Early Game Aircraft Suggestion

[AtillatheBum]

I already posted this in the sticky at the top of this forum thinking it was just a general suggestion thread, but another poster informed me that it was intended just for v8.2. Anyway, here's a quote of my thoughts on the early game aircraft meta.

"I know this is more a beta/balancing type suggestion and that you guys are more concerned with just getting the game feature complete, but I'd like to see the stats of the 2 starting interceptors to be reversed. So the F-17 would have 160 hp, 2300 km/h top speed, etc., but keep the weapons loadout on the craft as they are now. As it stands, F-17s are almost useless against the early game ships, they aren't fast enough to catch them and even when they do, their firepower leaves a lot to be desired for such a slow craft. As if to make F-17s even more obsolete, the default Mig-32 loadout is almost unbeatable by the alien craft. The AI isn't able judge when to roll out of the way effectively due to the different missile speeds and all 4 missiles hit 9 times out of 10.

If you reverse the stats, it would turn the F-17 into a fast, agile, but relatively weak interceptor perfectly suitable for hunting down and destroying alien scout ships solo and mediums when in a squadron. It would also turn the Mig-32 into a heavy engagement platform useful for taking on the alien's larger, more heavily armored combatants where its low speed would be less of a disadvantage when weighed against its heavy armament and good health pool."

Additionally, the F-17s ability to make evasive rolls would fit in better with the plane that is less heavily armored rather than the more armored one as it is now. Thoughts?

[Jean-Luc]

Don't like the idea of a plane that only uses missiles and fights at longer range having more HP while the one that takes most of the fire has less (with or without a defensive roll). It's the F-17 that needs to "tank", makes no sense for the MiG to try and take such a position.

But there are other ways to deal with these problems the most obvious one being having the AI use the roll better.

I might agree about the speed though. Atm one plane is classified as "interceptor" while the other is a dog fighter where in fact both planes need to be able to intercept, catch up to UFOs and get them into weapons' range. I'd argue that the F-17 which uses shorter range weapons needs the speed boost more than the missile spewing MiG. Both planes should either have similar speeds or the F-17 might even need to be the faster of the two.

Instead of "interceptor" the MiG should prolly be classified as "heavy weapons platform", it's the F-17 that has the interception issues chasing those small fighters and what not. The MiG is mostly for taking out the bigger, less maneuverable ships and it can usually afford to stay behind the F-17s and do its thing at a more leisurely pace.

It would be nice if we could control the planes' speed a bit more. For example, instead of just afterburner there could be speed settings, sort of like: slow - medium - afterburner. The faster you go the more fuel is burned. It would allow one to switch between combat and interception speeds and control which planes go in first and which ones take the rear.

Edited January 10, 2012 by Jean-Luc

[anotherdevil]

sounds good to me!

[Jean-Luc]

The speed settings could be called something like Standard - Interception - Super Sonic or I dunno.

Standard would be used in dog fights and during initial approach.

Interception would be for catching up to targets over medium distances, getting your dog fighters ahead of the heavy missile carriers in the initial charge and for certain evasive maneuvers.

Super Sonic would come into play in more extreme situations, either for a quick desperate get away or for catching long distance targets like UFOs that begin to run away as soon as the battle starts.

The faster you go the less fuel efficient you are. Accuracy of rapid firing guns could also suffer at higher speeds.

[castironrat]

valid points for both, but the Mig was one of the faster Intercepters out there at the time. where as the F-16 hybrid dont really have the legs. If you really wanted to go plane crazy "excuse the pun" why not go for the YF-12 which was the Intercepter version of the SR-71. That plane could carry nuclear air to air missles.

[anotherdevil]

The faster you go the less fuel efficient you are. Accuracy of rapid firing guns could also suffer at higher speeds.

could also make it that missiles couldn't lock on at higher (/highest speed) so you need to break to get that lock on.

[AtillatheBum]

To be fair, long range heavy engagement platform would be a misnomer for the planes in this game, Avalanches release only about a half second before the plane comes into range of the current alien ship's main guns, and between the sidewinder's lock on time and short range they usually launch from within the alien craft's effective weapons range. I imagine the larger alien craft have much farther reaching and harder hitting guns then their lesser brethren, and in this scenario the proposed Mig changes would allow it to be able to operate in such an environment for 25% longer.

Additionally, you must take into account the visual aspect of design. If you took the F-17 and the Mig-32 as portrayed as they are in game, put them sided by side and asked a random person which of the two was likely to be faster and more agile, I believe that most would be in favor of the F-17. Sure you might get some history buff that could tell the exact specifics such as the top speed and combat ceiling of the designs on which they are based, but I believe most would agree that the F-17 would be more deserving of the classification of interceptor. It's all about the visuals; if you took the weapon art from the game most people could tell you that the shotgun would be used up close, the precision rifle would be used at long range, and the standard rifle somewhere in between. To me the F-17 has a very sleek, agile look that lends itself to the idea of a quick interceptor, while the Mig-32 has a large, bulky look and seems like it would be more suited for straight dogfighting.

I do like the idea of different speeds while in combat, not so much in the geoscape.

[RulerOfNothing]

I don't see why the game should be changed because someone pulled off the street at random doesn't know the difference between an interceptor and an air superiority fighter. Also, your comment about agility not being required for dogfighting doesn't make any sense to me.

[anotherdevil]

wow wow calm down. It's more than just historical facts, this is a game, and he is suggesting a way that the game could be balanced differently to how it is now and how that MIGHT be better

[Gauddlike]

It does make more sense that the less heavily armoured sleeker looking craft could be the faster one.

It doesn't necessarily follow that because it needs to get in close it should also have better armour though.

Using its extra speed to avoid the firing arcs of alien ships would be its primary defence.

Then once it gets in behind them matching speed and keeping the cannon on target would be game over for the early aliens.

The current balancing doesn't allow this to work as well as it could but that's why there are forums

[AtillatheBum]

I assume that the devs are hoping to attract more players than just the die-hard xcom fans, those fans are probably the majority to be sure but selling more copies never hurt. Easy visual identification of what something is and whats going on in the game is key to making a fun experience for players. If you played Team Fortress 2 before it got drowned in hats and new weapons and what not, you might of read the developer commentary that came with the game. It talked about how the artists had made very individual and unique looks/silhouettes for all 9 classes. They wanted players to be able to look at something and have some idea of its capabilities right off the bat. For instance the Heavy Weapons Guy; he's a huge fat dude who's toting a minigun. If slow moving, high hp, high DPS doesn't pop out to you at a glance I don't know what to say.

I never said that the game should be balanced solely around its visuals, merely that having visuals that are intuitive and easy to understand at a glance make the game that much better and rewarding. I also never said that agility was or was not required for dogfighting, I only pointed out that the F-17 looked more agile.

[Chris]

The air combat will be getting some love in February according to my milestone schedule. I don't agree that the F-17 looks faster than the MiG but possibly it does look less durable (it already is much more agile than the MiG). The problem you'd have with making the MiG the tougher one is that the F-17 is the one with the cannon, and thus the one that would get exposed to the most fire and the one that needs to be tougher.

The current setup should play out like this:

lone Scouts - MiGs can catch and destroy with light missiles, F-17s cannot catch

fighters - F-17s can dogfight and destroy, MiG's cannot engage due to lack of cannon

lone Corvette - lone MiG with heavy missiles / multiple F-17s

Corvette with fighter escorts - MiG with heavy missiles plus F-17 escort

The alien AI needs work, which should even out some of these issues.

Btw, in my experience, the Heavy is actually a relatively low DPS class in TF2

[Gorlom]

Doesnt the Xenopedia pages remove some of the need of overintuitive unit designs? the F17 Condor says that it has special armor improvements for example explaing its comparably high armor.

[Gauddlike]

If you look at the craft equip screen you will be able to tell the roles at a glance anyway because of the equipment.

It will be down to the balancing and playtesting to decide if those roles actually work.

Once you get past the two almost identical starting fighters it probably wont matter anyway as you will be outside of the normal frame of reference.

You can make them look like anything you want and make up a reason for it.

This one looks like a flying Evil Barn® but drives like a mini metro because it is made of Ultra-light-alloyium and has twenty Big engines-of-pushiness etc.

[anotherdevil]

The air combat will be getting some love in February according to my milestone schedule. I don't agree that the F-17 looks faster than the MiG but possibly it does look less durable (it already is much more agile than the MiG). The problem you'd have with making the MiG the tougher one is that the F-17 is the one with the cannon, and thus the one that would get exposed to the most fire and the one that needs to be tougher.

The current setup should play out like this:

lone Scouts - MiGs can catch and destroy with light missiles, F-17s cannot catch

fighters - F-17s can dogfight and destroy, MiG's cannot engage due to lack of cannon

lone Corvette - lone MiG with heavy missiles / multiple F-17s

Corvette with fighter escorts - MiG with heavy missiles plus F-17 escort

While I agree with you Chris, the problem is we only get a radar contact, 'small size' and then have to decide what plane to send out after it. Now it could be a scout (needing a mig) or a fighter (needs F17s), and it's not very intuative early game which needs to be sent out. With waves of alien craft at a time, I really would like to be able to not have to send my entire squadron after each and every UFO...

Thoughts?

[TheTuninator]

The MIG-32 should remain faster than the F-17, as the MiG-25 Foxbat it's based off of is quite a bit faster than the F-16 Fighting Falcon, which comprises the inspiration for the F-17.

If the US warplane was different, than I might not have a problem with the role reversal, but as it is some accuracy should be maintained for the sake of atmosphere. I know it's a minor detail and one that will only really be noticed by military aviation enthusiasts, but as the game clearly seeks to establish a fairly grounded Cold War atmosphere these details are nonetheless important for the sake of internal logic.

As Chris notes, I also don't agree that the F-17 looks faster than the MiG. The MiG looks big, brutal, and powerful by comparison; the F-17 looks like it's more agile, but it certainly doesn't look faster.

These aren't space fighters, whose own internal logic often dictates smaller and more frail= faster; the fighter with bigger engines and more thrust is often the faster one.

Edited January 11, 2012 by TheTuninator

[anotherdevil]

but also by that logic, the smaller and more aerodynamic of the craft creates less drag = faster. Perhaps.

I'm not too fussed to be honest, so long as their roles are apparent and it's not too hard to determine which one is best sent where

[TheTuninator]

Actually, no. With real-life fighter planes, the ones with beefier engines, that as a result are a bit larger, tend to be faster. For example, the F-15 is faster than the F-16 and F/A-18, and the F-22 is faster than the JSF.

Hence, logic dictates that the MiG-32 should be faster than the F-17, as it's larger and has two engines to the F-17's one.

Edited January 11, 2012 by TheTuninator

[horrid]

Due to the nature of the setting I think it appropriate the F-17 doesn't make the grade when compared against the MiG. Soviet aircraft at the time were significantly faster and a stat exchange when one aircraft "looks faster/ cooler" would diminish the integrity of the story/ suspension of disbelief (I know, really important in a pc game about defeating an alien invaision:)).

That being said it really isn't fair to compare the stats of the soviet interceptor to the american. The F-17 was "budget" as far as combat aircraft and it's design reflected a light weight build philosophy of the time. The F-17 never made it beyond the experimental phase and would evolve into the more familiar F-18.

The loadout on the MiG-31 seems more in line with the weapon fit of a MiG-25; it was faster than the 31 but only carried missles. The Mig-31 did have a cannon in addition to carrying missles. Both soviet aircraft were at least 30% faster than the F-17.

I think both aircraft bring some interesting possibilities to the table in game. The superior range and lower cost of the F-17 would allow a user to employ more units in a "screen" (flights from multiple bases/attack vectors) and the lower cost could make it more viable to fly them in wings while the MiGs would benifit from more conservative tactical deployments (shorter attack runs to reduce fuel consumption).

The R&D phase could really make this all very interesting. In selecting a somewhat retro (79') time period it is possible to research and implement technologies along some really cool paths;

1. Real World tech- As avionics have advanced over the course of thirty+ years there is a wealth of real world data to appropriate. Research time tables could be advanced dramatically in our alternate history as a result of an alien threat. JSF project realized by 1985?

2. Alien tech- The weird stuff, alien saucers at the command of human fighter pilots (Wasn't that a questionable movie?)

3. Hybrid- The best part: A fusion of advancing real world techs and alien systems. I think these possibilities would be the most novel. An earth fighter incorporating an alien power source that improves performance or offers a near perpetual fuel source?

As the game gets fleshed out I'm sure there will be a better environment to demonstrate the qualities of the different aircrafts. A sprinter isn't necessarily a better athlete than someone else unless the only test you are putting them to is a 100m foot race.

The radar out of the box is limited but technologies in those areas if researched could offer better imaging/ tracking.

I even like thinking about playing this game