Geoscape Balance Discussion v19 Experimental Build 5

[Aaron]

This latest build added some pretty major balance changes to the alien invasion: UFOs should now have much greater variety, and there should be far fewer of the non-crashsite UFOs. In addition there's the new air combat auto-resolve feature, which is very raw so a bit buggy and unbalanced, but worth discussing.

Here's the the new Geoscape balance changes:

- Extensive rebalance of Geoscape UFO forces throughout the alien invasion

-- Scouts and Landing Ship UFOs will now appear throughout the entire game to help train rookies

-- Much more variety of UFOs, there will always be at least 2 main types available

-- Reduced the rate at which non-crashsite UFOs (fighters, bombers) spawn

- Reduced the frequency of alien attacks on Xenonaut bases by about 50%

- Refuelling rate for interceptors increased from 0.12 to 0.2

- Implemented monthly maintenance costs for all aircraft at 20% of initial cost

- Implemented monthly maintenance costs for base buildings at 10% of construction cost

- Reduced cost of new Xenonaut base down to 250000

[Dranak]

My initial impressions so far (late Oct) are that I like the increased UFO variety, but either funding is too low or upkeep is too high. I have a mostly established second base, and my upkeep is already pushing 600k of my 900k monthly funding. It feels like we're back to V18 economic balance of monthly funding paying for upkeep, and everything else having to be funded from ground missions.

[Aaron]

What's the breakdown of your upkeep costs there? Could you maybe post a screenshot of the base management screens from both bases?

[Ol' Stinky]

What's the breakdown of your upkeep costs there? Could you maybe post a screenshot of the base management screens from both bases?

Click on the base pictures to get a larger version.

Overview:

Base 1:

Base 2:

I've killed 53 non-coms: no guards, since the scouts that appeared so far have had escorts, meaning that trying to down them causes a CTD. 2 of those non-coms were overkills. Non-coms (both Cae and Seb) carry an alien plasma pistol and one alien plasma cell, I believe, which makes each one worth 20k, but the first pistol goes to the research division. I don't know whether the plasma cell does, but I'll assume the boys in the lab nick the first one as well.

So I estimate that as of 27 Oct 1979 I earnt at least 50*20k = 1000k from ground combat, not including the various bits and bobs gained from stripping down the UFO.

---

In all honesty, I don't have much of an opinion on how spending should work. Is the V18 model Dranak described something you want to avoid?

Edited July 29, 2013 by Ol' Stinky
Fixed the links so that it takes you directly to the larger version.

[Aaron]

Not necessarily - very broadly I think most funding should come from the nations your protect, and the money from recovered alien equipment should be a secondary source (maybe 30% of total?), but I don't want to be too strict.

[Belmakor]

It looks to me like wages are too high. Maybe reduce them down to 75% of their value and that would give you another 80k a month to play with? I've always been of the opinion that in the Cold War people should be cheap as chips as back then you would have had such a large choice of Scientists, Engineers, Soliders from all the militaries that kept up large standing armies on the back of WW2 and Vietnam/Korean wars. Its the high tech and keeping them soldiers alive that should be expensive.

[Dranak]

These were taken on the 29th of October. I did overbuild hangars a bit, but that actually is having a net effect of reducing my upkeep since it would be higher if I had 1-2 less hangars and 1-2 more Foxtrots.

Overview

Main base

Second base

Edited July 29, 2013 by Dranak

[Max_Caine]

On a different matter, in one of the 18.x balance threads, I had previously suggested that the best way to introduce someone to the air combat minigame was to get them to learn by doing, rather than make them sit through a tutorial. This was inspired by Egoraptor who make a very interesting video on this subject, using MegaMan as a good example of how the game teaches the player how to play without making them sit through tutorials. I wrote at the time that if a light scout could make an effective dodge manoeuvre then return fire the player would see what the UFO had done and could emulate it. I think that 19.x is well on its way to implementing this, but I would suggest a few small changes.

Firstly, I would suggest increasing the range of the light missile. Not by anything massive, but at the moment the range is so short that when a player experiences the UFO dodge, there’s very little time to react to it. At the same time, I would suggest also increasing the range of the light scout’s weapon to slightly less than the range of the light missile, so the sequence of events would be:

1) Condor fires missiles

2) Player experiences first ohshit! moment as light scout dodges missiles

3) Light scout shoots back

4) Player experiences second ohshit! moment, but has seen what the light scout has done and dodges shot

5) Player has option to dogfight or retreat

By doing it like that, the lesson is thoroughly rubbed in. I would also suggest that either the ROF or weapon damage for a light scout be reduced slightly, so a Condor which opts to dogfight looses 20-30% of HP, rather than 50%+. This makes dogfighting less of a “last stand” and encourages building improved cannons rather than making people think “why bother?”. Finally, I would suggest a small change to the light scout UFO xenopedia to suggest to the player solutions to the problem of UFOs dodging missiles. Perhaps something along the lines of UFOs having sophisticated tracking and evasion systems so firing a barrage of missiles all at once won’t work.

[Jmac006]

19.5 balance issues in my opinion.

#1 Air combat in 19.5 is a huge degree if diff spike from the stable version. I recommend going back to stable version diff as this gives the mass market audience time to scale diff with harder and harder aliens vs them getting rocked in there first few air combats.

#2 I think lowering the base cost to 250k was a great thing...Also I would caution against more changes to the economy at the moment since my counterparts who are showing screenshots above clearly overbuilt without adding to there monthly income via successful missions. In grand strategy resource management is key, this isnt an rts after all.

#3 Stun grenades and stun rockets.....need to be removed from the game totally. Keep the batons.

((I know i am gonna get flamed for this so here is the explanation.))

(once you get stun granades and stun rockets..it really takes away from most other tactical options because you get more money for captured aliens and its just so easy to spam all ur troops with stun gear and why even use the baton? no risk to the grenades and rockets..I get the idea...cool concept but the execution reality of a ranged stun weapon kills all the other types of combat and accessory granade tactics except smoke.

#4 Hidden movement doesnt go away when the aliens are shooting at you....had to go back to stable version, just to unplayable in ground combat not seeing where the shots are coming from and having the hidden movement up all the time.

#5 Ranks and medals...I would actually like to see all the ranks represented and this would hopefully solve others issues with ranking up to fast...since unless you save/load all the time your gonna lose people and if you add the ranks from e1 all the way thru colonel it does takes longer and I love the medals that are currently in the game, can we get that expanded? and ya..i do agree with a lot of the other guys about adding more generic names.

#6 I know this isnt the right place for it, but i would like to see some kind of roster, that shows your wall of dead that keeps there stats intact.

[Ol' Stinky]

#4 Hidden movement doesnt go away when the aliens are shooting at you....had to go back to stable version, just to unplayable in ground combat not seeing where the shots are coming from and having the hidden movement up all the time.

Browse to Xenonauts\assets\gui\GroundCombat\hiddenmovement\ and replace the hiddenmovement\hidden_movement_small .pngs with a transparent image. (I think you can just delete them instead, but I'm not sure of that.) It makes a world of difference - even if hidden movement was working properly, I much prefer having a greyed out screen than a stock picture.

As for #2 and getting back on topic - is it overexpansion to set up your base at the start of the second month? I don't know. I've done it by skimping on ground combat costs though, with all of $40k being spent on armour out of the 3mil+ I've earnt. So it's not as though I've done it without paying a price. For the record, I've done 15 ground combat missions. By the time I pass go at the end of Oct, I've earnt ~2 mil through funding, and 1 mil+ through ground combat looting. Seems about right then?

Edit: I'm a complete doofus. 1 mil out of 3 mil is a third. Duuuuh.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Ol' Stinky

[Dranak]

#2 I think lowering the base cost to 250k was a great thing...Also I would caution against more changes to the economy at the moment since my counterparts who are showing screenshots above clearly overbuilt without adding to there monthly income via successful missions. In grand strategy resource management is key, this isnt an rts after all.

I'm curious how you determined that we "clearly overbuilt" without doing missions to increase our monthly income based off a couple screenshots. In the two months before my SS were taken, I missed about 3-5 total UFOs over my main base and had assaulted all of them successfully... so I can't really do anything more to increase my monthly funding other than expanding (in which case the increased number of missions is a far greater impact than the actual monthly funding).

One of the problems I see is that monthly funding tends to be a rather flat, even when shooting down >85% of your UFO contacts over 2/3 of the world (I usually stop and invest in ground combat instead of taking a third base), whereas your returns from ground missions increase pretty quickly and by Nov (Dec at the absolute latest) surpass your funding from monthly funds. I can't remember the last time my monthly funding wasn't somewhere between 800K and 1.1M.

[Jmac006]

(

I'm curious how you determined that we "clearly overbuilt" without doing missions to increase our monthly income based off a cts.)ouple screensho

Granted every play style is different...However following the Xcom model which this is the successor to the game is supposed to be about tough resource management and choices you make on whats worth it to you and everything you do on the grand strategy side sets up your game for success or failure on the tactical combat side.

If you look at your monthly funding level and the amount of your of hangars/aircraft you have that is how I can see you overbuilt above your funding level....( I dont know where u guys put your first base but maybe consider moving it to a place that gives u better range to answer more missions in multiple continents?) Had you cut down on the aircraft at your first base, you'd be cutting down on maintence and initial cost and have no problem with 1 other small base being in operation and over time being able to expand to a 3rd and 4th....Increaseing your funding is about coverage and instead of missing cash for not replying to a situation turning it into a win and adding to funding...One superbase does not give you the coverage to respond globally.

One of the things That suprised me the most was you guys are still talking about the game with only 1-2 monthly income changes......that is still very early and I will also point out that as long as your income covers your outgo your monthly base maint is paid for...and ull make a lot of money on missions from there.....should be more then enough time to get your income up (from what i saw you could have 3 small bases and have decent global coverage and via missions still be okay untill ur responses raised ur funds)

Last thing I wanted to mention which I thought is kinda weird seeing your guys monthly funding......In my current game I havent hit the end of sept (almost but i stoped playing cause stun rockets and stun grenades r just a carebear game/tactics killer...way to easy...just totally changes the game dynamics imo) yet and I'm +150k

for next month which will put me well over 1.1m in funding for october, Yet i saw u guys still below 1m....Only thing that comes to mind is coverage...(my first base can respond in 4 sectors maybe im getting lucky with ufo sights...i've lost about 50k from not being able to respond to places outside of coverage but done very well with places in so im happy with the +150k

Hope that helps.....By the way guys not attacking you....just say consider your gameplay....if you want one all powerful base, you are gonna miss a lot of coverage when that money could go to 1-2 other small response bases that will allow u to not lose money from other countries as quickly as you are.. really hope that helps

-Jmac

Edited July 30, 2013 by Jmac006
typo

[Ol' Stinky]

I'm curious how you determined that we "clearly overbuilt" without doing missions to increase our monthly income based off a couple screenshots. In the two months before my SS were taken, I missed about 3-5 total UFOs over my main base and had assaulted all of them successfully... so I can't really do anything more to increase my monthly funding other than expanding (in which case the increased number of missions is a far greater impact than the actual monthly funding).

One of the problems I see is that monthly funding tends to be a rather flat, even when shooting down >85% of your UFO contacts over 2/3 of the world (I usually stop and invest in ground combat instead of taking a third base), whereas your returns from ground missions increase pretty quickly and by Nov (Dec at the absolute latest) surpass your funding from monthly funds. I can't remember the last time my monthly funding wasn't somewhere between 800K and 1.1M.

Generally speaking I don't get all too far before I hit a wall due to the whole It's A Beta© thing. Do you think it'd be better for mission score to be affected by type of craft - so more points for a corvette than a scout, for example - or something like a multiplier based on which month you're in?

Jmac006: I wasn't complaining about the game. I was just posting what my accounts were by the end of the second month.

I don't feel like money's too hard to come by, having shot down most of the craft in my domain. A couple of those that got away did so because downing them crashes the game. 16 missions with over 50 aliens dead doesn't seem to me like I'm slacking. That's not to say money's not a restriction, though, as I have to skimp on my soldiers' gear to focus on the base building. Once maint. fees get close to my funding/month, I'll hold back and gear up my men more suitably.

My first base is in Cairo, my second in eastern China.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Ol' Stinky

[thothkins]

I found that building that second and third base to be very important. I'm in late November and things are looking much more stable funding wise, than they were before I started doing this in 19.4 With a reduced set up cost, it pays more to get multiple bases rather than numerous hangers in a single base*.

* this is of course, depending on how well you cope with the air interception. I may well be crying about not having extra hangers once my MIGs are all in for repair in a month;s gametime.

[Ol' Stinky]

Yeah, it's the interceptors that make me want to build up a decent airforce. Also, I didn't get any alenium until November, which means it's that much harder to down corvettes. Being unable to take down those scouts back in Oct. really set me back.

I wish I could set an alert in the geoscape for when a particular plane's finished refuelling.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Ol' Stinky

[Dranak]

For testing purposes I generally place my first base in northern China and my second in southern US. I know Egypt is the optimal placement for a first base, however I deliberately do not place my first base there as I believe the game should not be balanced on Normal around 100% optimal choices. As to my number of aircraft... I have 3 interceptors and one transport per base at this point in the game (and as of that SS, 4 total AC and 1 transport), and one additional hangar at my main base for continued aircraft production so there's really not any overbuilding going on.

My comments on longer funding trends are based on having played until Jan/Feb on basically every build since about 18.1, although I did overlook the increased number of aliens per mission which should have a slight upward effect.

[Jmac006]

Well everything is a variable, one things effects a lot of other things....maybe we should be addressing the air combat diff in 19.5 versus the stable build.....and perhaps in the first few months have less alien incursions then norm?

I want to reiterate some points

#1 air combat diff needs to be returned to stable version levels for normal games.

#2 I really think the only way to truly balance combat is to remove stun grenades and stun rockets..

#3 Ranks & medals ....I know there have been a lot of posts...I'd like to see all the levels of rank added from e-1 to colonel

#4 Please find a way to include a wall of the dead so we have a list of troopers we have lost.

Guys Please clearly weigh in on this in a short and defined way so the devs know if the rest of the community supports these points. I've noticed that talking to players is paragraphs but if you wanna get anything done with a dev you have to use bullet outline formats! So please weigh in as i feel these are important for balance, gameplay and immersion.

[ventuswings]

I can cautiously agree with point #2 and #4.

Let me throw in my own gripe too:

• Prevent injured soldiers from being completely healed in combat (do not make their gray bar 100%). It makes 'injured' status pretty irrelevant.
  

[Dranak]

I can cautiously agree with point #2 and #4.

Let me throw in my own gripe too:

• Prevent injured soldiers from being completely healed in combat (do not make their gray bar 100%). It makes 'injured' status pretty irrelevant.

It's on the bug list, just waiting it's turn.

[svidangel]

Kinda the wrong thread for it, but since it was brought up here....

If there is an option for stun resistance, maybe the soldier versions of aliens should have a MUCH HIGHER stun resistance than the non-coms. Sure you can gas a few techs and researchers easily enough, but suppose the soldiers have armor and their own breathing apparatus, or implants to help deal with toxic chemicals... etc. Whatever justification, but in the end it will only be easy (like it is now) to stun the non-coms, leaving it very difficult to actually stun the soldier types.

This allows people to get their early research done, but prevents abuse later on.

[Dranak]

It does take more to stun later enemies than non-combatants, so I'm not sure that's really a problem. Remember, avoiding gas clouds is yet to be really added to the AI, so that will also make stunning them harder.

I underestimated the effect that the increased number of aliens (and any other, hidden changes) would have on funding levels. I'm still (mid-Dec) barely covering my upkeep costs (about 100K surplus) but my funding level has been increasing far more steadily than in previous builds.

It's nice having greater variety in UFO types, but through all of Nov I still fought about a 3:1 ratio of Scouts/Light Scouts to all other types, so I think those classes can be turned back slightly. So far I've seen one group of fighters, and 1 or 2 single fighters total, which makes me feel those are turned down a bit too far. Not having a terror mission/base assault every three days is a pleasant change though. Overall I like the direction you guys have the Geoscape moving in.

[Ol' Stinky]

I wish lightscouts were more like the original game where you'd get one, maybe two, and then that was it. They're basically tutorial missions and I don't like having to do those every time I start a new game. I got 8 lightscouts in the first month and then another 7 in October, and those are just the ones that I was able to down.

[smoitessier]

Loosing a Condor takes too long to get back, at 6.3 days that means it can miss 2 waves

[svidangel]

Pretty sure 80/24 is closer to 3.3 days, if I'm reading you correctly.

[Dranak]

Repair time plus the three days before repairs start.