Geoscape Balance Discussion V19 Stable Candidate 1

[Dranak]

I'd go for that.

I'd be opposed to giving a foxtrot a cannon; that's just too difficult to implement, and you'd never get to use it unless you were insane (or just didn't care about repair times). Giving a foxtrot two light hardpoints would work, though. It'd give you an incentive to get up close and personal with aircraft, and it'd be a good way to defend yourself against fighters that get too close. Since the range would still be low compared to the torpedoes you wouldn't be able to fire them along with the torps unless you got close, in which case you're risking the aircraft and should be correspondingly rewarded for your risk.

For a Foxtrot, there's very little practical difference between a cannon and sidewinders. Neither would allow it to engage alien fighters (fighter missile range is still longer, and no safe way to close that gap), so both would be relegated to additional damage being dealt to heavier UFOs at closer range, which requires an approach from the rear.

Anyway, here's the cases where adding two sidewinders to a Foxtrot would change results in an all Foxtrot group. In all the following cases, the number of Foxtrots needed decreases by one.

Alenium weapons: 1 Foxtrot to kill a Scout. 2 for a Landing Ship. 2 for a Strike Cruiser. 3 to kill a Cruiser.

Plasma weapons: 2 to kill a Cruiser.

Fusion weapons: 2 to kill a Carrier.

And for comparison sake, doing the same with cannons.

Default cannon/Alenium: 2 for Landing Ship. 2 for Strike Cruiser. 3 for Cruiser.

Default cannon/Plasma: 2 for Cruiser.

Plasma cannon/Plasma: 2 for Carrier.

Magstorm/Fusion: 2 for Battleship.

Assumption made: Versus all but Battleships, all Foxtrots can fire torpedoes. One Foxtrot must then kite (unable to use secondary weapons), while others are free to unleash their full damage. Due to battleship range, one must kite immediately and is unable to fire at all.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Dranak

[GizmoGomez]

I'd rather they get sidewinders; it'd make sidewinders less special and more of a standard feature on aircraft, while the cannon and the torpedoes would remain special.

[n4rf]

After reading a bit of this, here is my input; The aircraft used in x-com were not based on real world platforms, and as such were not restrained in our minds by realism boundaries. Using aircraft from the real world pulls a realism aspect into the game, which is both good and bad; good because its easier to take, but bad in this regard because the current weapon schemes aren't all what those aircraft are capable of. Example - the mig 25 and 31 could carry four missiles, but could only attain their maximum speeds at the sacrifice of their engines (the 31 had a cannon, though usage of it was rather temperamental), and the f-16 could carry far more than the few two sidewinders and the cannon even in an interceptor role.

However, even by the times Xenonauts were to take place, the primary western interceptors would be f-15's... (built specifically in the shadow of fear caused by the development of the mig 25.) This being said, I understand the game design reasons to use the Foxtrot and the Falcon, so I digress. Perhaps later you can add more initial conventional aircraft choices with their own advantages, but it doesn't particularly matter now.

The point is, the realism causes a blur between design choice and keeping up with those of us who know these little historical things, and thusly I would suggest simply offering the capability over restricting the arms. Keep the performance, add the weaponary, up the endurance of the ufo's to compensate, similarly increase the later interceptors in their capabilities, and I think thats stroking enough of the realism without destroying your balance.

The air game would appear to be more of a fight, but admittedly take a bit longer. Considering you are literally using the aircraft in an interceptor role, the foxtrots are going to be your go-to before the alien fighters show up, so why change how it was? If the only reason you need agility and close in weapons platforms is for fighters, its then punishment enough if the foxtrots are downed by fighters later trying to engage in a close combat role they were never designed for. You could then make later ufo's more likely to be escorted, making your response in a wave (I think the maximum wing size should be increased, but again, I think I can understand the design decision here) of fighters and then interceptors.

Remember, real world air combat is standoff, and has been for decades. Foxtrots in the game only do what Foxtrots in the real world do. I would think it would be incredibly hard to hit a fighter or a small ufo with a standoff missile, so perhaps you can simply make even a scout dodge them at a high chance, and keep their use down to the corvettes and such. Keep the sidewinders for the more agile targets, or add the capability of a medium range missile that is between (like an AIM-7.)

I would personally like to see the ability to produce/buy a tactical nuke to just destroy groups I either do not want or can not send a ground force to at the time. Suppose this would return a negative relations tack if over a country, but there have been quite a few times i'd have taken that over sending wounded soldiers in to get them (because the fresh meat had not arrived.)

[Gromitek]

I discovered a nice tactic against 3 enemy fighters. We need 1 foxtrot and 2 condors, the we have to put foxtrot to max speed + afterburner and direct him on ememy ufo. When he will flight close eneugh then turn him away. Small fighters lunch their missisles (2 times each) which all miss. When they hava no missiles it easy task for condors to shoot them down.