Geoscape Balance Discussion v19 Experimental Build 6

[Dranak]

@Kabill - I don't know that would still really add to anything though. An auto-replenishment system like that would functionally be the same as infinite (since you just set your stock to be large enough to never think of it again). It would add a small resource sink, but I'm not convinced one is needed at the moment.

[kabill]

It wouldn't necessarily have to be a *small* resource sink; the impact it has on available resources will be directly related to how important it is made!

I can see the advantage of advanced ammunition having a cost associated with using it, in that it creates a choice: do I muddle along with basic weapons to save resources for other things; or do I spend resources on advanced ammunition at the expense of (whatever else)? However, I can also see the advantage of the extant system in that it removes this choice and makes the strategy game easier to balance since you can pretty much count on the player having specific resources at their disposal when they need them.

In other words, if the strategy game was balanced around having to make the kind of trade-off I described, then I think it *would* (or could be made to) matter and my suggestion would help remove some of the busywork required by the player. But the game doesn't have to be designed like that and I certainly don't begrudge the decision which has been made for the game at present.

(My *ideal* game would involve there being all kinds of different pressures on resource usage, but I wouldn't pretend that getting it right would necessarily be worth the time and effort required nor the risk of failure!).

[smoitessier]

Were talking about the workshops being under used yes? Also I think it was Thomkins said the Stores screen is pretty useless now since we care less about resources because of invulnerable aircrafts, and having enough for our ground troops is a given.

So this keeps going around in circles. Resources are broken compared to the OG, and workshops are neutered as well, i'd much prefer a clear and simple interface in the workshops with 2 different categories, i.e. ammo, and equipment. in the ammo category you can assign 1 worker for each ammo types, if you wanted a long n slow replenishment, to crank out a batch of each kind of air missiles and advanced ground ammo.

[Mermel]

I personally like where the difficulty and complexity is for the normal mode.

And as for the manufacturing of ammunition and other small stuff... it doesn't add much to the game. The idea of adding a feature that actually reduces it to a couple of klicks at one point shows already how flawed it is.

There is no meaning in deciding on how much ammo you manufacture.

I'd rather see manufacturing burdened with the additional technical tasks that occur within the base. You fighter is damaged? Too bad, invest 100 Manhours of technicians to repair it. Dented that shiny armor of yours? Go get it repaired...

Dividing your time between maintaining old stuff and producing new things will result in Interesting decisions and fill up the manufacturing queu at the same time.

[svidangel]

Oooh, having technicians required to repair fighters WOULD get them back in the game, and in a big way. Have to balance it so that you can't just presto blamo new fighter it by loading up on techs though.

[Ol' Stinky]

This suggestion might get me booed off the stage. (Stinky tugs his collar and takes a deep breath.) Here goes!

Maybe have an "immortal vehicle" system that's a bit like the one for aircraft? Unlike the aircraft it wouldn't be scot free, maybe at half price, so repairing a hunter would cost 20k. In line with the above idea of engineers having to maintain existing assets, it'd be a manufacturing project to repair a busted vehicle.

I personally wouldn't use vehicles over infantry if it was an honest choice. I like moving around my little men, darn it. But it seems that vehicles are a bit too expensive right now.

---

Here's my current 19.6 game. I've been trying to get through November, but things become really unstable at this point what with various CTDs. This isn't a complaint, just an explanation as to why I'm only posting about the first couple of months: in Nov+, I either need to reload a ton to try and avoid CTDs or mod out the causes, which means I'm playing an easier version of the game than intended. Either way I'm not comfortable talking about how things go beyond this point.

Research wise, in Oct. with a crew of 10 scientists, I researched:

• Caesan Analysis (started tail end of Sep.)
  
• Alien Plasma Rifle
  
• Alien Plasma Technology
  
• started Laser Technology
  
• switched to Alenium
  
• Alenium Explosives
  
• Alien Alloy Fabrication
  
• resumed Laser Technology (finished in the first few days of Nov.)

That's right: I was building my first set of wolf armour while still fighting lightscouts and regular scouts, with only 10 scientists.

As far as raw income goes, I got ~1 mil from funding at the end of Sep. and Oct. both. I looted ~50k from UFOs I shot down per month.

I blasted 19 lightscouts out of the sky and raided 15. I took down 4 scouts and assaulted 2. Here's a breakdown of the individual loot scores.

September

LSct 1: 33k

LSct 2: 72k

LSct 3: 60k

LSct 4: 48k

LSct 5: 55k

Sct 1: 113k

LSct 6: 60k

LSct 7: 60k

October:

LSct 8: 60k

LSct 9: 67k

LSct 10: 36k (bug with a RL caused a frag rocket to be loaded instead of a stun, so overdamage happened)

LSct 11: 60k

Sct 2: 79k

LSct 12: 57k

LSct 13: 60k

LSct 14: 68k

LSct 15: 68k

I'm pretty happy with the amount I was pulling in; by the end of October I had two bases, one with six interceptors and one with three. I also had three suits of jackal armour made, and two sets of wolf armour on the way. It was painful for me to order the armour to be made as I'd have preferred to put that money towards expanding/fortifying the geoscape - which is how it should be, so good job there!

Edited August 6, 2013 by Ol' Stinky
I'm gonna call them engineers instead of technicians, and there's nothing you can do about it!

[xcomnaut]

Some thoughts...

Alien bases

Im in the middle of january. So far I eleminated about 8 alien bases, each gave me ~250k $, 225 alloys. Isnt alien build bases too frequent? Almost very 1-2 wave there is new base. By this time I could lose a few funding nations if bases left without attention.

Terror sites

Another concern is terror missions. I think there are too many aliens per terror mission. I mean this is fun and all but there is no terror in that. Aliens start next to civilians, most civilians die in the first few turns. There is no way to save them nor I care to do that. Missions turns into some massacre. But who cares about civilians, mission is successful anyway, everyone happy!

[Ol' Stinky]

Well, it's terrifying for me.

[Mytheos]

Some thoughts...

Alien bases

Im in the middle of january. So far I eleminated about 8 alien bases, each gave me ~250k $, 225 alloys. Isnt alien build bases too frequent? Almost very 1-2 wave there is new base. By this time I could lose a few funding nations if bases left without attention.

Terror sites

Another concern is terror missions. I think there are too many aliens per terror mission. I mean this is fun and all but there is no terror in that. Aliens start next to civilians, most civilians die in the first few turns. There is no way to save them nor I care to do that. Missions turns into some massacre. But who cares about civilians, mission is successful anyway, everyone happy!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2485[/ATTACH]

Wow, 8 bases by Jan?

Thats kinda crazy.

[xcomnaut]

05 February - Alenium 15, Alien Alloys 2500.

[lemm]

Alrighty, I've started a new game on Veteran. I think the geoscape is pretty well balanced at this point, although the missions are still cakewalks (mostly this is due to the predictable combat AI which doesn't hide behind corners or flank). I've gotten up to late January and I've constructed two bases. One has wolf/plasma tech and the other has jackal/laser tech. A million bucks in the bank and everything up to Scimitars, Shrikes, and Corsairs has been researched.

I was fortunate enough to get a scout on September 16th this time around. In my last game on Normal difficulty, I got a scout at mid-October. The early scout really forces you to carefully consider your research and production options, since everything is available right away. Giving the player an extra month of nothing but light scouts makes the decision process a lot more straightforward.

This suggestion might get me booed off the stage. (Stinky tugs his collar and takes a deep breath.) Here goes!

Maybe have an "immortal vehicle" system that's a bit like the one for aircraft? Unlike the aircraft it wouldn't be scot free' date=' maybe at half price, so repairing a hunter would cost 20k. In line with the above idea of engineers having to maintain existing assets, it'd be a manufacturing project to repair a busted vehicle.

I personally wouldn't use vehicles over infantry if it was an honest choice. I like moving around my little men, darn it. But it seems that vehicles are a bit too expensive right now.

[/quote']

Personally, I think that vehicles should cost far less than they do. Paying 100K for a Hunter plus a turret is just not worth it when you can send out a rookie with a rocket launcher for 10k, especially since both have comparable TUs. With the increase in weapons range, Hunters really lose their usefulness once the aliens start showing up with plasma rifles, especially in the open maps we get for terror attack missions. (If they're seen on the first turn, they're essentially dead). The same was true with the original XCOM games; there was just no reason to purchase a tank or a coelecanth when four rookies in T-shirts were much cheaper and far more capable.

Anyway, I like your idea. Unless the Hunter takes a real pounding, it doesn't usually get completely destroyed, but is rendered incapacitated. If you win the mission, you should be able to recover and repair your vehicle for free, albeit with a repair time penalty so that it's rendered inoperable for the remainder of the current wave. Perhaps you could even be able to recover it unless you leave it at a terror site or an alien base. (I've noticed that I get armor from dead soldiers returned to me; does it "automatically" come back regardless of the mission outcome, or do you have to retrieve the corpse of the fallen Xenonaut to get it back?)

While we're discussing invincible vehicles, I should mention that I'm really irked by the fact that we have to build the first MiG, but if it gets destroyed, then we get a new one built by the sponsor nations. From the standpoint of the game, I think the unlimited interceptor mechanism is balanced very nicely, but it just doesn't "make sense." Can't we just have the first one constructed for us by some sponsor nation so that we never have to build MiGs at all? I don't really think it would throw off the balance at all, because my techs were tasked enough with the construction of weaponry and armour that there was no time at all to build vehicles. But if it still throws things off, perhaps the MiG could cost 50k more and laser and jackal tech could take 10% longer to construct?

Finally, I think that the radar ranges need to be dramatically reduced, at least at the higher difficulties. If you put one base in the Suez Canal and one on the Yucatan peninsula, you can cover most of the globe. I'd like a game where I need at least four bases to ensure adequate global coverage.

Edited August 7, 2013 by lemm

[lemm]

Some thoughts...

Terror sites

Another concern is terror missions. I think there are too many aliens per terror mission. I mean this is fun and all but there is no terror in that. Aliens start next to civilians, most civilians die in the first few turns. There is no way to save them nor I care to do that. Missions turns into some massacre. But who cares about civilians, mission is successful anyway, everyone happy!

Yeah, I agree with this. I don't think there would be any hope in these terror missions if the aliens got smart and sent scouts around the edges of the map. I've been fortunate enough to get myopic Androns and Sebellians who just charge towards the dropship when they have numerical superiority.

Then again, maybe there should be some terror missions that you aren't mean to win..

[kabill]

Finally, I think that the radar ranges need to be dramatically reduced, at least at the higher difficulties. If you put one base in the Suez Canal and one on the Yucatan peninsula, you can cover most of the globe. I'd like a game where I need at least four bases to ensure adequate global coverage.

I thought about this too, primarily in terms of making the Cairo starting base less optimal.

[StellarRat]

The whole vehicle balance issue needs to be looked at again. They were VERY useful in the OG. A lot tougher and had excellent firepower and more TUs then what we get now. The main drawback was that they couldn't fight in some areas because they didn't fit and they took up a lot of space in the transport. In this game, they are still fairly useless IMO. I don't even use them anymore. It is correct that a single soldier (costing 1/2 as much) with a rocket launcher or LMG is essentially better than a Hunter. If he's wearing Wolf armor has a laser weapon he's much better. Not to mention that a vehicle can't "take cover" nearly as easily as a soldier. Plus they are much more likely to get hit by missed shots (scatter) because of their large size.

Vehicles should be much better in open terrain than a low level soldier. They ought to be your best friend on desert and terror maps. My suggestion is to give them limited sight range (quite a bit less than an unarmored soldier), but longer range weapons and more speed. (This will tempt players into running them up ahead without infantry escort and into ambushes, MAWAHAHA!) Now that the alien AI is much better at reaction fire and attacking, they will not be OP comparatively. The ideal use ought be vehicle AND soldiers working in close proximity. A vehicle without soldiers to spot danger should be very vulnerable. One to fire and one to see. The firing rate ought to limited (by TU) to one aimed shot/burst per turn or two snap. For the Hunter, I'd replace the twin .30's with a single .50 cal. Increase the weapon range to at least as far as sniper and increase the damage and penetration per hit by at least 50% while reducing the ROF to 5 rounds like the LMG. I don't think they need better armor because that might be a bit over the top, if the other two are improved.

Also, I think if the prices are going to remain as high as they are, they should be recoverable just like aircraft. If you think about it, recovering a knocked out armored vehicle is MUCH more realistic and easier than trying to piece together a plane that's been scattered across the countryside in little pieces. If I remember right, in WWII, over half of all armored vehicles that were knocked out could be recovered and repaired.

Edited August 7, 2013 by StellarRat

[Mermel]

I have to agree to a lot of the things mentioned before.

The starting Vehicle gets pretty useless as soon as plasma rifles pop up. And as two soldiers provide essentially more flexibility and chances to get better than the vehicle in time, it's a no brainer to go for the soldiers.

The only way to get the ground vehicles back into the equation is by letting them provide something you want but can't get anywhere else.

[StellarRat]

I have to agree to a lot of the things mentioned before.

The starting Vehicle gets pretty useless as soon as plasma rifles pop up. And as two soldiers provide essentially more flexibility and chances to get better than the vehicle in time, it's a no brainer to go for the soldiers.

The only way to get the ground vehicles back into the equation is by letting them provide something you want but can't get anywhere else.

IMO, they ought to be a highly mobile extra heavy weapons platform with a lot of operational drawbacks, so they can't replace Xenonauts, but instead augment them in the right situation.

I know Goldhawk doesn't want to emphasize vehicles over soldiers, but since we have them they ought to least be highly useful in certain situations (why else would you have them?) IMO, they ought be something you would choose in open field combat and terror maps. When you don't care about captures or saving alien equipment. Goldhawk needs to bear in mind that they take up FOUR spaces on the transport, so they need to be at least as useful as a couple soldiers or more. Right now that is not true at all.

Edited August 7, 2013 by StellarRat

[Max_Caine]

Having played quite a lot with vehicles (as in every mission since 19.6 came out), I can emphasise that vehicles seem to be the lesser option. Others have put their views forward, but from my experience there's basically nothing a vehicle as they stand can do that a solider can't. I've been tweaking and fiddling with the stats for several days (I'll put up my modded stats on the mod forum later on), and it's possible to turn vehicles into things that provide unique services which don't loose value as the game progresses.

Take the Hunter, for example. It's written up and intended as a light scout. Fine - by upping the APs from 60 to 80, and increasing the sight range to 22 you have an agile vehicle that can engage targets beyond the standard sight range of most aliens. The 300HP a Hunter has isn't so much of a deal if it can see a target before the target sees it. Or the Scimitar. Jack up the HPs and boost the armour rating and you have a brawler which can reduce strongpoints, draw fire and shield squaddies behind it. The Hyperion's hovering ability makes it suitible as a fast skimmer and flanker (Eldar!), so I jack up the APs. While it's not materially stronger than the lumbering Scimitar, it can get around a dug in opponent and force it to fall back.

[StellarRat]

I've been tweaking and fiddling with the stats for several days (I'll put up my modded stats on the mod forum later on), and it's possible to turn vehicles into things that provide unique services which don't loose value as the game progresses.

Take the Hunter, for example. It's written up and intended as a light scout. Fine - by upping the APs from 60 to 80, and increasing the sight range to 22 you have an agile vehicle that can engage targets beyond the standard sight range of most aliens. The 300HP a Hunter has isn't so much of a deal if it can see a target before the target sees it. Or the Scimitar. Jack up the HPs and boost the armour rating and you have a brawler which can reduce strongpoints, draw fire and shield squaddies behind it. The Hyperion's hovering ability makes it suitible as a fast skimmer and flanker (Eldar!), so I jack up the APs. While it's not materially stronger than the lumbering Scimitar, it can get around a dug in opponent and force it to fall back.

Have you tried upping the weapons and TU and REDUCING the sight range to make them more like "real" armored vehicles? I think with new aggressive AI it might be interesting to see if they can survive without infantry support in that config.

[Max_Caine]

Not yet.. but I can tell you now the Hunter doesn't stand up very long in a firefight. Oh, it'll survive one. Usually two. But never three. It's useful (when jacked up) for the scout "era", but when you get to the medium "era", the proliferation of alien with big guns is usually too much for it if it doesn't have a boosted sight range.

EDIT: Forgot to mention. The primary culprit in short Hunter lifespan is armour degredation. If aliens have a chance to chip away at Hunter armour, they can reduce it to nothing in a short period of time, and that's when aliens weapons hurt.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Max_Caine

[StellarRat]

Not yet.. but I can tell you now the Hunter doesn't stand up very long in a firefight. Oh, it'll survive one. Usually two. But never three. It's useful (when jacked up) for the scout "era", but when you get to the medium "era", the proliferation of alien with big guns is usually too much for it if it doesn't have a boosted sight range.

EDIT: Forgot to mention. The primary culprit in short Hunter lifespan is armour degredation. If aliens have a chance to chip away at Hunter armour, they can reduce it to nothing in a short period of time, and that's when aliens weapons hurt.

They are hopeless once the aliens start using plasma rifles. It would still be interesting to see how they do with better weapons and TU, but less sight with and without infantry to spot for them. I believe that might prove a good combo. The idea being to engage and destroy the aliens before they can do much damage.

[Aaron]

Thanks for the feedback guys - vehicles do need some attention. I guess the issue right now is their role is not defined very well - how do each of you expect them to be useful? As good scouts? Damage sponges? Damage dealers?

I would also be very tempted to slip some extra capability in there for them... the obvious is giving them the ability to create a smoke screen around themselves to provide cover. Can people think of anything else interesting (and simple!) vehicles could do that would really impact the ground combat? How about headlights for night missions?

[Ol' Stinky]

Headlights and smoke cover would be great!

How about a ram attack to run over reapers/zombies and smash down uncrushable walls? I guess that mechanically it'd be a melee attack. It's not the greatest idea, I know, but it helps them get around without having to use their/other soldiers' ammo.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Ol' Stinky

[xcomnaut]

How about a ram attack to run over reapers/zombies and smash down uncrushable walls? I guess that mechanically it'd be a melee attack. It's not the greatest idea' date=' I know, but it helps them get around without having to use their/other soldiers' ammo.[/quote']

This is actually very great idea. Make vehicles destroy any destroyable object, be it a wall or just a cover spot, by simply moving through. This alone would make vehicles very usable.

[dmz]

Obligatory disclaimer: I only tried the v18-Stable so far (I'm impatiently waiting for the v19-Stable) and (being often shot from way out of range) I've never really stuck with any of my games long enough to use vehicles more than once or twice.

However, a bunch of ideas could be:

- vehicles capable of carrying more than a single man (I'm thinking most of them) could have weapons that require little TU usage, simulating a driver and a soldier dedicated to the weapons turret. Ideally moving and firing would have two different TU pools, but I don't know if that's feasible. This would however have to be finely tuned to avoid having vehicles raining hell everywhere when they don't move by firing too much. A malus to accuracy when the vehicle moves would also be fitting, I guess.

- a scout vehicle could have a larger sight range and a good enough pool of TUs, but weak armor; other vehicles could instead have worse maneuverability and/or less TUs but better firepower and/or armor.

- non-hovering vehicles would need more space (thus requiring more TUs) to turn on themselves, making them harder to use when not in open fields. Depending on how good maneuverability hover vehicles should have, turning could be equally difficult or easier for them (at most up to 1 point per direction like soldiers).

- vehicles in general could provide cover to units behind them (I guess that's already in though, isn't it?), with their armor/life on the line instead.

- Smoke screens could be an additional weapon vehicles have with limited usage (similar to smoke grenades for soldiers).

- The "ram attack" mentioned by Ol' Stinky would be great, also coupled by the ability of (some) vehicles of going over (some) covers by destroying them. Small amounts of damage to the vehicle could also be added since it hits something directly.

- When damaged, vehicles should in my opinion require money and time to be repaired, using the workshop. Should I save money and risk my soldiers (risking to lose trained ones, with the upside of them only requiring time to be healed if wounded) or go for a vehicle (thus having slightly less risk to lose trained soldiers, but risking to lose money for repairs or to build new ones, plus the man-hours it would mean on the workshop)?

With just these changes, I think vehicles would be useful enough to be used but not enough to be used in every occasion. I'm thinking they could be useful in farms, deserts, arctic or in general on open maps, to explore and provide cover, but they should be hard to use in city, industry or otherwise "cluttered" maps, so that the player will have to decide if to bring them judging by where the UFO crashed/landed.

[smoitessier]

Having the hunter carry a couple people, even needing a driver would be nice, probably too late for that tho

And yeah some secondary weapons i.e. flares/smoke, or other grenade types, and headlight are cool, and ramming xeno scum ala alien hehe.

Or what about a thermo imaging module to see through walls that are close by?

Edited August 8, 2013 by smoitessier