.

-Tech: The pilot is still there with the plane, commander.

-Commander: Who cares? I dont even know whats his name. Forget him too.

Edited July 5, 2013 by lightgemini

[smoitessier]

Not so easy, that is 4 clicks to navigate to the hangar and decommissioning it

[Andeerz]

Interceptor recovery? Really?

[Gordon]

No...damn...Interceptor...immortality

[smoitessier]

Not sure if this is the right place to bring this up, but

What if friendly nations could offer you free planes once in a while? Sometimes after you suffer heavy losses, perhaps.

On a related note, what if we could get 'brownie' points with countries, but would need new air combats such as friendly nation aircraft asking for assistance however improbable the chance that he would be still flying when you get there, then you get to have a chance that pilot will defect and come land at your base if you authorized it.

[thothkins]

What if friendly nations could offer you free planes once in a while? Sometimes after you suffer heavy losses, perhaps.

Just posted up thoughts on such a thing here.

[WalrusJones]

Why not make a plane recovery an actual mission:

Sometimes, you will see no resistance.

Sometimes, the ship that downed you is the resistance.

Sometimes, local forces will want your advanced tech planes in the late phases of the invasion, and you will need to fight fellow humans.

[GizmoGomez]

Eh, that would further complicate things. Plus, you'd have to get sprites for pilots, and tiles and such for all of the interceptors in the game, which would add a ton of work for the devs.

I have an idea for fixing the indestructible interceptor crisis, here's the link:

http://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/showthread.php/6250-Alternative-Mechanic-to-Indestructible-Interceptors-Designed-to-Please-Everyone

[RawCode]

mindless desire to overcomplicate game is bad thing leading nowhere.

gameplay MUST be simple, if figher lost in combat, it shoud just teleport to it's hangar with negative health (yes yes it shoud display something like -321% health) and stay here till rapaired, with option to pay full cost and get new plane, in case when player have money and dont want to wait longer then order arrive time.

for "hardcore" gamers, veteran shoud feature -300% and insane -200% complete destruction threshold, if fighter reach such damage - it destoyed completely.

everyone will be happy and player on normal and easy wont have a chance to fail completely on first 3fighter UFO wing.

[Dranak]

I think the devs need to decide what they want air combat to be. Right now it's a hugely important minigame that once you figure out, you should never lose (this is pretty much normal for all mini-games). IMO they either need to do something to make it less of a make or break element, or add a lot more depth to it.

[Andeerz]

I find the idea of aircraft recovery to be ridiculous from a game setting and game-feel standpoint. It would make sense for a few parts from more advanced craft made of stronger materials to have a chance to be salvageable following a crash, but having the whole thing recoverable is just plain absurd and really draws attention to the fact that this is a bandaid that only treats a symptom and not the causes of imbalanced gameplay. It's not an abstraction that makes sense; it's a poor game design choice that really makes the setting and the things the game tries to represent all the less believable and immersive. I hope I am making sense here... And if the air combat cannot be salvaged without making poor game design choices (and I'm NOT saying it's to that point... yet...), then I suggest that that entire aspect of the game be entirely redone from scratch. Is it truly impossible for the current problems to be addressed with changing funding from member nations, the costs of individual aircraft, and altering the pacing of the invasion?

[RawCode]

Andeerz

allien aircraft that always survive crash landing with some crew always alive and always resist xenonauts not ridiculos?

realism not option for sci-fi game

[Aaron]

I think I have said this before, but to be clear - we have decided what we want the air combat to be: less important. Before this change it was a part of the game that was not really fun once the novelty wore off, yet it was incredibly punishing for the player to lose even one air mission. That had to change, and in a way that did not complicate things further than they had to be.

The arguments from the point of view of realism don't take into account that there are lots of other even less realistic things going on in this game than recovering and repairing a crashed interceptor; how can you be so worked up about this when, for example, soldiers in the ground combat can only see a few dozen meters in broad daylight? Or the aliens don't just bombard the Xenonauts base from space? If this really is the last straw that broke you suspension of disbelief in the Xenonauts fiction I am sorry it did so, but I suspect that may not be as true as some of you are saying.

Believe me guys, if a complete re-write of the air combat system were on the table I would absolutely love to do that and produce an air combat system that fits into the game better - but our resources are far from infinite, it would be hugely reckless for us to start ripping out deeply rooted systems at this stage and adding many months onto development.

[StellarRat]

I think I have said this before, but to be clear - we have decided what we want the air combat to be: less important. Before this change it was a part of the game that was not really fun once the novelty wore off, yet it was incredibly punishing for the player to lose even one air mission. That had to change, and in a way that did not complicate things further than they had to be.

The arguments from the point of view of realism don't take into account that there are lots of other even less realistic things going on in this game than recovering and repairing a crashed interceptor; how can you be so worked up about this when, for example, soldiers in the ground combat can only see a few dozen meters in broad daylight? Or the aliens don't just bombard the Xenonauts base from space? If this really is the last straw that broke you suspension of disbelief in the Xenonauts fiction I am sorry it did so, but I suspect that may not be as true as some of you are saying.

Believe me guys, if a complete re-write of the air combat system were on the table I would absolutely love to do that and produce an air combat system that fits into the game better - but our resources are far from infinite, it would be hugely reckless for us to start ripping out deeply rooted systems at this stage and adding many months onto development.

Can we compromise on this? I have an idea that might satisfy all parties.

Why not make any aircraft or vehicles that use alien technology recoverable?

So, your Condors and Mig-32's can die and the Hunter too, but higher level stuff (the stuff that takes and lot of time and money) can always be recovered along with any permanently attached alien tech weapons (Gatling lasers, lasers turrets, plasma stuff, etc...) Obviously, the alien alloys are very tough since their ships can survive being shot down, so anything the Xenonauts build with the same technology should be equally as tough. If you write that in the descriptions I think most people will accept the change as it fits into the story line smoothly. Not to mention, it adds a nice perk for getting alien tech into your equipment. I think the balance issues with the Condor and Mig-32 were fixed when you lowered their prices, so there is no need to make them indestructible at this point and it is VERY difficult to believe they could be indestructible. I have no problem believing the low prices either as I just assume they are "donated" planes with some electronics upgrades, not a whole new airframe.

Also, just as a side note, I'm a bit curious about why you decided air combat should be less important. Did you take a poll of the alpha/beta players to see what they wanted? I like the AC part of the game and especially like how you have made it much more interactive than the original game. To me it is one of the improvements that I truly enjoy. I can't be the only one that feels that way.

Edited July 8, 2013 by StellarRat

[GizmoGomez]

Can we compromise on this? I have an idea that might satisfy all parties.

Why not make any aircraft or vehicles that use alien technology recoverable?

So, your Condors and Mig-32's can die and the Hunter too, but higher level stuff (the stuff that takes and lot of time and money) can always be recovered along with any permanently attached alien tech weapons (Gatling lasers, lasers turrets, plasma stuff, etc...) Obviously, the alien alloys are very tough since their ships can survive being shot down, so anything the Xenonauts build with the same technology should be equally as tough. If you write that in the descriptions I think most people will accept the change as it fits into the story line smoothly. Not to mention, it adds a nice perk for getting alien tech into your equipment. I think the balance issues with the Condor and Mig-32 were fixed when you lowered their prices, so there is no need to make them indestructible at this point and it is VERY difficult to believe they could be indestructible. I have no problem believing the low prices either as I just assume they are "donated" planes with some electronics upgrades, not a whole new airframe.

StellarRat, you are a genius.

I love this idea! It still fixes the developer's concern about aircraft being too important by not changing anything, but it brings the "realism" back into play by making the non-alloy planes not immortal. I can totally see the corsair and onwards being mostly intact when crashing into the ground; the pilot would definitely die if he/she were still in there, though. (Perhaps we can say in the research description describing the recovery process that either a) the pilots will eject and parachute down next to their plane, or b) the pilots all die, but at least the expensive alien technology isn't wasted (much more morbid. Is the head scientist that dark?)).

The Condor and Migs would have to be pretty inexpensive, and that makes sense. Really, we should be getting the main bulk of the aircraft for free (like the ballistics weapons), and just adding our own armor and avionics systems.

I like this idea especially since it just might make it into the game, since it's basically exactly what the developers are doing; it just doesn't apply to the weak, throwaway aircraft that has no alien tech in them.

Also, @Aaron, I appreciate all the hard work you and the other developers have put into the system, and I understand more fully your motives for the change. I don't want you guys to think we're being unappreciative; thank you for making such a great game!

[StellarRat]

StellarRat, you are a genius.

To be honest RavenX posted this exact idea at almost the same time as I did although I came up with it independently from him. Also, my IQ is only 120 something. So although, RavenX and I may appear to be Newton and Leibniz we probably aren't.

Personally, I like the idea of having alien stuff recoverable, including vehicles and even potentially personal armor and infantry weapons (they are very expensive at the higher levels too), but I think the just having the planes and vehicles recoverable is good enough and probably solves most of the problem. The only way to know is to try it.

I actually wouldn't have a problem with Condors being "free" even. To me they are just F-16s with souped up engines. Over 4500 have been built to date. It's not like they're hard to find.

Edited July 8, 2013 by StellarRat

[smoitessier]

I don't think air combat as it is now is boring or repetitive when we get to fight different ships all the times, it was one of the features that rocked the most for me.

The only thing boring about air battles is the waiting period when you disengage and have to wait 30 sec to escape sometimes, I wonder if the afterburners speed could be sped up x2, would that be jarring to most players?

As for recoverable high tech fighters, and not Earth tech stuff, Yeah I guess if the GH can't find an easy (cheap) way to make it work, this would be a good compromise.

[StellarRat]

I don't think air combat as it is now is boring or repetitive when we get to fight different ships all the times, it was one of the features that rocked the most for me.

The only thing boring about air battles is the waiting period when you disengage and have to wait 30 sec to escape sometimes, I wonder if the afterburners speed could be sped up x2, would that be jarring to most players?

As for recoverable high tech fighters, and not Earth tech stuff, Yeah I guess if the GH can't find an easy (cheap) way to make it work, this would be a good compromise.

2x afterburners are combat advantage too though, I think it will make AC easier in general.

[GizmoGomez]

Yeah, really. Condors should be free (and arrive in 3 days, which I think they already do, but just making sure) and Migs should be much cheaper, and should be able to be made in, say, five days.

The balance issue here is that then the Mig, which is useful throughout the game, is now the only plane that consistently takes up workshop time. All of the others would not require workshop time to be repaired/replaced (condor) after a lost battle. A Mig would require workshop hours to replace, though, making it off-balance. Perhaps making the Mig should take a lot less time? Or maybe after a certain amount of time, the Mig can be simply supplied by the funding nations for free as well? Or could it be supplied from the start as a funding nation plane?

The main issue is that the Mig stands alone as an outlier; all of the others would recover and repair, or simply be purchased/ordered (if free) again.

[StellarRat]

The balance issue here is that then the Mig, which is useful throughout the game, is now the only plane that consistently takes up workshop time. All of the others would not require workshop time to be repaired/replaced (condor) after a lost battle. A Mig would require workshop hours to replace, though, making it off-balance. Perhaps making the Mig should take a lot less time?

I think cost is OK, perhaps the time to modify the airframe (workshop time) could be reduced further. Right now, it seems OK, but it wouldn't hurt to make it require less hours. Also, couldn't we just have Mig "black boxes" sitting on the shelf ahead of time? You could build them like the advanced aircraft weapons (Gatling Laser, etc...) and store them until a plane arrives. Then you would just pay for a Mig airframe and if you had the parts on hand it could be ready in hours instead of days. Edited July 9, 2013 by StellarRat

[Andeerz]

Andeerz

allien aircraft that always survive crash landing with some crew always alive and always resist xenonauts not ridiculos?

realism not option for sci-fi game

The arguments from the point of view of realism don't take into account that there are lots of other even less realistic things going on in this game than recovering and repairing a crashed interceptor; how can you be so worked up about this when, for example, soldiers in the ground combat can only see a few dozen meters in broad daylight? Or the aliens don't just bombard the Xenonauts base from space? If this really is the last straw that broke you suspension of disbelief in the Xenonauts fiction I am sorry it did so, but I suspect that may not be as true as some of you are saying.

Perhaps realism isn't the word I should have used. Regardless of whether or not realism is an option in a work of science fiction, verisimilitude sure as heck is. If what happens in the game does not make sense (not necessarily being realistic) within the universe of the game setting, then it breaks immersion and makes the effort put into making the setting compelling, at least in the way this game does, a waste. And with regard to alien ships crash landing; those ships aren't going back up. Also, they are made of ridiculous alien magic materials, so them not being completely obliterated upon crashing makes sense within the setting of the game. An F-16 (or 17) made of human derived materials surviving a crash in such a way as to be serviceable afterwards does not; it makes the threat of the aliens seem way less pressing and dangerous. Regardless, what I have a big problem with is that I feel there are much better ways to balance this without sacrificing verisimilitude and making it seem like the game is blatantly holding your hand.

Oh, and at least this person who argues from the point of view of realism sure as heck is not just worked up about this. I am most certainly worked up about limited sight range etc., and not necessarily because it is unrealistic, but because I think it is a crappy feature of the original xcom as well as this game and its ilk (though these games are fun IN SPITE OF such a thing). But that is beyond the scope of this discussion... And the mystery behind why the aliens don't just blow us up from space, I think, is not comparable to what is going on here. In fact, I like it. With the way things are written and the game universe is set up, it does not seem like some absurd hole in the plot, but an interesting thing to ponder, even if it is never ever answered in the game and is simply there to give the game a reason to exist.

Also, Stellar Rat's idea is an example of how this should be done if done at all.