Do not give noobs to the player on first rooster.

[Mordobb]

Understanding that we are a supposed elite force.

Understanding that in a 0 to 100 scale 50 in the average untrained, and should be considered unqualified, citizen.

In the first 10 troops we get, do not give anybody below 55 Strenght and 55 accuracy.

My mother which is 70 has more accuracy than those guys and my father which is 67 is stronger than such guys.

Those are the main STATS for any given soldier, being able to carry freaking equipment and shooting his weapon.

Such people wouldn t even qualify at the end of basic infantry course.

Such stats are for crack addicts not trained soldiers.

Thank you.

OBS: i know its minor but its SO MINOR this shouldn t be left out of the next upgrade.

[EchoFourDelta]

Yeah, I've made the point before that a bunch of combat vet Recon and SEAL dudes should probably be able to carry a little more than an M16, a spare magazine, and a frag grenade without it making them feel like their back was going to snap and shoot without at least about 45 degrees of their target, but eh. That's Xenonauts. It's all in the writing. If we were told we were getting, like... a bunch of Army 11Bs and Russian home guard troops, it'd make a little more sense. But it wouldn't make much sense to use guys like that.

So you're left with a depiction of what are supposed to be these elite-ass guys who seem like they'd be better placed in a home for geriatrics, because game balance. I've long held the view that it might be better sometimes to depict that side of things as closely as you can to what people would expect; if the aliens are winning because they're tougher and their weapons are more powerful, don't convey this by depicting special forces troops as having the warfighting capability of a baby giraffe. Show us that the aliens are winning for the reasons listed above.

[GizmoGomez]

Actually, Chris mentioned that he was contemplating changing the lore so that the Xenonauts only get the dregs of the military, making it a mite more believable. I dunno if that went anywhere, though.

[EchoFourDelta]

Actually, Chris mentioned that he was contemplating changing the lore so that the Xenonauts only get the dregs of the military, making it a mite more believable. I dunno if that went anywhere, though.

That said... that's one of those things that would just end up feeling shitty. It's easier to believe it's just some gamey representation than it is they'd be using a bunch of uber-crap troops.

[GizmoGomez]

Yeah, that'd be the issue there.

[gshuford]

Unfortunately, game balance is key.

1) We get super-elite soldiers, they should be able to hit anything within 300 meters and within 150 meters if it's moving (for standard rifles). Pretty much 0% miss chance for even well trained basic infantry under those conditions. So, the aliens have nice armor and you whittle them down. Except, some of them don't. The Caesans (sp?) are pretty much greys. For some of them, having high hit chance and increasing alien armor would work, but then the 'nauts would go through the Caesans like a fat kid through a cookie shop.

2) So we get the dregs of the military. This would explain the combat, but if they're giving us the crappiest soldiers, why are they giving us the smartest scientists and engineers as well as a virtually unlimited military surplus of m16s, grenades, etc?

3) From personal experience, soldiers can carry upwards of 120 lbs on the battlefield. The weight gets dropped for combat, but they can easily maneuver with 60 lbs or less. This sort of group would travel light anyway. Just guns and ammo. So, we're talking a light machine gunner having about 600+ rounds at least. Riflemen would have at least 7 mags if they wanted. But once again, game balance.

This is just one of those areas I don't think should have an explanation. Yeah, it might piss a player off for unrealism, but to make it realistic would crap up the actual gameplay. And the gameplay is what's most important.

Of course, if some very insightful person could come up with a decent explanation, that would be awesome.

[Mordobb]

This again is bad game design or maybe bad execution.

People will hate me for being blunt, ok , wait until such hit the market.

Resuming what we are stating.

There is an equation to solve:

- Xenonauts need to defend human race from slavery or extinction.

- We send the worst of what we got

- We send the best but the best as stated above: "these elite-ass guys who seem like they'd be better placed in a home for geriatrics"

The equation doesn t close.

If a basic equation like that or the 7 hours refueling (see below) issue can t be solved, i wonder about the game design qualification of the team and future of the game.

Stating this is not priority, but will be looked in the future is one thing.

Stating it won t be looked into because thats the solution to the problem, i m sorry, but this scream incompetence in my and many peoples book.

You can t throw an old bone to the public and hope not to get bitten anymore.

7 hours refueling scenario.

Real planes refuel AND rearm in 20 to 30 minutes once landed (if not 10)

- Xenonauts is supposed to have state of the art equipment

- Xenonauts weaponry quantity is at least 50% inferior to real fighters and rearm speed is 2 hours just 600% more than normal plane for the same equipment

- Xenonauts planes refuel in more than 250X the time to a normal plane to refuel. 250X time = 2500%.

Here real database Normal time feed can be calculated by 1000 to 1500 Liters per minutes.(availiable but real refuelling IS slower)

f16 block c/d internal tanks around: 4000 liters

Even cutting refuelling capacity by half and doubling fuel capacity we still got a 16 minutes time.

7 hours ?

2 hours ?

In front of such comes the question:

WhoTF put asmatic and rheumatic grandma s to refuel the planes with a bucket and to lift weaponry with an inflatable matress air pump to feed the lifters ?

Equation to bring refueling time to something not ROFLMAOPMPed

- Time of exposure to xenonaut air force by ufo

- QTT of UFO appearing

- Capability of air force to loiter.

- Air force able range.

Thinker with those and solution will naturally appear, at least something more plausible.

[Mordobb]

Gshuford, forget it, your numbers are fake as russian propaganda.

All your number are for static. laterally moving target make the numbers goes to hell.

Now put soldier on the move and alien on the move and you got a city firefight situation where people miss themselves at 10 meters (30 feets). This is FBI/SWAT statistic.

The problem is not the hit ration is how laughable our soldier appears by their inicial statistics.

To speak the true actual progression make it worse.

During a missions they barely shoot half a clip and accuracy rises, looks likethey never fired a weapon before.

This is one not hard to solve problem:

Balance:

- Inicial stats

- Stat progression

- Malus and bonus in the hit/miss equation. (running/walking/still/covered/uncovered/distance)

- give it a reasonable miss cone (the higher the % thinner should be the "missing cone")

Don t make them shoot nearby friendly, dont make them shoot theyr own cover.

And plausability will rise a lot

[MrPyro]

Gshuford, forget it, your numbers are fake as russian propaganda.

All your number are for static. laterally moving target make the numbers goes to hell.

Now put soldier on the move and alien on the move and you got a city firefight situation where people miss themselves at 10 meters (30 feets). This is FBI/SWAT statistic.

The problem is not the hit ration is how laughable our soldier appears by their inicial statistics.

To speak the true actual progression make it worse.

During a missions they barely shoot half a clip and accuracy rises, looks likethey never fired a weapon before.

This is one not hard to solve problem:

Balance:

- Inicial stats

- Stat progression

- Malus and bonus in the hit/miss equation. (running/walking/still/covered/uncovered/distance)

- give it a reasonable miss cone (the higher the % thinner should be the "missing cone")

Don t make them shoot nearby friendly, dont make them shoot theyr own cover.

And plausability will rise a lot

One of the issues you seem to have with the stats is that you think that on a scale between 1 and 100, 50 must logically be an average guy. I think that's probably incorrect.

For accuracy, I see it like

0 represents somebody who doesn't know what a gun is

100 represents a legendary sniper (somewhere approaching Simo Hayha or Carlos Hathcock, for example)

When you look at the scale like that, 50-60 is probably not unreasonable for a non-specialised marksman.

The advancement rate is an issue, and there has been a lot of discussion about tweaking it; the issue is balancing realism (how is my guy suddenly so much better), and the satisfaction people get from seeing their soldiers advance.

[Chris]

Actually, Chris mentioned that he was contemplating changing the lore so that the Xenonauts only get the dregs of the military, making it a mite more believable. I dunno if that went anywhere, though.

That was me being ironic. I've no intention of changing the lore, it was just a joke.

Once again, game balance trumps realism. This is a remake of X-Com and therefore combat takes place at short range (which is more tense) but the soldiers can't be accurate to a realistic degree because then everyone would hit with every shot at that range (there would be no tactics, nor soldier progression with experience). There's also no gameplay "fun" in allowing a soldier to take all the equipment he could possibly want onto the battlefield.

@Mordobb - the reason the refueling time are the way they are is, again, because of game balance. It stops the player using the same interceptor squadron from shooting down all the UFOs in a wave. That's not bad design or execution, that's good game design and execution.

Letting "realism" dictate game mechanics is a terrible idea unless you're attempting to make a military simulation. If you want an accurate military simulation, go and play Arma - if you want an X-Com game, play Xenonauts.

You can express your opinions, of course, but be aware that this game is not a milsim and if I see any change as detrimental to the intended gameplay simply to increase realism then I will have no interest in it.

[gshuford]

Gshuford, forget it, your numbers are fake as russian propaganda.

All your number are for static. laterally moving target make the numbers goes to hell.

I'll just put this out there, then. I spent six years in the American army infantry. I've spent about 2.5 years of that in combat. My numbers are pretty accurate. If I engaged a still target within 300 meters with a standard assault rifle that I was trained with, I could hit the target in the head (100)% of the time. If it was moving, it would have to be within about 150 meters. Call BS all you want, but I know for a fact that I'm not citing anything that myself and others in my unit have not produced less than a 1 sigma repeatable results on, and that's being generous. The hit ratio for military becomes skewed when you examine the support by fire teams whose job it is to lay down suppression fire. That suppression fire is highly accurate. With an m240 bravo, I would hit (100)% of the time, anything within 600 meters with a 3.5x magnifier. That is, should any thing be stupid enough to move from cover.

Furthermore, your law enforcement citations do not represent trained military. I've also did about 2.5 years in that field. Cops are nowhere near as trained in firearms - especially assault rifles - as military men, and even less so, combat arms and infantry.

I can respect your opinion of what you would like in a game and I will be civil in this forum. Simply put, do not call me a liar. Please do not attempt to slander me unless I have truly stated something obtrusive and offensive.

Now, you've raised some issues that I believe everyone is aware of. However, this is still a game. It would be nice to have an accurate depiction of real soldiers, but I believe doing so would unbalance the game.

On top of that, you contradict your own statements. First, you state that it is unrealistic that trained elites miss so much and that they can carry so little. I provide supporting facts that restate this and then you give me your statistics on how poorly people engage in real life.

[Q] Understanding that in a 0 to 100 scale 50 in the average untrained, and should be considered unqualified, citizen.

Such people wouldn t even qualify at the end of basic infantry course. [/Q]

[Q] Now put soldier on the move and alien on the move and you got a city firefight situation where people miss themselves at 10 meters (30 feets). This is FBI/SWAT statistic. [/Q]

[/Q]

i wonder about the game design qualification of the team and future of the game.

i m sorry, but this scream incompetence in my and many peoples book.

You can t throw an old bone to the public and hope not to get bitten anymore.

[/Q]

I think that in the spirit of this being a re-imagining of the original XCOM: UFO unknown, I think this is the most highly qualified game design team I've seen. I've played XCOM clones that come nowhere near recreating the original. Nor have they possessed the spirit of putting this game together the way the developers have. In the spirit of an XCOM: UFO game style which many people were hoping for with XCOM 2012 (which was a great game), this is an amazingly accurate game with updated graphics and game play mechanics.

As for their incompetence, part of the reason I bought into this game early on was because I was impressed at how they were handling the attempt to stay true to the game and not crap it up by making drastic changes in the game play. Many people have been screaming for this sort of game for a long time now. I'm sorry if it doesn't fit your bill. I'll be sorry if they change it too much to compensate for what you (and others - yo're certainly not alone in your thinking) desire. However, I will not begrudge them should they do what's best for them.

I'm not even opposed to your idea. I just don't think it feasible for what I understand the game is meant to be.

In the end, no matter how realistic you try to make it, it's a game which is run on turn-based tactical simulation. 90% of that alone makes it fairly unrealistic. However, I've found general military tactics work very well. Support by fire to suppress and an assault team to flank is still a very viable textbook strategy.

EDIT: I apologize for probably comparing too closely to xcom, but this game does tend to capture that spirit very well.

Edited August 31, 2013 by gshuford

[OndieJ]

From a gaming perspective I'm against increasing the stats of the soldiers you start with. In the latest build, I'm up to month 3 and already have a Cpl of soldiers with 75ish accuracy if not more and let me tell you, those snipers hit more than they miss already. It may be annoying as all heck when you're missing shots at the start of the game and losing soldiers because of it but they're up against aliens!! When you've levelled up a bit and got some soldiers that have survived a few battles that are starting to land 2-3 hits out of 5 with the LMG at range you start to wooooo. Part of the fun of these game is making soldiers elite alien hunting machines.

If anything... I'm starting to think that maybe the rate of improvement of your soldiers needs to be slowed down a little and maybe making the fresh troops with better base stats a little rarer... so long as you can look at a batch of recruits and go 'no thanks... I'll look around' and they 'reset' every so often to reflect scouting.

[gshuford]

If anything... I'm starting to think that maybe the rate of improvement of your soldiers needs to be slowed down a little and maybe making the fresh troops with better base stats a little rarer... so long as you can look at a batch of recruits and go 'no thanks... I'll look around' and they 'reset' every so often to reflect scouting.

I like this as I was wont to say in another thread. If anything, roughly 40 combat-imminent missions makes a super-soldier and they probably should be by that point and probably deserve it in a brutal game like this. But 40 missions can go by pretty fast. That is, should the poor bastards survive.

My only problem with slowing down their progression (or really, taking any advantage away from the player in ground combat) is one simple mechanic we really have seen implemented yet: morale. When your little 'nauts freak out and start shooting each other, you're going to be praying for that low accuracy. I'm VERY interested to see how the game plays with the morale updated.

[OndieJ]

Troops freaking out from morale would be awesome... but give it time. May not even make it in I do still have nightmares after XCOM about random gunfire in small confines

To back up the progression thing... I've JUST got to use laser weapons for the very first time and that alone has made (I am using ONE laser precision rifle in a group of 8), with a 75-80 acc trooper, a HUGE difference. My first base (android) mission as well and without that little punch... I could have lost more that one trooper. If everyone was kitted out with them it would be A LOT easier as I'm fielding a group of very experienced soldiers when running 1st tier missions The few casualties here and there do hurt but I have loaded on many occasions I VERY much look forward to playing ironman in the final more refined release

I honestly think that it is very close to being spot on but I'd still like to see a little slower progression in skills so the very thought of taking on an enemy base when it comes up will make me go 'am I ready??'.

[thothkins]

That was me being ironic. I've no intention of changing the lore, it was just a joke.

Well, you say that but, in my last mission the debrief screen said:-

Number of locals killed by aliens - 1

Number of Xenonauts distracted by dumpster finds - 1

Number of Xenonauts driven to alcoholism through post traumatic stress -2

Number of locals killed by Xenonauts - 0

Due to inadequate Xenonaut veteran provision, lost personnel will not be replaced.

We've had suggestions that:-

- The attributes not go up at all. The best of the best.

- The attributes start at a certain level and go up only minimally, representing the slight best of the best of the best in a peer group.

- Attributes to be much like X-Com. As the battlescape size is abstracted so are the stats that operate within it.

- Fairly static stats, supplemented by skills given through the Xenonaut training pull downs.

- As X-Com, but the stats not to go up as quickly as previous builds.

The last one seemed to come out as the most popular.

Starting soldiers being more capable isn't something that I'm too fond of, and a search should bring up a lot of differing views on it. However, with local forces tackling the alien menace, particularly in lost funding blocs, in late game there is enough plausibility that some recruits would have already undergone some pretty tough missions of their own.

[crusherven]

Yeah, I've made the point before that a bunch of combat vet Recon and SEAL dudes should probably be able to carry a little more than an M16, a spare magazine, and a frag grenade without it making them feel like their back was going to snap and shoot without at least about 45 degrees of their target, but eh. That's Xenonauts. It's all in the writing. If we were told we were getting, like... a bunch of Army 11Bs and Russian home guard troops, it'd make a little more sense. But it wouldn't make much sense to use guys like that.

I don't know what kind of troops you're starting with, but I'm equipping starting troops with a LMG, a rocket launcher, two spare boxes of LMG rounds, and a pistol. Others get a rifle, a shotgun, three grenades, a medikit, and a couple magazines. Either of those is a pretty substantial load, with the former being unrealistically heavy.

[EchoFourDelta]

I was being slightly facetious, and like I said, I get it: gameplay, it's just jarring to see in-game.

(Also, the load you mentioned isn't actually that heavy; it's not much of an issue for a healthy adult male in military shape, and acclimated to carrying heavy gear to run around with, for example, a nearly-20-pound light machine gun, upwards of 1800-2000 rounds [some on the vest, some in the day pack] at 6 pounds per 200-round drum, frag and smoke, their personal first aid equipment, a spare barrel, an AT4, and upwards of 25-35 pounds of body armor, batteries, and their comm gear and move around just fine for hours at a time and while conducting an assault.)

Edited August 31, 2013 by EchoFourDelta

[gshuford]

@Ondie: It's not a matter of IF they'll put it in. The morale system is definitely there - and it's very intricate. Chris has said himself that he just needs to up the rate at which it takes effect so we see it in game. But yeah, I do tend to think that these guys progress rather quickly.

@Thoth: I'm inclined to just accept the poor accuracy and light load for the game mechanics, but I've already said that a couple of times.

@crusheraven: E4D pretty much said it. I'll give you some realistic numbers though. From personal experience, I've been with an entire platoon with each man carrying about 120 lbs of gear on move to contact missions that lasted a week and a half. That amount of weight is not very good once combat starts, but let me give you some real figures from first hand experience:

M240 bravo (medium machine gun and much heavier than the ones the 'nauts carry which would be about 16 pounds): 27.6 lbs

600 rds of ammo: 7 lbs per 100 rounds

Interceptor body armor with ballistic plates: roughly 20-25 lbs

tactical MOLLE assault gear (vest, ammo pouches, etc) with radio, bandages, IV kit, generally 4 grenades, kevlar helmet, night vision, etc: roughly 10-25 lbs.

Now that would be the bare minimum to take on a mission. Total: just over or under 100 lbs of gear depending on the total weight of the various accessories. Even with just the gun and ammo, you're talking about 70 lbs.

Rifleman: m4 carbine: 8 lbs with loaded 30 rd mag

180 more rounds of 5.56 ammo: about 6 lbs I believe.

same body armor and tactical web gear: 35-55 lbs about

generally outfitted with one of the following extras:

a)extra ammo for light or medium machine gunners would usually cover about 20 more lbs at least. And probably AT4 rocket launcher (I'd guess about 7 to 10 lbs maybe)

b)medic litter, extra javelin missile: about 25 lbs

c) radio operator: not sure, but it's significantly heavy (35 lbs? with batteries and all?)

d) javelin launch unit and whatever other extra stuff can be put with it

In the end, each man's load would come to within 20 lbs of 100 rounds before you even factor in the ruck sack that would carry tents, meals, change of clothes, full field first aid kit (not the medic's type kit), etc which comes to about 25-35 lbs.

Now, in an actual combat situation like our 'nauts are getting in, you would still carry your main weapon with standard payload which is about what E4D described and still only comes to 45 to 70 lbs or so depending on role in platoon. So, for true-to-life weights, any of those loads you mentioned would actually be unrealistically light.

[crusherven]

I got out of the marine corps a couple years ago. I don't need a list--I carried 60 lbs of gear in Iraq before ammo. Y'all are forgetting or ignoring a few things, though, such as the fact that the launcher in xenonauts is obviously not an AT4, that even a gunner carrying a light machine gun has someone else helping carry ammo and tripod, and most importantly that the fact is simply that carrying all that stuff slows you down. We could talk all day about what grunts actually carry into combat, but if you ignore the fact that heavily armed and armored modern infantry can't move as fast as they could without all that gear, I'm just going to ignore you.

In contrast, beginning troops in xenonauts can carry everything I mentioned without slowing down at all.

[EchoFourDelta]

I got out of the marine corps a couple years ago. I don't need a list--I carried 60 lbs of gear in Iraq before ammo. Y'all are forgetting or ignoring a few things, though, such as the fact that the launcher in xenonauts is obviously not an AT4, that even a gunner carrying a light machine gun has someone else helping carry ammo and tripod, and most importantly that the fact is simply that carrying all that stuff slows you down. We could talk all day about what grunts actually carry into combat, but if you ignore the fact that heavily armed and armored modern infantry can't move as fast as they could without all that gear, I'm just going to ignore you.

In contrast, beginning troops in xenonauts can carry everything I mentioned without slowing down at all.

Oohrah, 2/2 Fox. Warlords represent! Also, not sure what outfit you were running with where the SAW gunner was running with a tripod and an ammo bearer, but eh.

Edited August 31, 2013 by EchoFourDelta

[crusherven]

Semper. I don't mean to be rude--my point is that we're talking about what our troops can carry in the context of encumbrance. I just think it's a little ridiculous to say "but modern troops carry a lot of stuff" and use that example to say that carrying all that crap shouldn't slow you down. Yeah you get used to it, but still.

[EchoFourDelta]

Yeah. I mean, the system works, and Chris is sticking with it; it's gameplay. Fun to debate about it, though; you run into this sort of thing with just about any game you play.

[crusherven]

I wrote the part about the tripod thinking of an m240, not a SAW. Not sure why... I think I rewrote the sentence too many times. I don't think I've ever seen someone actually use the tripod on one either. In any case, in the interests of full disclosure, I was comm.

[Elydo]

Thanks for your service guys, even if I'm not from the US. You all deserve much respect.

Gameplay vs reality is always a tough one, and ultimately it comes down to immersion. I graduated as an engineer and so want things to be a realistic as possible instinctively, but then I've taught myself to be a writer and come to terms with how things are received rather than how they are. One solution I thought of for the inaccuracy problem would be to realistically represent accuracy, but only have the given 'accuracy' percentage of rounds do damage. Thus you get the scary sight of bullets plinking off aliens to no effect. As 'accuracy' goes up, more rounds do damage. But it comes with it's own trade-offs and problems.

Interestingly, gameplay vs realism totally sank The Last Of Us for me. I just could not get into it because I spent most of the time perplexed by why the hell the mechanics of the game worked the way they did given the real world. "Because game" should be a justification, but not an excuse.

Edit: Battle LA had that visual working quite well. Trained soldiers being pretty ineffective until they got relevant experience for the situation.

Edited August 31, 2013 by Elydo

[EchoFourDelta]

Oh man, Battle: LA was so friggin' awesome.