Breaking the Monotony in Ground Combat

[Haba]

Does anyone think it's more monotonous than the OG? If so, why? I think it's more fun than the OG because of the better graphics and IMO a better combat system.

Like mentioned, X-Com had a couple of radical game changers with blaster launcher and psionics. Xenonauts is a bit lacking on that side. Wraiths are a step in the right direction, but the current implementation is a bit funky.

(Frankly, I think I could live with ultra-late game aliens coming with blaster launchers. Or something equally unfair. Just don't put them in bases or insides of UFOs, please!)

Objectively (as much as it is possible), I think I still have more fun with the original X-Com. The aliens being more human-like with their panic states and the sheer fun of using the explosives being the probable reasons. Xenonauts isn't too far away though, which is quite an achievement.

[Isu]

I thing the changes in the recent experimental builds have helped a lot. Not only are aliens more aggressive, but I've noticed things like Caesians taking cover in small buildings in one of the Middle East maps. Of course, when they do that, I just demolish half the building, but the point is that the game encourages tactical variation. More of this sort of thing!

[theblazeuk]

They have a much much bigger spread and they deal stun as well as explosive damage.

The nades will ruin my squads...

[StellarRat]

They have a much much bigger spread and they deal stun as well as explosive damage.

The nades will ruin my squads...

The trick will be to make sure your guys don't bunch up in unscouted areas.

[TrashMan]

The solution might be for aliens to be better prepared only in some cases - depending on how long it took you to reach the site or if there are alien commanders present (if they died in the crash, the aliens act dumber).

That way only some missions would be harder, with alien snipers and the like, while most would be "normal". It also makes perfect sense.

[Brochacho]

Just to be clear, the "problem" -- and this was a problem in the original UFO:EU -- is that, due to how line of sight/reaction fire works, the most effective strategy almost always to advance as slowly as possible so that your squad always has TUs in reserve to shoot. Cautious, tense gameplay is great, but since there is no realistic penalty for literally moving at a snail's pace the ground combat frequently encourages the player to bore himself rather than take risks.

You can solve this by making aliens much more intelligent and aggressive, by giving the Xenonauts time-critical goals to achieve in ground combat, or both.

[legit1337]

I actually like being rewarded for being cautious. But on the other hand there is no reward for being reckless. (Reckless doesn't mean bad tactics)

To put it bluntly there is no reason NOT to slowly advance through each combat mission, meticulously scouting everything and advancing by covered movement. To do otherwise is just putting your men at risk and costs you money in the long run. I would like to see some type of reward for doing a mission quickly, or a mission type that requires speed so that you HAVE to take risks.

The reward of being cautious is that your men have an increased chance of survival. The reward of being reckless should be something of equal value.

[superbob]

The reward for skipping safety measures is doing missions faster, so you can do three in the space of two carefully played ones. Or maybe more, depending on how careful/reckless you like to be. Ultimately it results in more money and fewer, but better trained troops.

The important factors here are the time you have available to play the game and the goals you set for yourself on what you want to achieve in one sitting. If you play 18h a day and don't mind finishing the game in a month, you could easily do every single available mission carefully. If you only have a few evenings to play per week, and intend to clear at least two alien waves per sitting, you'd probably do 2-3 missions per wave and try to do them quickly.

One way doing missions carefully might be rewarded is more detailed evaluation of player's behavior during a mission - I mentioned this in another thread here somewhere - basically reward the player for not wrecking the place, which also means attracting less enemy fire.

[legit1337]

@superbob

Not really. Geoscape is paused while I do ground missions, so there is no penalty for doing missions slow other then time. Doing missions more recklessly actually COSTS you money in the long one because you have to pay to replace your losses.

Less time on missions is not adequate reward for skipping safety. I for one actually enjoy the tenseness of slowly advancing, and the satisfaction that comes with completing a mission with 0 casualties because it makes me feel the tactics I has devised as a general are effective.

IMO there should be at least one mission type that is time sensitive, just for shaking it up a bit. Variety is the spice of life an all that.

[StK]

@Time critical missions:

Wouldn't upping the value of civilians achive that (especially in terror missions). Civilian life seems rather cheap in xenonauts.

It might need an AI change for the civilians then (mb for them to sit in their houses/try to reach indoors until they see a xenonaut -> walk towards him -> back to the chopper)

[Haba]

Civilians in terror missions do not last for very long, so making them more expensive feels cheap imho. Sometimes they all die in the first few turns...

[ventuswings]

To be fair, we should still up the value of civilian regardless. The issue of immediate civilian death could be alleviated if the spawn point is mostly placed within buildings. After all, what kind of people manage to survive through several hours it takes for Xenonauts to arrive while standing in middle of the street?